4.5 Article

Effects of dual pulse gastric electrical stimulation on gastric tone and compliance in dogs

Journal

DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE
Volume 41, Issue 4, Pages 277-282

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2008.07.312

Keywords

Gastric electrical stimulation; Gastric tone; Gastric compliance; Sympathetic and vagal activity

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [DK055437]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) with short pulses improves nausea and vomiting in patients with gastroparesis, whereas GES with long pulses improves gastric motility. Aims. To assess the effects of a novel method of GES using dual Pulse (both short and long Pulses) on gastric tone, compliance and sympathovagal activity in dogs. Materials and methods. The study was performed in 7 dogs implanted with a gastric cannula and a pair of gastric serosal electrodes for dual pulse GES. The study was composed of a number of sessions on different days with different Stimulation parameters, including variations in the number of short Pulses and stimulation amplitude. Results. (1) Dual pulse GES of one short pulse and one long pulse with various amplitudes inhibited gastric tone (p<0.05) but did not after sympathetic or vagal activity. (2) Dual pulse GES with five short pulses and one long pulse not only inhibited gastric tone, but also reduced sympathetic activity and increased vagal activity (p<0.05). (3) Dual pulse GES with five short pulses and one long pulse significantly increased gastric compliance. Conclusions. Dual pulse GES reduces gastric tone and increases gastric compliance. The variation in the number of short Pulse affects the sympathetic and vagal activities, whereas, the increase in Stimulation strength enhance.,; its effects on gastric tone. (C) 2008 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available