PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Lim, Alexandria H
AU  - Varghese, Chris
AU  - Sebaratnam, Gabrielle
AU  - Schamberg, Gabriel
AU  - Calder, Stefan
AU  - Gharibans, Armen
AU  - Andrews, Christopher N
AU  - Foong, Daphne
AU  - Ho, Vincent
AU  - Ishida, Shunichi
AU  - Imai, Yohsuke
AU  - Wise, Michelle R
AU  - O’Grady, Greg
TI  - Effect of Menstrual Cycle and Menopause on Human Gastric Electrophysiology
AID  - 10.1101/2023.09.21.23295929
DP  - 2023 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2023.09.21.23295929
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/09/25/2023.09.21.23295929.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/09/25/2023.09.21.23295929.full
AB  - Chronic gastroduodenal symptoms disproportionately affect females of childbearing age; however, the effect of menstrual cycling on gastric electrophysiology is poorly defined. To establish the effect of the menstrual cycle on gastric electrophysiology, healthy subjects underwent non-invasive Body Surface Gastric Mapping (BSGM; 8×8 array), with validated symptom logging App (Gastric AlimetryⓇ, New Zealand). Participants were premenopausal females in follicular (n=26) and luteal phases (n=18). Postmenopausal females (n=30) and males (n=51) were controls. Principal gastric frequency (PGF), BMI-adjusted amplitude, Gastric Alimetry Rhythm Index (GA-RI), fasted-fed amplitude ratio (ff-AR), meal response curves, and symptom burden were analysed. Menstrual cycle-related electrophysiological changes were then transferred to an established anatomically-accurate computational gastric fluid dynamics model (meal viscosity 0.1 Pas), to predict the impact on gastric mixing and emptying. PGF was significantly higher in the luteal vs. follicular phase (mean 3.21 cpm, SD (0.17) vs. 2.94 cpm, SD (0.17), p<0.001) and vs. males (3.01 cpm, SD (0.2), p<0.001). In the computational model, this translated to 8.1% higher gastric mixing strength and 5.3% faster gastric emptying for luteal versus follicular phases. Postmenopausal females also exhibited higher PGF than females in the follicular phase (3.10 cpm, SD (0.24) vs. 2.94 cpm, SD (0.17), p=0.01), and higher BMI-adjusted amplitude (40.7 µV (33.02-52.58) vs. 29.6 µV (26.15-39.65), p<0.001), GA-RI (0.60 (0.48-0.73) vs. 0.43 (0.30-0.60), p=0.005), and ff-AR (2.51 (1.79-3.47) vs. 1.48 (1.21-2.17), p=0.001) than males. There were no differences in symptoms. These results define variations in gastric electrophysiology with regard to human menstrual cycling and menopause.New and Noteworthy This study evaluates gastric electrophysiology in relation to the menstrual cycle using a novel non-invasive high-resolution methodology, revealing substantial variations in gastric activity with menstrual cycling and menopause. Gastric slow wave frequency is significantly higher in the luteal versus follicular menstrual phase. Computational modelling predicts that this difference translates to higher rates of gastric mixing and emptying in the luteal phase, which is consistent with previous experimental data evaluating menstrual cycling effects on gastric emptying.Competing Interest StatementGOG and AG hold grants and intellectual property in the field of GI electrophysiology and are members of the University of Auckland spin-out company Alimetry. GSc, GS, CNA, and SC are members of Alimetry. The remaining authors have no relevant conflicts to declare.Funding StatementThis project was supported by the Health Research Council of New Zealand Grant 3715588.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approval was granted under the following references: AHREC 1330 (Auckland Health Research Ethical Committee), REB19-1925 (University of Calgary), H13541 (Human Research Ethics Committee, Western Sydney).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesData used for analysis will be made available upon reasonable request, conditional on ethical approvals