Apparatus for electrical stimulation of weakened peristaltic activity of the stomach (experimental investigation)

Sobakin, M. A.; Shepelev, V. A.

doi:10.1007/bf00561687

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the next several years many authors published conflicting results of the experimental and clinical studies on gastric pacing. They used in their experimental models different pacing sites, evaluation methodology, and a wide range of electrical current profiles (4–11). Consequently, gastric pacing was abandoned until the 1990s.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Frequency Electrical Stimulation of the Stomach is More Effective than Low Frequency Pacing for the Treatment of Postoperative Functional Gastric Stasis in Humans

Sobocki¹,

Thor

Królczyk

2003

Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper describes an original method of endoluminal electrical stimulation of the stomach developed by authors. The aim of the study was to compare two types of electrical stimulation: low frequency (LF) and high frequency (HF) in human patients. Twenty-three patients with postoperative gastroparesis (after abdominal surgery) were involved in the study and randomized into two groups. Group A consisted of 13 subjects treated by LF stimulation (mean age 52 ± 11; five males, eight females) and group B of 10 patients scheduled for HF stimulation (mean age 61 ± 8; six males, four females). A computer preprogrammable stimulator was used and the following parameters were evaluated: gastric retention every 12 h and symptoms score on the days 0, 1, 3, and 5. Gastric retention decreased in group A on consecutive days of pacing from 1,593 to 623, 407, 315, 246, to 192 ml, and in group B from 1,980 to 570, 218, 80, 15, to 0 ml (p < 0.05). Symptoms score decreased on the consecutive days of pacing from 8.3 to 3.8, 1.3, to 0.9 in the LF group and from 8.2 to 3.1, 1.0, to 0 in the HF group. We conclude that HF is more effective than LF in the treatment of postoperative gastroparetic human patients. No adverse effects of HF and LF were observed in this study.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%