基于胃充盈超声技术的三类BMI人群胃动力功能变化对比研究
CSTR:
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

R573;R445.1

基金项目:

四川省科技厅应用基础项目(2019YJ0708);


Gastric filling ultrasound study of gastric dynamic function in obese patients with different BMI levels
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
    摘要:

    目的:应用胃充盈超声造影探讨不同体质量指数(BMI)水平人群的胃动力功能差异,明确BMI对胃动力的独立影响,为肥胖相关胃动力障碍机制研究提供依据。方法:纳入100位BMI≥25.0 kg/m2为研究对象,根据国内BMI标准将其分为A组(超重组:25.0 kg/m2≤BMI<29.9 kg/m2)和B组(肥胖组:BMI≥30.0 kg/m2);另选取47名BMI在正常范围内的健康志愿者作为对照组,分别对以上受试人员行胃充盈超声造影检查,观察各组研究对象的造影剂在饮入即刻通过贲门的情况,测取所有研究对象饮入胃肠超声造影剂后3~5 min内的胃壁增厚率、胃蠕动波峰强度、胃蠕动速度、2 min胃蠕动次数,记录半坐卧位时0 min(饮入即刻)、10 min、20 min及30 min时的近端胃、远端胃的面积,计算各时间段近端胃及远端胃排空率(GER)和胃动力指数(MI)进行分析。结果:造影剂在A组、B组、对照组三组人员饮入时通过贲门通畅,未出现梗阻及反流等现象(P>0.05);饮入造影剂后3~5 min内A组、B组的胃蠕动波峰强度(1.02±0.29 vs.0.71±0.30 vs.1.34±0.38)cm、胃蠕动速度(0.28±0.08 vs.0.24±0.07 vs.0.31±0.07)cm/s、MI(0.35±0.11 vs.0.28±0.10 vs.0.45±0.23)cm2/s及2 min胃蠕动次数[(6.15±1.28 vs.5.61±1.32 vs.6.72±1.29)次]较对照组均降低,且B组较A组降低,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);各时间段近端胃、远端胃排空率均值呈现“正常体质量组>A组>B组”趋势,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);多因素回归显示,BMI分组是影响MI的独立因素(β=-0.325,P<0.001)。进一步针对胃排空率的多因素线性回归分析表明,BMI分组对各时间点近端胃及远端胃排空率均存在独立负向影响,且该抑制作用随时间延长呈增强趋势,其中对远端胃30 min排空率的影响最为显著(β=-3.89,P<0.001),而年龄、性别及GSRS评分对胃排空率的影响无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:在排除混杂因素后,BMI与胃动力功能呈负相关,BMI越高,胃蠕动能力及胃排空效率越弱;胃充盈超声造影实时、无创、可操作性强、可重复性高,是潜在评估不同BMI人群胃动力功能首选检查方法。

    Abstract:

    Objective: To investigate the differences in gastric motility function among populations with different body mass index (BMI) levels using gastric filling ultrasound, clarify the independent impact of BMI on gastric motility, and provide a basis for the research on the mechanism of obesity-related gastric motility disorders.Methods: A total of 100 subjects with BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m2 were enrolled and divided into Group A (overweight group: 25.0 kg/m2 ≤ BMI 0.05). Within 3~5 minutes after drinking contrast agent, compared with the control group, Group A and Group B showed significant decreases in gastric peristaltic wave peak intensity (1.02±0.29 vs. 0.71±0.30 vs. 1.34±0.38) cm, gastric peristaltic velocity (0.28±0.08 vs. 0.24±0.07 vs. 0.31±0.07) cm/s, MI (0.35±0.11 vs. 0.28±0.10 vs. 0.45±0.23) cm2/s, and number of gastric peristalsis (6.15±1.28 vs. 5.61±1.32 vs. 6.72±1.29) times/2 minutes. Moreover, these indicators in Group B were lower than those in Group A, with statistically significant differences (P Group A > Group B”, with statistically significant differences (P0.05).Conclusion: After excluding confounding factors, BMI is negatively correlated with gastric motility function. The higher the BMI, the weaker the gastric peristaltic capacity and gastric emptying efficiency. Gastric filling contrast-enhanced ultrasound is a potential preferred examination method for evaluating gastric motility function in populations with different BMI levels due to its real-time, non-invasive, highly operable, and reproducible characteristics.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

杨航;刘颜州;张曦月;岳文胜.基于胃充盈超声技术的三类BMI人群胃动力功能变化对比研究[J].川北医学院学报,2026,41(2):160-165.

复制
分享
相关视频

文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2026-03-05
  • 出版日期: 2026-02-28
文章二维码