背景：功能性消化不良的内脏超敏反应可以是局部的或广泛的，没有简单的评估方法。在不同地点测量相互感受的准确性可以评估对特定生态现象的感知超敏反应。这项研究的目的是通过比较餐后窘迫综合征患者和健康志愿者的胃感觉和心脏知觉测试来表征内脏高敏感性。
方法：16例餐后窘迫综合征患者（年龄=47.5±17.4，均为女性）和16例健康志愿者（年龄=43.3±16.1，均为女性）在禁食6小时后参与研究。每位参与者都回答了关于身体和精神生活质量的问卷，抑郁和焦虑,述情障碍的倾向，和体感放大。填写问卷后，参与者进行了心跳追踪任务和5分钟水负荷测试.我们使用Mann-WhitneyU检验和Spearman的等级相关系数进行统计分析。
结果：与健康志愿者相比，餐后窘迫综合征患者的饮酒能力较低（餐后窘迫综合征=360.9±170.0mL，健康志愿者=644.1±297毫升，P=0.009),但心跳感知评分无显著差异(餐后窘迫综合征=0.599±0.175,健康志愿者=0.623±0.181,P=0.647)。健康志愿者饮酒量与心跳感知评分呈负相关(r=-0.509,P<0.05),但与餐后窘迫综合征无相关性(r=-0.156,P=0.564)。心跳感知得分与心理测量无关。
结论：与健康志愿者相比，在餐后窘迫综合征患者中，只有五分钟的水负荷测试值降低，在心跳跟踪任务中没有观察到差异。结合5分钟的水负荷测试和心率跟踪任务，发现餐后窘迫综合征患者的心胃知觉关系丢失，这在健康志愿者中未观察到，提示胃内感觉感知功能存在超敏反应。在两个不同部位进行感觉检查可能有助于阐明内脏超敏反应是否局部化。
背景：UMIN000057586.2023年3月11日注册（回顾性注册）。
BACKGROUND: Visceral hypersensitivity in functional dyspepsia can be localized or widespread, and there is no simple method of assessment. Measuring interoceptive accuracy at different sites provides an assessment of perceptual hypersensitivity to specific ecological phenomena. The purpose of this study was to characterize visceral hypersensitivity by comparing gastric sensory and cardiac perceptual tests in patients with postprandial distress syndrome and in healthy volunteers.
METHODS: Sixteen patients with postprandial distress syndrome (age = 47.5 ± 17.4, all female) and 16 healthy volunteers (age = 43.3 ± 16.1, all female) participated in the study after a six-hour fast. Each participant answered questionnaires about physical and mental quality of life, depression and anxiety, tendency of alexithymia, and somatosensory amplification. After completing the questionnaire, the participants took the heartbeat tracking task and the five-minute water load test. We performed statistical analysis using the Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman\'s rank correlation coefficient.
RESULTS: Subjects with postprandial distress syndrome had a lower drinking capacity than healthy volunteers (postprandial distress syndrome = 360.9 ± 170.0 mL, healthy volunteers = 644.1 ± 297 mL, P = 0.009), but there was no significant difference in the heartbeat perception score (postprandial distress syndrome = 0.599 ± 0.175, healthy volunteers = 0.623 ± 0.181, P = 0.647). There was a negative correlation (r = - 0.509, P < 0.05) between drinking capacity and the heartbeat perception score in healthy volunteers, but no correlation in postprandial distress syndrome (r = - 0.156, P = 0.564). Heartbeat perception score did not correlate with psychological measures.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with healthy volunteers, only the five-minute water load test values were reduced in patients with postprandial distress syndrome, and no difference was observed in the heartbeat tracking task. Combining the 5-minute water load test and the heart rate tracking task revealed a lost cardiac-gastric perceptual relationship in patients with postprandial distress syndrome that was not observed in healthy volunteers, suggesting that there is hypersensitivity in gastric interoceptive perceptual function. Performing sensory examinations at two different sites may be useful in clarifying whether visceral hypersensitivity is localized.
BACKGROUND: UMIN000057586. Registered11 March 2023(retrospectively registered).
PDF(Pubmed)