Advertisement

Chagas Disease pp 243-264 | Cite as

Gastrointestinal Chagas Disease

  • Ênio Chaves de Oliveira
  • Alexandre Barcelos Morais da Silveira
  • Alejandro O. LuquettiEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Birkhäuser Advances in Infectious Diseases book series (BAID)

Abstract

The chronic phase of Chagas disease is presented in three clinical forms: indeterminate (no clinical manifestations), cardiac disease, and megaviscera syndromes. The latter comprise up to 18% of the infected individuals and most often present a compromise of the esophagus and colon. The physiological function of these organs depends on a perfect coordination/synchronization of muscular constriction and relaxation waves, in order to push a rather hard material (alimentary bolus and feces) through their cavity, and a coordinated transposition of two sphincters. When this function is hampered, a progressive increase in the diameter of both organs is produced, termed megaesophagus and megacolon. A clue for the cause of this dysfunction is the selective destruction of parasympathetic plexus neurons by the etiological agent of the disease, Trypanosoma cruzi. Besides motor alterations, secretory and absorptive functions may be affected. Why these features are observed in only some of the infected is not clear. A markedly discrete geographical distribution of digestive Chagas disease cases below the equatorial line suggests it may be due to the type of circulating T. cruzi lineages (TcII and TcV). Different incidences according to gender and age are also seen. A number of neurotransmitters and neuropeptides have been linked to Chagas disease-associated megaviscera syndromes. Dysphagia and obstipation are clinical hallmarks of this disease, but serological diagnosis is necessary to exclude other possible causes, like idiopathic megaviscera. Association with cardiac involvement is observed in 20–30% of the cases, and 40% of the cases exhibit both megaesophagus and megacolon. Progression from mild to severe disease is seen in some of the cases, in which surgery is ultimately required. Fecaloma and volvulus are common complications of megacolon. In recent years, new methods have significantly improved post-surgery prognosis. Alternative treatments with botulinum toxin and by mechanical dilatation are indicated for specific cases. Other hollow viscera may be involved, albeit at lower frequencies, such as the stomach, duodenum, gallbladder, ureter, bladder, and others. However, these are usually also associated with megacolon and/or megaesophagus.

Keywords

Megaesophagus Megacolon Chagas disease Dysphagia Constipation Volvulus Fecal impaction Neuropeptides Enteric nervous system Geographical differences 

References

  1. 1.
    Koberle F. Patologische befunde an den muskularen hoholorganen bei der experimentellen Chagaskrankheit. Zentralkbl Allg Path Path Anat. 1956;95:321–9.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Spix JB, Martius CF. Reise in Brasilien. Munchen. Traduction in portuguese. 1823. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Itatiaia, EDUSP; 1981. p. 97–240.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kidder DP, Fletcher JC. Brazil and the brazilians. Philadelphia: Ed. Childs & Peterson; 1857. p. 416–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ferreira LF, Reinhard KJ, Araújo A. Fundamentos da paleoparasitologia. Rio de Janeiro: Edit. Fiocruz; 2011. p. 437–53.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Koberle F. The causation and importance of nervous lesions in American trypanosomiasis. Bull WHO. 1970;42:739–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zingales B, Miles MA, Campbell DA, Tibayrenc M, Macedo AM, Teixeira MM, Schijman AG, Llewellyn MS, Lages-Silva E, Machado CR, Andrade SG, Sturm NR. The revised Trypanosoma cruzi subspecific nomenclature: rationale, epidemiological relevance and research applications. Infect Genet Evol. 2012;12:240–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Luquetti AO, Miles MA, Rassi A, de Rezende JM, De Souza AA, Povoa MM, Rodrigues I. Trypanosoma cruzi: zymodemes associated with acute and chronic Chagas’ disease in central Brazil. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1986;80:462–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Atias A, Neghme A, Aguirre Mackay L, Jarpas S. Megaesophagus, megacolon and Chagas disease in Chile. Gastroenterology. 1963;44:433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    de Rezende JM, Luquetti AO. Chagasic Megavisceras. In: Pan American Health Organization, editor. Chagas’ disease and the nervous system. Scientific publication no. 547. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization; 1994. p. 149–71.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Luquetti AO. Megaesôfago e anticorpos anti-Trypanosoma cruzi. Rev Goiana Med. 1987;33:1–16.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rassi A, Rezende JM, Moreira H, Ximenes CA, Luquetti AO, Lousa L, Ferrioli Filho F. Associação de cardiopatia, megaesôfago e megacolo na fase crônica da doença de Chagas. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 1986;19. (Suppl. 2:29.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oliveira EC, Leite MS, Miranda JA, Andrade AL, Garcia SB, Luquetti AO, Moreira H. Chronic Trypanosoma cruzi infection associated with low incidence of 1,2-dimethylhydrazine-induced colon cancer in rats. Carcinogenesis. 2001;22:737–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Garcia SB, Aranha AL, Garcia FR, Basile FV, Pinto AP, de Oliveira EC, Zucoloto S. A retrospective study of histopathological findings in 894 cases of megacolon: what is the relationship between megacolon and colonic cancer? Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2003;45:91–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    World Health Organization. Control of Chagas disease WHO technical report series N° 905. Second report of the WHO Expert Committee. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2002.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rassi A, Rezende JM, Luquetti AO, Rassi A Jr. Clinical phases and forms of Chagas disease. In: Telleria J, Tibayrenc M, editors. American Trypanosomiasis. Chagas disease. One hundred years of research. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2017.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chagas C. Processos patogênicos da tripanosomíase americana. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 1916;8:5–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Corbett CE, UJr R, Prianti MG, Habr-Gama A, Okumura M, Gama-Rodrigues J. Cell-mediated immune response in megacolon from patients with chronic Chagas’ disease. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;44:993–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    da Silveira AB, Adad SJ, Correa-Oliveira R, Furness JB, D’Avila Reis D. Morphometric study of eosinophils, mast cells, macrophages and fibrosis in the colon of chronic chagasic patients with and without megacolon. Parasitology. 2007;134:789–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Campos JV, Tafuri WL. Chagas enteropathy. Gut. 1973;14:910–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tafuri WL, Maria TA, Lopes ER. Myenteric plexus lesions in the esophagus, jejunum and colon of chronic chagasic patients. Electron microscopy study. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 1971;13:76–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Almeida HO, Teixeira VP, Gobbi H, Rocha A, Brandao MC. Inflammation associated with cardiac muscle cells parasitized by Trypanosoma cruzi, in chronic Chagas’ disease patients. Arq Bras Cardiol. 1984;42:183–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Furness JB, Young HM, Pompolo S, Bornstein JC, Kunze WA, McConalogue K. Plurichemical transmission and chemical coding of neurons in the digestive tract. Gastroenterology. 1995;108:554–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Furness JB, Costa M. Types of nerves in the enteric nervous system. Neuroscience. 1980;5:1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Furness JB. The enteric nervous system: normal functions and enteric neuropathies. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2008;20(Suppl 1):32–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gabella G. Ultrastructure of the nerve plexuses of the mammalian intestine: the enteric glial cells. Neuroscience. 1981;6:425–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    da Silveira AB, D’Avila Reis D, de Oliveira EC, Neto SG, Luquetti AO, Poole D, Correa-Oliveira R, Furness JB. Neurochemical coding of the enteric nervous system in chagasic patients with megacolon. Dig Dis Sci. 2007;52:2877–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Furness JB, Jones C, Nurgali K, Clerc N. Intrinsic primary afferent neurons and nerve circuits within the intestine. Prog Neurobiol. 2004;72:143–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cruvinel W de M, DJr M, Araujo JA, Catelan TT, de Souza AW, da Silva NP, Andrade LE. Immune system – part I. Fundamentals of innate immunity with emphasis on molecular and cellular mechanisms of inflammatory response. Rev Bras Reumatol. 2010;50:434–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kodali S, Ding W, Huang J, Seiffert K, Wagner JA, Granstein RD. Vasoactive intestinal peptide modulates Langerhans cell immune function. J Immunol. 2004;173:6082–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schmidt K, Klatt P, Mayer B. Uptake of nitric oxide synthase inhibitors by macrophage RAW 264.7 cells. Biochem J. 1994;301:313–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rezende JM. Rev Med Chil. 1979). [Chagas disease of the digestive tract (author’s transl);107:71–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    da Silveira AB, Arantes RM, Vago AR, Lemos EM, Adad SJ, Correa-Oliveira R, D’Avila Reis D. Comparative study of the presence of Trypanosoma cruzi kDNA, inflammation and denervation in chagasic patients with and without megaesophagus. Parasitology. 2005;131:627–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    da Silveira AB, Lemos EM, Adad SJ, Correa-Oliveira R, Furness JB, D’Avila Reis D. Megacolon in Chagas disease: a study of inflammatory cells, enteric nerves, and glial cells. Hum Pathol. 2007;38:1256–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sato H, Leo N, Katakai Y, Takano J, Akari H, Nakamura S, Une Y. Prevalence and molecular phylogenetic characterization of Trypanosoma (Megatrypanum) minasense in the peripheral blood of small neotropical primates after a quarantine period. J Parasitol. 2008;94:1128–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Souza DHS, Vaz MGM, Fonseca CR, Luquetti A, Rezende Filho J, Oliveira EC. Current epidemiological profile of chagasic megaesophagus in Central Brazil. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2013;46:316–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rezende JM, Lauar KL, Oliveira AR. Aspectos clinicos e radiologicos da aperistalsis do esôfago. Rev Bras Gastroenterol. 1960;12:247–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Aquino JL, Said MM, Pereira DA, Leandro-Merhi VA, Nascimento PC, Reis VV. Early and late assessment of esophagocardioplasty in the surgical treatment of advanced recurrent megaesophagus. Arq Gastroenterol. 2016;53:235–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Asti E, Sironi A, Lovece A, Bonavina G, Fanelli M, Bonitta G, Bonavina L. Health-related quality of life after laparoscopic Heller myotomy and Dor fundoplication for achalasia. Surgery. 2017;161:977–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Allaix ME, Patti MG. Toward a tailored treatment of Achalasia: an evidence-based approach. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech. 2016;26:256–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ponciano H, Cecconello I, Alves L, Ferreira BD, Gama-Rodrigues J. Cardiaplasty and Roux-en-Y partial gastrectomy (Serra-Dória procedure) for reoperation of achalasia. Arq Gastroenterol. 2004;41:155–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Herbella FA, Aquino JL, Stefani-Nakano S, Artifon EL, Sakai P, Crema E, Andreollo NA, Lopes LR, de Castro Pochini C, Corsi PR, Gagliardi D, Del Grande JC. Treatment of achalasia: lessons learned with Chagas’ disease. Dis Esophagus. 2008;21:461–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pochini Cde C, Gagliardi D, Saad Júnior R, de Almeida RF, Corsi PR. Esophagectomy with gastroplasty in advanced megaesophagus: late results of omeprazole use. Rev Col Bras Cir. 2015;42:299–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zilberstein B, Franciss MY, Genovesi A, Volpe P, Domene CE, Barchi LC. Pioneer robotic Serra-Doria Operation for recurrent Achalasia After Heller’s cardiomyotomy: a “new quondam” procedure. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2017;27:524–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rebecchi F, Allaix ME, Morino M. Robotic technological aids in esophageal surgery. J Vis Surg. 2017;8:3–7.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Brant C, Moraes-Filho JP, Siqueira E, Nasi A, Libera E, Morais M, Rohr M, Macedo EP, Alonso G, Ferrari AP. Intrasphincteric botulinum toxin injection in the treatment of chagasic achalasia. Dis Esophagus. 2003;16:33–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Uppal DS, Wang AY. Update on the endoscopic treatments for achalasia. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22:8670–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Gladman MA, Dvorkin LS, Scott MS, Lunniss PJ, Williams NS. A novel technique to identify patients with megarectum. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50:621–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Anand AC, Sashindran VK, Mohan L. Gastrointestinal problems at high altitude. Trop Gastroenterol. 2006;27:147–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Oliveira EC, Menezes JG, Cardoso VK, Luquetti AO, Neto SG, Garcia SB. The Relationship between megacolon and constipation in Chagas’ disease. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2009;21(Suppl 1):5.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bafutto M, Luquetti AO, Gabriel Neto S, Penhavel FAS, Oliveira EC. Constipation is related to small bowel disturbance rather than colonic enlargement in acquired chagasic megacolon. Gastroenterol Res. 2017;10:213–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Oliveira EC, Gabriel Neto S, Bafutto M, Luquetti AO. False-negative rectoanal inhibitory reflex in acquired megacolon. Annual scientific meeting. American Society of Colon and Rectum Surgeons.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Cavenaghi S, Felicio OCS, Ronchi LS, Cunrath GS, Melo MMC, Netinho JG. Prevalence of rectoanal inhibitory reflex in chagasic megacólon. Arq Gastroenterol. 2008;45:128–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Castro C, Hernandez EB, Rezende JM, Prata A. Radiological study on megacolon cases in an endemic area for Chagas disease. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2010;43:562–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Shafik A, Mostafa RM, Shafik I, EI-Sibai O, Shafik AA. Functional activity of the rectum: a conduit organ or a storage organ or both. World J Gastroenterol. 2006;12:4549–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Duhamel B. New operation for congenital megacolon: retrorectal and transanal lowering of the colon, and its possible application to the treatment of various other malformations. Presse Med. 1956;64:2249–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Oliveira AB. Tratamento cirúrgico do megacólon pela operação de Duhamel. Rev Paul Med. 1963;63:283–304.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Haddad J, Raia A, Correa Neto A. Abaixamento retro-retal do colon com colostomia perineal no tratamento do megacólon adquirido. Rev Assoc Med Bras. 1965;11:83–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Reis Neto JA. Resultados tardios da operação de Duhamel no tratamento do megacólon adquirido. Rev Assoc Med Bras. 1970;18:57–62.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Salerno G, Sinnatamby C, Branagan G, Daniels IR, Heald RJ, Moran BJ. Defining the rectum: surgically, radiologically and anatomically. Color Dis. 2006;8. (Suppl. 3:5–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Gabriel Neto S, Oliveira EC, Ramos GC, Gabriel AG, Habr-Gama A, Zilberstein B, Luquetti AO. Treatment of megacolon: low anterior resection vs. Duhamel procedure evaluated by colonic transit time. Dis Colon Rectum. 2009;50:798.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ênio Chaves de Oliveira
    • 1
  • Alexandre Barcelos Morais da Silveira
    • 2
  • Alejandro O. Luquetti
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Faculdade de Medicina, Núcleo de Estudos da Doença de Chagas) (NEDoC), Hospital das Clinicas and Surgery DepartmentUniversidade Federal de GoiásGoiâniaBrazil
  2. 2.Department Human Anatomy, Instituto de Ciências BiomédicasUniversidade Federal de UberlândiaUberlândiaBrazil
  3. 3.Núcleo de Estudos da Doença de Chagas (NEDoC), Hospital das Clinicas and Instituto de Patologia Tropical e Saúde PúblicaUniversidade Federal de GoiásGoiâniaBrazil

Personalised recommendations