Abstract
Abstract
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.
Trial registration
UMIN000057586. Registered11 March 2023(retrospectively registered).
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Biological Psychiatry,Psychiatry and Mental health,General Psychology,Social Psychology
Reference42 articles.
1. Craig AD. How do you feel? Interoception: the sense of the physiological condition of the body. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2002;3:655–66.
2. Chen WG, Schloesser D, Arensdorf AM, Simmons JM, Cui C, Valentino R, et al. The Emerging Science of Interoception: sensing, integrating, interpreting, and regulating signals within the self. Trends Neurosci. Volume 44. Elsevier Ltd; 2021. pp. 3–16.
3. Critchley HD, Harrison NA. Visceral influences on Brain and Behavior. Neuron. Volume 77. Elsevier Inc.; 2013. pp. 624–38.
4. Garfinkel SN, Critchley HD et al. Interoception, emotion and brain: new insights link internal physiology to social behaviour. Commentary on:: “Anterior insular cortex mediates bodily sensibility and social anxiety” by Terasawa. (2012). Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2013;8:231–4.
5. Garfinkel SN, Seth AK, Barrett AB, Suzuki K, Critchley HD. Knowing your own heart: distinguishing interoceptive accuracy from interoceptive awareness. Biol Psychol Elsevier B V. 2015;104:65–74.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献