Impaired gastric accommodation in patients with postprandial distress syndrome type of functional dyspepsia assessed by 2D ultrasonography

Background and Purpose The pathophysiology of postprandial distress syndrome includes impaired gastric accommodation, hypersensitivity to gastric distension and delayed gastric emptying. 2D-ultrasonography is one of the methods to assess gastric accommodation by measuring proximal gastric area and w...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Indian journal of gastroenterology 2023-12, Vol.42 (6), p.824-832
Main Authors: Ahmed, Ishtkhar, Udawat, Harsh Prasad, Ansari, Mohsin, Yadav, Rajeev, Vaishnav, Sandeep, Agrawal, Dinesh, Govil, Anurag, Purohit, Sunita
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Dyspepsia - diagnostic imaging
Gastric Emptying
Gastroenterology
Hepatology
Humans
Male
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Original Article
Postprandial Period - physiology
Quality of Life
Stomach - diagnostic imaging
Stomach Diseases
Ultrasonography
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background and Purpose The pathophysiology of postprandial distress syndrome includes impaired gastric accommodation, hypersensitivity to gastric distension and delayed gastric emptying. 2D-ultrasonography is one of the methods to assess gastric accommodation by measuring proximal gastric area and we evaluated its role in calculating proximal gastric area and thus assessing gastric accommodation in Indian patients with postprandial distress syndrome. Methods In a hospital-based comparative analysis, proximal gastric area was measured with 2D-ultrasonography of postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) patients and compared with healthy controls. Five readings were measured every five minutes till 25 minutes after 400 mL of vegetable soup. The Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Disorders-Quality of Life (PAGI-QOL score) and diets aggravating PDS symptoms were studied through detailed questionnaires. Sample size was calculated at 80% study power and alpha error of 0.05 to be 30 subjects in each group. Results The mean age of patients (18 males) vs. 30 healthy controls (25 males) was 40.8 ± 11.50 years vs. 36.37 ± 7.58, respectively, ( p  = 0.084). Proximal gastric area was significantly lower in patients versus healthy controls at five minutes (22.54 ± 2.77 vs. 30.66 ± 2.55 cm 2 ), 10 minutes (23.03 ± 2.45 vs. 31.10 ± 2.06 cm 2 ), 15 minutes (23.06 ± 2.27 vs. 30.31 ± 2.11 cm 2 ), 20 minutes (22.21 ± 2.31 vs. 29.73 ± 1.71 cm 2 ) and 25 minutes (22.02 ± 2.33 vs. 28.39 ± 1.55 cm 2 ); p  
ISSN:0254-8860
0975-0711
DOI:10.1007/s12664-023-01436-7