• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Why Should You Support SAGES?
    • SAGES Swag
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Annual Meeting
      • 2027 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2027 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Lead Up Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • Innovative Surgical Trends
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Advanced Laparoscopy and Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
    • Foregut Video Atlas
  • Opportunities
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs
  • Learning Hub
You are here: Home / Abstracts / DOES ETIOLOGY OF GASTROPARESIS DETERMINE CLINCIAL OUTCOMES IN GASTRIC ELECTRICAL STIMULATION TREATMENT OF GASTROPARESIS?

DOES ETIOLOGY OF GASTROPARESIS DETERMINE CLINCIAL OUTCOMES IN GASTRIC ELECTRICAL STIMULATION TREATMENT OF GASTROPARESIS?

Doris Kim, MD, Shelby Allen, MD, Ryan Gedney, BS, Haley Zlombke, MD, Elizabeth Winter, BS, John Craver, BS, William Lancaster, MD, David Adams, MD. Medical University of South Carolina

INTRODUCTION: Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) in the management of gastroparesis has had mixed clinical response, which may in part be due to the variety in underlying etiology.  The most common etiologies of gastroparesis intractable to medical management are diabetes, surgical vagal nerve injury following foregut operations, and idiopathic. The aim of this study was to identify which patient populations are more likely to benefit from GES.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES: A retrospective review and analysis was undertaken on patients who underwent GES for gastroparesis management over a ten-year period. Patient demographics, medical and surgical history, need for enteral or parenteral nutrition postoperatively, weight gain or loss, and readmission rates were evaluated.

Each patient was stratified into an etiological subset (diabetes, idiopathic, or post-surgical) and compared using outcome measure categories identified above. For each measure, subsets were compared to each other using a Chi-Squared Test. A Two-Tailed T-Test was also performed to compare average weight gain or loss of each subset of patients. A significance value of p < 0.05 was used.

RESULTS: 185 patients underwent GES from 2005-2015.  81.1% were woman (n=150) with an average age of 44 years old (range 17-84 years).  49.7% were diabetic, 37.3% idiopathic, and 13% post-surgical. 8.7% of patients had a concurrent diagnosis of colonic inertia. 20.5% of gastric neurostimulators were later explanted (3.2% due to infection, 5.9% for pain, 10.3% for continued symptoms, 1.1% for symptom resolution). 26.5% underwent generator exchanges for continued therapy with an average of 2.2 exchanges (range 1-10). 26.5% of patients required enteral nutrition and 8.7% required parenteral nutrition after neurostimulator placement. 11.4% of patients were readmitted within 30 days of neurostimulator placement, with 85.7% for PO intolerance and 1.1% due to infection.

Patients with prior foregut surgery had the highest incidence of weight gain (56%), followed by diabetic (50%) and idiopathic (38%) 3-6 months post placement (p=0.016). Idiopathic patients experienced significant weight loss compared to diabetic and post-surgical patients (48%, 40%, 34%, respectively, p = 0.017). Diabetic patients demonstrated the highest incidence of continued therapy compared to post-surgical and idiopathic patient populations(87% vs 69% vs 70%, respectively, p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS: Patients with gastroparesis had different clinical outcomes after GES therapy based on their underlying etiology. Post-surgical gastroparetics demonstrated the highest likelihood of weight gain after implantation. Diabetic gastroparetics were most likely to continue pacemaker therapy. Idiopathic gastroparetics were more likely to have weight loss. 


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 95486

Program Number: S018

Presentation Session: Foregut I

Presentation Type: Podium

Related



Hours & Info

15821 Ventura Blvd Ste 400
Encino, CA 91436

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2026 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

Refine Search