OBJECTIVE: To extensively evaluate the method of simultaneous determination of intra-gastric pressure (IGP) in liquid load test (LLT) in healthy subjects (HS) and patients with functional dyspepsia (FD). METHODS: Forty HS and 67 FD patients (Rome III criteria) were recruited. All subjects were surveyed with regards to demographic characteristics, features of FD symptom spectrum and psychological status (Zung anxiety and depression scale). And the test of simultaneous determination of IGP in LLT was conducted. Finally all the data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: HS group: no statistical difference was found in IGP divided by gender, age and body mass index (P > 0.05). The coefficient of variation of IGP at 15.3% was less than that of maximal intake volume (MIV). Twice repeated studies showed quite similar results and the linear interclass correlation coefficient of IGP was 0.806 (P = 0.002). As to the range of normal value from HS, the proportion of gastric hypersensitivity accounted for 35.0% and impaired accommodation for 25.0%. FD group: no statistical difference was found in IGP and MIV divided by gender, age and FD symptom subtype (P > 0.05). FD patients with abnormal psychological status had a lower IGP (4.2 +/- 1.2 mm Hg vs 4.8 +/- 1.1 mm Hg, P = 0.042) and MIV (450 +/- 138 ml vs 526 +/- 121 ml, P = 0.034) than those with normal status. IGP was not related to epigastric pain, epigastric burning, postprandial fullness or early satiation (F = 1.635, P = 0.190). Early satiation was significantly related to MIV (F = 4.682, P = 0.031; correlation coefficient was -6.8, P = 0.033). No statistical difference was found in gastric compliance among HS, all FD patients, patients with hypersensitivity or impaired accommodation (P > 0.05). The test had an excellent safety and tolerability. CONCLUSIONS: The method of simultaneous determination of IGP in LLT can differentiate gastric hypersensitivity from impaired accommodation. And it has an excellent feasibility, safety and reliability.
OBJECTIVE: To extensively evaluate the method of simultaneous determination of intra-gastric pressure (IGP) in liquid load test (LLT) in healthy subjects (HS) and patients with functional dyspepsia (FD). METHODS: Forty HS and 67 FDpatients (Rome III criteria) were recruited. All subjects were surveyed with regards to demographic characteristics, features of FD symptom spectrum and psychological status (Zung anxiety and depression scale). And the test of simultaneous determination of IGP in LLT was conducted. Finally all the data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: HS group: no statistical difference was found in IGP divided by gender, age and body mass index (P > 0.05). The coefficient of variation of IGP at 15.3% was less than that of maximal intake volume (MIV). Twice repeated studies showed quite similar results and the linear interclass correlation coefficient of IGP was 0.806 (P = 0.002). As to the range of normal value from HS, the proportion of gastric hypersensitivity accounted for 35.0% and impaired accommodation for 25.0%. FD group: no statistical difference was found in IGP and MIV divided by gender, age and FD symptom subtype (P > 0.05). FDpatients with abnormal psychological status had a lower IGP (4.2 +/- 1.2 mm Hg vs 4.8 +/- 1.1 mm Hg, P = 0.042) and MIV (450 +/- 138 ml vs 526 +/- 121 ml, P = 0.034) than those with normal status. IGP was not related to epigastric pain, epigastric burning, postprandial fullness or early satiation (F = 1.635, P = 0.190). Early satiation was significantly related to MIV (F = 4.682, P = 0.031; correlation coefficient was -6.8, P = 0.033). No statistical difference was found in gastric compliance among HS, all FDpatients, patients with hypersensitivity or impaired accommodation (P > 0.05). The test had an excellent safety and tolerability. CONCLUSIONS: The method of simultaneous determination of IGP in LLT can differentiate gastric hypersensitivity from impaired accommodation. And it has an excellent feasibility, safety and reliability.