Abstract
The use of manometry, i.e. the recording of pressures within hollow viscera, after being successfully applied to the study of esophageal and anorectal motor dysfunctions, has also been used to investigate physiological and pathological conditions of the small bowel. By means of this technique, it has been possible to understand better the normal motor functions of the small intestine, and their relationship and variations following physiologic events, such as food ingestion. Moreover, intestinal manometry has proved useful to document motor abnormalities of the small bowel, although recognition of altered patterns specific for a determinate pathologic condition is still unavailable. However, this technique often permits the detection of abnormal gut motility in patients with abdominal symptoms such as unexplained vomiting and diarrhea, and it is sometimes also useful to address therapeutic targeting.
Key Words: Intestinal, Manometry, Motility, Myopathy, Neuropathy
Introduction
Manometric techniques are methods that detect pressure events within hollow viscera. After being successfully employed to study upper (esophageal) and lower (anorectal) motility, manometry has also been applied to investigate the small (1) and the large bowel motility (2). Concerning the small bowel, these techniques have been extremely important to better elucidate several physiological mechanisms and demonstrate the pathophysiological bases of motor dysfunction in some pathologic disorders. Until recently, manometric techniques were based on the use of multilumen recording probes (with the lateral orifices arranged in various conformations to record different portions of the bowel), in turn connected to pressure transducers and to infusion systems (3). These techniques are presently often being replaced by the use of solid-state catheters that do not need perfusion, and may be directly connected to a recording system (polygraph, computer) for automated analyses (4), even though the perfused systems still maintain their validity.
Physiological aspects
In humans, the motor activity of the upper parts (stomach and small bowel) features specific patterns that mostly depend from individuals in the fasted or fed state (5). In fact, the fasting state is characterized by a pattern that displays cyclic timing and sweeps the bowel according to a oro-aboral programme (6). This pattern is named migrating motor complex (MMC) and is composed of three relatively well defined phases (7): phase I (in which with little or no contractile activity is present), phase II (in which intermittent and irregular contractions are documented), and phase III (the so-called activity front, which displays contractions occurring at a maximal rate, determined by the frequency of the slow waves in a specific segment) (Figure 1A).
Figure 1.
Antroduodenojejunal manometric recording in a healthy subject. A. During fasting, the three phases of the MMC are clearly identifiable; it is worth noting that the phase III is directed aborally from the antrum (first tracing) to the-jejunum (last tracing). B. After ingestion of a meal, a strong activation of contractile activity may be observed in all segments
The three phases recur on average every 90 minutes, with phase III being relatively short (10% or less of the MMC), as well as phase I and phase II occupying each about 30%-80% of the cycle (8). It is worth remembering that the MMC may start physiologically from the distal esophagus (9), and therefore propagates to the terminal ileum (10). This inter-digestive cycle is interrupted by the ingestion of food, it is then replaced by randomly occurring frequent contractions (Figure 1B); this activity lasts about 2.5-8 hours and is progressively replaced by a new MMC (11). The duration of the fed motor activity strongly depends on the composition of the meal, lasts longer after a caloric than a non-caloric meal (12), and after fat-rich meals than after ingestion of other nutrients (13).
Performing intestinal motility studies: when and in whom?
The first important point to be stressed is that manometric studies of gastrointestinal motility should be preceded by an accurate exclusion of other organic and/or metabolic disorders by means of radiologic and endoscopic studies. The availability of less invasive radioisotopic techniques in some centers (14) may represent a reasonable alternative to manometric investigations, although these techniques are more expensive and have a little collateral biologic risk (15).
Upper gastrointestinal manometry is chiefly used to investigate complaints of unexplained nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain and distention. in patients with an abnormal gastric emptying test in the absence of an etiological diagnosis (16, 17). However, it should be kept in mind that manometry in the stomach is reliable only to detect antral or antropyloric abnormalities, due to the large anatomical section of the viscus. When gastric emptying abnormalities are present, manometry is carried out to detect whether these abnormalities are limited to the stomach or belong to more generalized motility disorders (18). However, it must be stressed that intestinal manometry may reveal abnormal motor patterns in about only 50% of such patients (19-21). It is also worth noting that in most instances it is not possible to identify a specific motor pattern which can discriminate patients with severe motility-like dyspepsia from those with other diseases, or even from healthy individuals (22).
Manometric investigations may also help to identify the presence of abnormalities reconductable to neuropathic or myopathic disorders that affect the small bowel in both adult and pediatric patients (23-27). The therapeutic approach may vary according to the presence of neuropathic or myopathic features, with the myopathic ones being usually less responsive to a medical approach. These abnormalities might be important to define patients with chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction (28,29).
Also, manometric techniques may reveal postsurgical motor abnormalities (30, 31). These abnormalities may help to characterize the patient’s symptoms in the postoperative period (32, 33). Further applications of intestinal manometry might help to define patients with severe intractable chronic constipation candidates for surgery, in whom the exclusion of motor abnormalities in the upper gut is important to avoid surgical failures or poor results (34).
More recently, intestinal manometry has been used to study patients with small bowel bacterial overgrowth. These studies have consistently shown the presence of small bowel motor abnormalities, suggesting that altered gut motility might likely predispose to the pathological growth of bacteria (35-37)
Can intestinal manometry identify pathophysiological processes?
Manometry is often able to provide evidence of a pathophysiological process; at the same time it is not usually diagnostic of a specific disease per se (38, 39). When available, manometry is useful to enforce the clinical suspicion of the presence of an abnormal motor activity by demonstration of a myopathic or neuropathic process. Manometry has a role in the process of diagnosis (Table 1). To date, it is possible to identify at least five main types of motor abnormalities in patients with suspected motility disorders using manometric techniques (40):
Table 1.
Intestinal manometric abnormalities and their corresponding clinical situations
Manometric findings | Associated clinical situation |
---|---|
Sustained "minute" clustered contractions | Partial mechanical intestinal obstruction, Crohn’s disease |
Repetitive, simultaneous, prolonged contractions of proximal small bowel | Subacute mechanical intestinal obstruction |
Normally propagated but low amplitude contractions | Hollow visceral myopathies, intestinal pseudo-obstruction (myopathic forms), scleroderma |
Abnormal propagation of antral and intestinal contractions | Intestinal pseudo-obstruction (neuropathic forms), severe dyspepsia, idiopathic gastroparesis, diabetes mellitus |
Postprandial antral hypomotility | Diabetes mellitus, idiopathic or post-infectious gastroparesis, surgical vagotomy, dyspepsia |
Minute clustered contractions (bursts) | Irritable bowel syndrome, intestinal pseudo-obstruction (neuropathic forms), food allergies, celiac disease, Whipple’s disease, Crohn’s disease, acute enteric infections, small bowel overgrowth |
1) Patterns suggesting mechanical obstruction. These are represented by two events: a) a sustained (>30 minutes) postprandial pattern of "minute" clustered contractions separated by brief periods of motor quiescence (41); b) repetitive, simultaneous, prolonged contractions in the upper small bowel portions (42).
2) Generally low amplitude contractions, documented at several intestinal levels, and thought to be suggestive of a myopathic process. These low amplitudes (on average, below 15 mmHg) are mainly recorded in patients with hollow visceral myopathies or progressive systemic sclerosis (43, 44) (Figure 2A).
Figure 2.
A. Manometric recording of a myopathic pattern. It is worth noting that the phase III of MMC features very low amplitude contractions (arrow). B. Manometric recording of a neuropathic pattern, featuring normal amplitude but uncoordinated (simultaneous) activity fronts and a sustained nonpropagated burst of activity in the last tracing (arrow
3) Normal amplitude, but “uncoordinated” (i.e., abnormally propagated) contractile activity in the gastric antrum and the small bowel, suggesting a neuropathic process. These motor abnormalities are usually present during phases II and III of the MMC (45) (Figure 2B); in addition, the persistence of a fasting pattern after eating a meal of >400 kcal is strongly suggestive of a neuropathic process (46).
4) Postprandial antral hypomotility (infrequent contractions of normal amplitude). This pattern is frequently found in patients with diabetes mellitus, post-vagotomy, and postviral or idiopathic gastroparesis (47, 48).
5) Minute clustered contractions associated with abdominal pain firstly reported in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (49, 50). This kind of motor activity has been described in other subgroups of patients, such as those with untreated celiac disease (51) and food allergy (52), and it is common in healthy subjects (53).
Limits of intestinal manometry
Even though in selected subgroups of patients, neuropathic and myopathic motility patterns have been described (54), their pathological correlates are available only rarely. Therefore, it is often impossible to distinguish different pathological conditions only on the basis of manometric abnormalities (55). From a motor point of view, the human intestine seems to respond, in a monotonous manner following different pathophysiological noxae (see point 5 above). Thus, in the interpretation of manometric tracings caution should be a rule, since motility in the interdigestive state is extremely variable in human beings (56). Short (e.g., up to 2-3 hours) recording periods may show only one (or even none) motor event, such as that represented by the MMC (57). Therefore, in order to reduce the bias due to technical limitations, it is wise to carry out prolonged recordings (preferably for 24 hours by ambulant manometric techniques) (58). The recent introduction of automated analysis systems (59) will also help to better identify, define and establish the real values of intestinal manometric findings.
Intestinal manometry: useful to establish therapeutic programs?
Treating subgroups of patients with intestinal motor abnormalities may be complex, unsuccessful, and not infrequently frustrating (60). However, some evidences indicate that manometric techniques in selected individuals might help to find mechanisms likely responsible for the patient’s symptoms. Also, manometry may demonstrate the direct effect of possibly useful drugs on the motor abnormalities detected in these patients. For instance, it has been reported that octreotide injection stimulates MMC-like activity in scleroderma patients and reduces some of their symptoms (61), and other drugs have shown promising effects on intestinal motility (62, 63). Some authors tried to establish manometric findings as predictors of a therapeutic outcome. For instance, the persistence of fasting MMC may indicate a greater likelihood of response to prokinetic agents (64), and normalization of abnormal intestinal motility may predict the response to gluten-free diet, in both adults and children (65, 66). Again, the presence of intestinal motor abnormalities in patients with inactive Crohn’s disease could help management. The demonstration of the presence of a functional disorder may avoid g the risk of considering the ensuing symptoms as due to a disease’s relapse (67).
Finally, intestinal manometry may help to explain the gut motor responses to different food formulas (68, 69), thus providing useful information for the use of food manipulations during enteral nutrition.
References
- 1.Keller J, Layer P. Intestinal and anorectal motility and functional disorders. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2009;23:407–23. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2009.02.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Bassotti G, de Roberto G, Castellani D, Sediari L, Morelli A. Normal aspects of colorectal motility and abnormalities in slow transit constipation. World J Gastroenterol. 2005;11:2691–96. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v11.i18.2691. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Arndorfer RC, Stef JJ, Dodds WJ, Linehan JH, Hogan WJ. Improved infusion system for intraluminal esophageal manometry. Gastoenterology. 1977;73:23. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Penning C, Gielkens HA, Hemelaar M, Lamers CB, Masclee AA. Reproducibility of antroduodenal motility during prolonged ambulatory recording. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2001;13:133–41. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2982.2001.00252.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Mazet B. Gastrointestinal motility and its enteric actors in mechanosensitivity: past and present. Pflugers Arch. 2015;467:191–200. doi: 10.1007/s00424-014-1635-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Rees WDW, Malagelada JR, Miller LJ, Go VL. Human interdigestive and postprandial gastrointestinal motor and gastrointestinal hormone patterns. Dig Dis Sci. 1982;27:321–29. doi: 10.1007/BF01296751. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Takahashi T. Interdigestive migrating motor complex -its mechanism and clinical importance. J Smooth Muscle Res. 2013;49:99–11. doi: 10.1540/jsmr.49.99. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Sarna SK. Cyclic motor activity: migrating motor complex: 1985. Gastroenterology. 1985;89:894–13. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(85)90589-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Janssens J, Annese V, Vantrappen G. Bursts of non-deglutitive simultaneous contractions may be a normal oesophageal motility pattern. Gut. 1993;34:1021–24. doi: 10.1136/gut.34.8.1021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Kerlin P, Phillips SF. Variability of motility of the ileum and jejunum in healthy man. Gastroenterology. 1982;82:694–700. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Deloose E, Janssen P, Depoortere I, Tack J. The migrating motor complex: control mechanisms and its role in health and disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;9:271–85. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2012.57. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Schemann M, Ehrlein HJ. Postprandial patterns of canine jejunal motility and transit of luminal content. Gastroenterology. 1986;90:991–1000. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(86)90878-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.De Wever I, Eeckout C, Vantrappen G, Hellemans J. Disruptive effect of test meal on interdigestive motor complex in dogs. Am J Physiol. 1978;235:E661–65. doi: 10.1152/ajpendo.1978.235.6.E661. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Madsen JL. Scintigraphic assessment of gastrointestinal motility: a brief review of techniques and data interpretation. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2014;34:243–53. doi: 10.1111/cpf.12089. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Camilleri M, Zinsmeister AR, Greydanus MP, Brown ML, Proano M. Towards a less costly but accurate test of gastric emptying and small bowel transit. Dig Dis Sci. 1991;36:609–15. doi: 10.1007/BF01297027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Camilleri M, Hasler WL, Parkman HP, Quigley EM, Soffer E. Measurement of gastrointestinal motility in the GI laboratory. Gastroenterology. 1998;115:747. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5085(98)70155-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Hansen MB. Small intestinal manometry. Physiol Res. 2002;51:541–56. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Michoux N, Lalaude O, Maheu B, Helluin C, Ducrot F, Denis P, et al. Postprandial duodenojejunal motility in health and idiopathic severe gastroparesis: from conventional analysis to nonlinear dynamics analysis. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2000;12:75–85. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2982.2000.00182.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Jebbink HJ, vanBerge-Henegouwen GP, Akkermans LM, Smout AJ. Small intestinal motor abnormalities in patients with functional dyspepsia demonstrated by ambulatory manometry. Gut. 1996;38:694–700. doi: 10.1136/gut.38.5.694. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Gu C, Ke M, Wang Z. Temporal and spatial relationship of pylorus to antroduodenal motility in functional dyspepsia. Chin Med J (Engl) 1998;111:906–909. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Sha W, Pasricha PJ, Chen JD. Correlations among electrogastrogram, gastric dysmotility, and duodenal dysmotility in patients with functional dyspepsia. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2009;43:716–22. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e31818b8ed9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Wilmer A, Van Cutsem E, Andrioli A, Tack J, Coremans G, Janssens J. Ambulatory gastrojejunal manometry in severe motility-like dyspepsia: lack of correlation between dysmotility, symptoms, and gastric emptying. Gut. 1998;42:235–42. doi: 10.1136/gut.42.2.235. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Dooley CP, El Newihi HM, Zeidler A, Valenzuela JE. Abnormalities of the migrating motor complex in diabetics with autonomic neuropathy and diarrhea. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1988;23:217–33. doi: 10.3109/00365528809103971. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Bassotti G, Battaglia E, Debernardi V, Germani U, Quiriconi F, Dughera L, et al. Esophageal dysfunction in scleroderma: relationship with disease subsets. Arthritis Rheum. 1997;40:2252–59. doi: 10.1002/art.1780401222. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Marie I, Levesque H, Ducrotté P, Denis P, Benichou J, Hellot MF, et al. Manometry of the upper intestinal tract in patients with systemic sclerosis: a prospective study. Arthritis Rheum. 1998;41:1874–83. doi: 10.1002/1529-0131(199810)41:10<1874::AID-ART21>3.0.CO;2-T. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Hyman PE, Napolitano JA, Diego A, Patel S, Flores AF, Grill BB, et al. Antroduodenal manometry in the evaluation of chronic functional gastrointestinal symptoms. Pediatrics. 1990;86:39–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Stanghellini V, Cogliandro RF, De Giorgio R, Barbara G, Cremon C, Antonucci A, et al. Natural history of intestinal failure induced by chronic idiopathic intestinal pseudo-obstruction. Transplant Proc. 2010;42:15–18. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2009.12.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Smout AJ. Manometry of the gastrointestinal tract: toy or tool? Scand J Gastroenterol. 2001;234:22–8. doi: 10.1080/003655201753265415. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Patcharatrakul T, Gonlachanvit S. Technique of functional and motility test: how to perform antroduodenal manometry. J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2013;19:395–404. doi: 10.5056/jnm.2013.19.3.395. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Mathias JR, Fernandez A, Sninsky CA, Clench MH, Davis RH. Nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain after Roux-en-Y anastomosis: motility of the jejunal limb. Gastroenterology. 1985;88:101–07. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5085(85)80140-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Bassotti G, Chiarinelli ML, Germani U, Chiarioni G, Morelli A. Effect of some abdominal surgical operations on small bowel motility in humans: our experience. J Clin Gastroenterol. 1995;21:211–16. doi: 10.1097/00004836-199510000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Le Blanc-Louvry I, Ducrotté P, Peillon C, Testart J, Denis P, Michot F, et al. Upper jejunal motility after pancreatoduodenectomy according to the type of anastomosis, pancreaticojejunal or pancreaticogastric. J Am Coll Surg. 1999;188:261–70. doi: 10.1016/s1072-7515(98)00309-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Le Blanc-Louvry I, Denis P, Ducrotté P. The effect of cholecystectomy on duodenojejunal motility in humans. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2002;14:279–85. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2982.2002.00330.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Bassotti G, Stanghellini V, Chiarioni G, Germani U, De Giorgio R, Vantini I, et al. Upper gastrointestinal motor activity in patients with slow-transit constipation Further evidence for an enteric neuropathy. Dig Dis Sci. 1996;41:1999–2005. doi: 10.1007/BF02093603. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Madrid AM, Poniachik J, Quera R, Defilippi C. Small intestinal clustered contractions and bacterial overgrowth: a frequent finding in obese patients. Dig Dis Sci. 2011;56:155–60. doi: 10.1007/s10620-010-1239-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Miller LS, Vegesna AK, Sampath AM, Prabhu S, Kotapati SK, Makipour K. Ileocecal valve dysfunction in small intestinal bacterial overgrowth: a pilot study. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:6801–808. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i46.6801. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Jacobs C, Coss Adame E, Attaluri A, Valestin J, Rao SS. Dysmotility and proton pump inhibitor use are independent risk factors for small intestinal bacterial and/or fungal overgrowth. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2013;37:1103–11. doi: 10.1111/apt.12304. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Malagelada JR, Camilleri M, Stanghellini V. Manometric Diagnosis of gastointestinal motility disorders. New York: Thieme; 1986. [Google Scholar]
- 39.Camilleri M. Disorders of gastrointestinal motility in neurologic diseases. Mayo Clin Proc. 1990;65:825–46. doi: 10.1016/s0025-6196(12)62574-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Camilleri M, Bharucha AE, di Lorenzo C, Hasler WL, Prather CM, Rao SS, et al. American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society consensus statement on intraluminal measurement of gastrointestinal and colonic motility in clinical practice. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2008;20:1269–82. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2982.2008.01230.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Summers RW, Anuras S, Green J. Jejunal manometry patterns in health, partial intestinal obstruction, and pseudoobstruction. Gastroenterology. 1983;85:1290–300. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Camilleri M. Jejunal manometry in distal subacute mechanical obstruction: significance of prolonged simultaneous contractions. Gut. 1989;30:468–75. doi: 10.1136/gut.30.4.468. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Colemont LJ, Camilleri M. Chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction: diagnosis and treatment. Mayo Clin Proc. 1989;64:60–70. doi: 10.1016/s0025-6196(12)65304-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Sjölund K, Bartosik I, Lindberg G, Scheja A, Wildt M, Akesson A. Small intestinal manometry in patients with systemic sclerosis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005;17:1205–12. doi: 10.1097/00042737-200511000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Bassotti G, Germani U, Calcara C, Spinozzi F, Roselli P, Morelli A. Effects of octreotide on manometric variables in patients with neuropathic abnormalities of the small bowel. Dig Dis Sci. 1997;42:1634–39. doi: 10.1023/a:1018845011625. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Stanghellini V, Camilleri M, Malagelada JR. Chronic idiopathic intestinal pseudoobstruction: clinical and intestinal manometric findings. Gut. 1987;28:5–12. doi: 10.1136/gut.28.1.5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Malagelada JR, Rees WDW, Mazzotta LJ, Go VLW. Gastric motor abnormalities in diabetic and post-vagotomy gastroparesis: effect of metoclopramide and bethanechol. Gastroenterology. 1980;78:286–92. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Narducci F, Bassotti G, Granata MT, Gaburri M, Farroni F, Palumbo R, et al. Functional dyspepsia and chronic idiopathic gastric stasis Role of endogenous opiates. Arch Int Med. 1986;146:716–20. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Kumar D, Wingate DL. The irritable bowel syndrome: a paroxysmal motor disorder. Lancet. 1985;2:973–77. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(85)90525-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Kellow JE, Phillips SF. Altered small bowel motility in irritable bowel syndrome is correlated with symptoms. Gastroenterology. 1987;92:1885–83. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(87)90620-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Bassotti G, Castellucci G, Betti C, Fusaro C, Cavalletti ML, Bertotto A, et al. Abnormal gastrointestinal motility in patients with celiac sprue. Dig Dis Sci. 1994;39:1947–54. doi: 10.1007/BF02088130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Bassotti G, Bertotto A, Spinozzi F. Heretical thoughts about food hypersensitivity: small bowel manometry as an objective way to document gut reactions. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1997;51:567–72. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1600439. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Quigley EMM, Donovan JP, Lane MJ, Gallagher TF. Antroduodenal manometry: limitations and usefulness as an outpatient study. Dig Dis Sci. 1992;37:20–28. doi: 10.1007/BF01308337. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Camilleri M, Malagelada JR. Abnormal intestinal motility in diabetics with the gastroparesis syndrome. Eur J Clin Invest. 1984;14:420–27. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.1984.tb01206.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Read NW. Functional gastroenterological disorders: the name’s the thing. Gut. 1987;28:281–84. doi: 10.1136/gut.28.1.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Kellow JE, Borody TJ, Phillips SF, Tucker RL, Haddad AC. Human interdigestive motility: variations in patterns from esophagus to colon. Gastroenterology. 1986;91:386–95. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(86)90573-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Bharucha AE, Camilleri M, Low PA, Zinsmeister AR. Autonomic dysfunction in gastrointestinal motility disorders. Gut. 1993;34:397–401. doi: 10.1136/gut.34.3.397. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Samsom M, Fraser R, Smout AJ, Verhagen MA, Adachi K, Horowitz M, et al. Characterization of small intestinal pressure waves in ambulant subjects recorded with a novel portable manometric system. Dig Dis Sci. 1999;44:2157–64. doi: 10.1023/a:1026659414507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Scott SM, Picon L, Knowles CH, Fourquet F, Yazaki E, Williams NS, et al. Automated quantitative analysis of nocturnal jejunal motor activity identifies abnormalities in individuals and subgroups of patients with slow transit constipation. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:1123–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.07419.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Camilleri M. Appraisal of medium- and long-term treatment of gastroparesis and chronic intestinal dysmotility. Am J Gastroenterol. 1994;89:1769–74. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Soudah HC, Hasler WL, Owyang C. Effect of octreotide on intestinal motility and bacterial overgrowth in scleroderma. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:1461–67. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199111213252102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Nasr I, Rao SS, Attaluri A, Hashmi SM, Summers R. Effects of tegaserod and erythromycin in upper gut dysmotility: a comparative study. Indian J Gastroenterol. 2009;28:136–42. doi: 10.1007/s12664-009-0048-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Chini P, Toskes PP, Waseem S, Hou W, McDonald R, Moshiree B. Effect of azithromycin on small bowel motility in patients with gastrointestinal dysmotility. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2012;47:422–27. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2012.654402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Hyman PE, Di Lorenzo C, McAdams L, Flores AF, Tomomasa T, Garvey TQ 3rd. Predicting the clinical response to cisapride in children with chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction. Am J Gastroenterol. 1993;88:832–36. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Cucchiara S, Bassotti G, Castellucci G, Minella R, Betti C, Fusaro C, et al. Upper gastrointestinal motor abnormalities in children with active celiac disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 1995;21:435–42. doi: 10.1097/00005176-199511000-00011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Bassotti G, Villanacci V, Mazzocchi A, Mariano M, Incardona P, Clerici C, et al. Antroduodenojejunal motor activity in untreated and treated celiac disease patients. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;23:e23–28. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2007.04868.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Annese V, Bassotti G, Napolitano G, Usai P, Andriulli A, Vantrappen G. Gastrointestinal motility disorders in patients with inactive Crohn's disease. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1997;32:1107–17. doi: 10.3109/00365529709002989. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Guedon C, Ducrotte P, Chayvialle JA, Lerebours E, Denis P, Colin R. Effects of intravenous and intraduodenal fat on jejunal motility and on plasma cholecystokinin in man. Dig Dis Sci. 1988;33:558–64. doi: 10.1007/BF01798357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Bouin M, Savoye G, Maillot C, Hellot MF, Guédon C, Denis P, et al. How do fiber-supplemented formulas affect antroduodenal motility during enteral nutrition? A comparative study between mixed and insoluble fibers. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;72:1040–46. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/72.4.1040. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]