Cited by 188Gastrointestinal motility and disordersGastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and TreatmentVagus Nerve Stimulation Research

Treatment of Diabetic Gastroparesis by High-Frequency Gastric Electrical Stimulation

Open access
Lin, Zhiyue, Forster, Jameson, Sarosiek, Irene, McCallum, Richard W.·2004·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—To investigate the long-term efficacy of high-frequency gastric electrical stimulation (GES) for treating diabetic gastroparesis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—This is a retrospective review of 48 adult diabetic patients with refractory gastroparesis who had a GES system implanted surgically and had follow-up evaluations at 6 and 12 months. The outcome measures were total symptom score (TSS), derived from six upper gastrointestinal (GI) symptom subscores; health-related quality of life (HQOL), including physical composite score (PCS) and mental composite score (MCS) assessed by SF-36 questionnaire, radionuclide gastric emptying test, nutritional status, HbA1c, and adverse events. RESULTS—In comparison with baseline, TSS, all six upper GI symptom subscores, PCS, and MCS were significantly improved at 6 months, with the improvement sustained at 12 months. Of 13 patients receiving nutritional support at baseline by tube feeding, only 5 required supplemental enteral feeding at 12 months, and none of the 9 on total parenteral nutrition continued this support. The mean number of hospitalization days during the year after GES was significantly reduced by 52 days compared with the prior year. HbA1c levels were significantly reduced at 12 months. Gastric emptying was only minimally and not significantly faster. Because of infections at the pulse generator pocket site, four patients had their GES systems removed 3–17 months postsurgery. CONCLUSIONS—In diabetic patients with refractory gastroparesis, high-frequency GES by a permanently implanted system significantly improved upper GI symptoms, HQOL, nutritional status, glucose control, and hospitalizations with an acceptably low complication rate.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/diacare.27.5.1071

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) may reduce vomiting and improve quality of life and glycemic variability in selected patients, although data are largely observational.

    “Gastric electrical stimulation (GES), which may reduce vomiting and improve quality of life and glycemic variability in selected patients, although data are largely observational [128];”

    From Diabetic gastroparesis: pathophysiology and impact on insulin timing choices (2026) · cites this paper as [128]

    The Abstract and discussion report reduced vomiting, improved quality of life, and lower HbA1c after GES in 48 patients with medically refractory diabetic gastroparesis. The study was a retrospective review without a placebo control, consistent with the observational-data caveat. It reports improved glycemic control but does not measure glycemic variability specifically. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 30 · Cited by 188

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Kinsley BT, Gramm HF, Rolla A: Diabetic gastroparesis: a review. J Diabetes Compli- cations 5:207-217, 1991
  2. Rundles RW: Diabetic neuropathy: gen- eral review of 125 cases. Medicine 24: 116 -160, 1945
  3. Lin ZY, Forster J, Sarosiek I, McCallum RW: Treatment of gastroparesis with elec- trical stimulation (Review). Dig Dis Sic 48: 837-848, 2003
  4. McCallum RW, George SJ: Gastroparesis (Review). Clinical Perspectives in Gastroen- terology 4:147-154, 2001

Authors
Lin, Z., Forster, J., Sarosiek, I., & McCallum, R. W.
Affiliations
University of Kansas Medical Center (US)
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2004-05-01
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
1071-1076
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2153568493
Cited by
188
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 15
FWCI
13.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Kansas
  • American Gastroenterological Association
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vagus Nerve Stimulation Research
Keywords
diabetic gastroparesis, gastric electrical stimulation, high-frequency stimulation, refractory gastroparesis, health-related quality of life, upper gastrointestinal symptoms, nutritional status, glycemic control, HbA1c, hospitalization reduction, total parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Blood Glucose, Demography, Diabetic Neuropathies, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Female, Health Status, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nutritional Status, Quality of Life, Retrospective Studies, Gastroparesis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review