ArticlePDF Available

Gastrointestinal problems in distance running

Authors:

Abstract

This article reviews the literature of gastrointestinal (GI) problems in runners. These problems commonly affect runners and some believe that they can hamper performance. Many physiologic processes, including the interplay of decreased transit time, absorptive effects, hormonal changes, and endotoxins breaching the bowel wall contribute to an incomplete understanding of the physiology behind the pathology. Upper GI pathology, such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), nausea, and vomiting, can detract from the pleasurable aspects of running, while gastritis, hepatitis and pancreatitis can threaten the health of the athlete. Lower GI pathology, such as diarrhoea and colitis, can similarly taint the runner's experience. The authors examine various pathologies suspected of contributing to runner's anaemia, the side stitch, and the effect of running on previous GI pathology. Also discussed are important elements of history, physical examination, and treatments.
Gastrointestinal Problems in Runners
Stephen M. Simons, MD* and Robert G. Kennedy, MD
Address
*South Bend Primary Care Sports Medicine Fellowship Program,
53880 Carmichael Drive, South Bend, IN 46635, USA.
E-mail: simonss@sjrmc.com
Current Sports Medicine Reports 2004, 3:112–116
Current Science Inc. ISSN 1537-890x
Copyright © 2004 by Current Science Inc.
Introduction
The most publicly notable and often quoted gastrointesti-
nal (GI) event in sports came from Derek Clayton follow-
ing his world record-setting marathon in 1979, “Two hours
later, the elation had worn off. I was urinating quite large
clots of blood, and I was vomiting black mucus and had
black diarrhea” [1]. This is clearly a reference to the poten-
tial GI stresses following intense physical activity. My own
personal anecdote came as a finish line observer to a com-
munity marathon. While I was standing near the finish, the
winner was nearing the end. The crowd’s joyous greeting
was followed by a curious silence. The cause of this
reaction was soon apparent as the winner crossed the line
with feces-coated legs and quickly disappeared to the near-
est shower, missing his well-deserved victors reception.
Gastrointestinal symptoms are experienced by 30% to
65% of long distance runners and although less studied,
no doubt many other athletes [2]. Pathophysiologic pro-
cesses hypothesized include mechanical factors, visceral
vasoconstriction-reducing splanchnic blood flow, medica-
tion influences, and the biochemical changes of exercise.
Blood flow to the splanchnic system declines from 1.56 L/
min at rest to 0.3 L/min at maximal exercise [3]. The clini-
cal consequences range from a minor nuisance to perfor-
mance impairments and even potentially life-threatening
bleeding. Some GI symptoms are the direct consequence of
intense exercise. Athletes seeking advice or assistance with
these problems are usually concerned with the interrup-
tion to training or performance impairment caused by the
symptoms. The clinician must remain vigilant to the possi-
bility of underlying GI pathology unmasked by exercise or
masquerading as common exercise sequelae. Advising
these athletes, particularly with dietary manipulations,
may allow them to achieve their maximum training and
performance potential.
Upper Gastrointestinal Effects of Running
Among the upper GI afflictions of runners are gastroesoph-
ageal reflux disease (GERD), ulcers, nausea, and vomiting.
Of course, nonrunners experience all of these maladies. A
study of 93 runners found that nausea and heartburn
symptoms occur more commonly in nonrunners than
runners, and that runners have more nausea and heartburn
when not running [4]. Similarly, runners may suffer from
problems such as hiatal hernias, decreased lower esoph-
ageal sphincter tone, and Helicobacter pylori infection.
Gastroesophageal reflux
Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a common problem
among runners. Even people without prior history of GERD
demonstrate reflux on manometry testing when put through
vigorous exercise [5]. Reflux is closely associated with belch-
ing during running [6]. Eating prior to exercise causes more
esophageal reflux. Although weight lifting may cause more
reflux than running, running causes more than cycling [7].
This is in spite of runners benefiting more from gravity and a
presumed lower intra-abdominal pressure.
A comparison of runners, cyclists, and triathletes found
that 36% of the runners complained of upper GI symp-
toms, which was fewer than cyclists [8]. The prevalence of
symptoms is directly related to intensity of the run. In
extreme endurance runs, more runners reported moderate
to severe symptoms. In a 67-km race, 17% reported upper
GI complaints of this severity, whereas runners in a 160-
km race reported this at a rate of 47% [9,10]. In fact, the
majority of the upper GI symptoms (nausea and vomiting)
occurred in the last half of the 160-km race. Even with pro-
longed walking, nausea is a common complaint, but prob-
lems are less frequent and less severe [11].
This article reviews the literature regarding gastrointestinal
disturbances specifically in runners. Upper gastrointestinal
problems such as reflux, nausea, vomiting, and gastritis are
reviewed. Exercise has been found to alter esophageal
motility. These symptoms worsen with increased exertion
as well. H2 blockers have been found helpful for reflux and
nausea. The lower intestinal problems of motility and blood
loss are discussed. These problems are generally more
common and more directly related to running. Also
reviewed are endotoxin involvement and transient
abdominal pain. Much of the literature deals with marathon
and ultramarathon running, showing the extreme effects
of running and exertional stress on the body; however,
recreational runners may not be so afflicted as these
study participants.
Gastrointestinal Problems in Runners • Simons and Kennedy 113
Esophageal motility is affected during exercise. Esoph-
ageal contractions become less frequent, shorter, and weaker
with increasing exercise in cyclists [12]. At 90% VO2max,
reflux episodes and esophageal acid exposure occurred sig-
nificantly more frequently. The same study, however, found
no significant change to various GI hormones. Cyclists had
no changes in reflux, gastric pH, or GI transit time at 70%
VO2max; however, lower esophageal pressure decreased and
esophageal peristalsis increased [13]. It is reasonable to
extrapolate that increasing running intensity would have a
similar increase in esophageal dysmotility. Choi et al. [14]
found that fed runners had significantly more gastroesoph-
ageal reflux with increasing running intensity, due to disor-
ganized esophageal motility.
Although there is an association of reflux with chronic
cough and asthma exacerbation, a small study showed no
significant correlation between reflux and exercise-induced
bronchospasm in asthmatics [15]. However, GERD with
exercise may be confused with cardiac pain. DeMeester et
al. [16] found 46% of patients with anginal symptoms and
normal coronary arteries had reflux on 24-hour pH moni-
toring. In a similar population, Schofield et al. [17] found
44% had exertional reflux on stress testing with a strong
correlation with chest pain during the exercise. Exertional
pH monitoring provided improved diagnostic certainty for
noncardiac chest pain, with 68% of patients showing
pathologic reflux and 27% having chest pain with exercise
stress test apparently related to reflux [18].
The simplest treatment options involve modification of
food intake and exercise. Runners should avoid eating within
3 hours of running. Additionally, foods high in fat and pro-
tein should be avoided due to the consequent decrease in
gastric motility. If possible, the runner should decrease the
peak intensity of the workout. If these methods are unsuc-
cessful or impossible, medical management may help.
Antacids, H2 blockers, and proton pump inhibitors can
be helpful. Antacids have a short duration of action and
their effects may wane on longer runs. Some antacids con-
tain magnesium hydroxide, causing loose stools, a problem
already faced by many runners. Conversely, aluminum-
based antacids may lead to constipation. Histamine block-
ers can be used prophylactically. One study found that 300
mg ranitidine prior to running significantly reduced reflux
with no adverse effects [6]. Although no studies have been
made, proton pump inhibitors would likely provide a simi-
lar benefit. There are no long-term data that reflux related to
running is harmful, or that treatment will positively or nega-
tively effect performance. Use of these medicines should be
for comfort only.
Vomiting and nausea
Runners also commonly experience nausea, retching, vom-
iting, and loss of appetite. Some athletes (and coaches)
will not consider a workout vigorous unless it induces
some retching. Although runners report more retching
while running, Sullivan et al. [4] found no increased rate of
vomiting while running. In the lower intensity, longer
duration ultramarathon, there was a strong correlation
between nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)
use and nausea/vomiting [10]. Similar to reflux, eating
prior to exercise worsens the incidence of nausea [19].
Cimetidine 800 mg alleviated nausea and vomiting symp-
toms in ultramarathon runners when taken 1 hour prior to
the race and a repeat dose at the 50-mile mark [20].
Gastritis and ulcers
At the Chicago marathon, a majority of participants
reported use of aspirin or ibuprofen before or during the
race. Ibuprofen (but not aspirin) was found to increase GI
permeability, which represents a breakdown in the GI tract
barrier [21]. Interestingly, half of the NSAID users and half
of the nonusers reported GI symptoms. Other studies have
found increased permeability with aspirin [22,23].
In a group of young, competitive runners, the vast major-
ity of those suffering anemia had gastritis and/or esophagitis
on endoscopy [24•]. In an ultramarathon setting, runners
who used 800 mg cimetidine 1 hour prior to the race and at
the 50-mile mark had an 11% rate of Hemoccult (SmithKlein
Diagnostics, Norristown, PA)-positive stool compared with
87.5% of the controls [20]. However, a similar study in mara-
thon runners produced no significant difference between the
drug and placebo, indicating the source was more likely in
the lower tract [25].
Cheng et al. [26] noted a decreased prevalence of
duodenal ulcers in a group of physically active men. In this
study, men walking or running more than 10 miles per
week had a relative hazard of 0.38, and those going less
than 10 miles 0.54. There was no significant association in
women or with gastric ulcers and other differences in base-
line characteristics (smoking, NSAID use, and alcohol use)
were not reported. This protective effect is hypothesized to
be due to improved immune function, decreased gastric
acidity, or stress control, although there are no direct data
to support this.
Exercise-related Transient Abdominal Pain
The side stitch is a pain typically felt in the right or left
upper quadrant. The pain may also be referred to the
shoulder, possibly implicating hepatic, splenic, or phrenic
nerve involvement. A majority of athletes report some his-
tory of exercise-related abdominal pain, specifically 69%
of runners [27]. These sufferers describe the more severe
pain as sharp and the less severe as a cramping, aching, or
pulling. This syndrome seems to decrease with increasing
age and training status, but sex and body mass index do
not affect the frequency [28•]. Thus, runners should be
encouraged to continue their regimen with the expectation
that the symptoms will improve.
One anecdotal method that seems to help less experi-
enced runners deal with this affliction is rhythmic breathing
technique. The runner should inhale during three steps and
114 Abdominal Conditions
exhale on the fourth, leading to a sequence of exhaling every
other right foot strike. This provides an alternative focus of
concentration in addition to standardizing the diaphrag-
matic interaction with foot strike.
Running Effects on Previous
Gastrointestinal Conditions
There is minimal evidence regarding running and inflam-
matory bowel disease or irritable bowel syndrome. Seden-
tary patients with Crohn’s disease have been found to
tolerate a low-intensity walking program without exacer-
bating the condition [29]. However, due to the problems
of dehydration, electrolyte disturbances, and blood loss
during a flare up of inflammatory bowel disease, strenuous
running should be avoided [30]. Among women with irri-
table bowel syndrome, those who are more active reported
less fatigue [31]. Further, women with irritable bowel were
less likely to be active.
Lower Gastrointestinal Tract
Lower GI tract symptoms include lower abdominal cramp-
ing, urge to defecate, increased bowel frequency, and diar-
rhea. The prevalence of these symptoms is variously
reported to occur in 37% to 71% of runners either during or
following a run [8,32,33]. Considering such a high preva-
lence of these symptoms, it is reasonable to expect training
interruptions, socially awkward circumstances, and perfor-
mance disappointments. Such an interruption proved costly
to one elite marathoner. She was forced to stop at a service
station at 22 miles, returned to the race, and still won. How-
ever, she inadvertently trimmed 30 meters off the 42-km
course, was disqualified, and lost the $41,000 prize money
[34]. Peters et al. [8] recently followed GI symptoms in 606
runners, cyclists, and triathletes for 12 months. Running,
either as the lone activity or as the running portion of the
triathlete’s training, caused a preponderance of lower GI
symptoms when compared to nearly equal upper and lower
GI problems in cyclists. Ultra-endurance activity may show
different patterns of GI disturbance. In the previously
mentioned study, Glace et al. [10] followed 19 runners
participating in a 160-km event. Half of the participants
experienced GI disturbance. In contrast to previous studies
of shorter event duration, upper GI symptoms predomi-
nated and occurred mainly after 88 km. The authors specu-
late the slower pace contributed to the differing GI
disturbances in this ultra-distance event.
Several hypotheses are postulated to explain these
lower GI symptoms, but none conclusively satisfy all
observations. The hypotheses include fluid shifts,
decreased splanchnic blood flow, dehydration, increased
parasympathetic tone, increased sympathetic tone with
intense exercise, and hormone changes. The mechanical
effect of intra-abdominal jostling most certainly plays
some role. Empiric evidence for this mechanical contribu-
tor is supported by studies that note the increased preva-
lence of GI symptoms among runners compared with
cyclists [8]. Although not specifically stated in these stud-
ies, it would seem intuitive that a semisolid stool liquefies
from the churning effect caused by decelerating the colon
contents when the foot strikes the ground. Rehrer and
Meijer [35] confirmed that running imposes approxi-
mately twice the acceleration/deceleration forces rendered
by bicycling at a similar workload. Rapid fluid shifts into
the colon may cause irritability and cramping [32]. Intense
exercise can decrease splanchnic blood flow quite substan-
tially, and dehydration further reduces the blood supply;
80% of marathon runners losing at least 4% of body
weight experienced GI problems [36]. But the cohort of
ultra-endurance runners studied by Glace et al. [10]
showed that GI disturbances could also occur in the
absence of dehydration, although most were after pro-
longed running. Improved fitness through training reduces
the dramatic blood shift away from the GI tract and there-
fore at any given workload the more highly fit experience
fewer GI disturbances [37].
Several chemical and hormonal changes that occur
with running are implicated as the source of GI distur-
bances. Sorting through the quagmire of chemical changes
is staggering. A cohort studied by Rehrer et al. [9], complet-
ing a 67-km alpine marathon, showed postrace elevations
of cortisol, adrenaline, and noradrenaline. GI symptoms
were more closely correlated with lower postrace cortisol
and noradrenaline levels and elevated postrace potassium.
Causal relationships were impossible to confirm. Pro-
found elevations of several GI hormones are thought to
provide metabolic support of increasing fuel demands and
not simply represent generalized stress reactants [38].
These include vasoactive intestinal polypeptide (VIP),
gastrin, secretin, pancreatic polypeptide, neurokinin A,
pancreastatin, and motilin. VIP acting as a vasodilator is
thought to combat the splanchnic vasoconstriction.
Endotoxins
Mucosal compromise associated with running seemingly
allows entry of endotoxins into the portal circulation. Nor-
mal gram-negative bowel flora contain lipopolysaccharide
(LPS) in the cell wall. This LPS is largely confined to the
lumenal side of the bowel wall. LPS breeches the mucosal
barrier and enters the portal circulation with intense exercise
causing a measurable anti-LPS response. Increasing LPS lev-
els and decreasing anti-LPS is evident in the first 16 hours
after a long-distance triathlon [39]. The latter decrease is due
to the LPS/anti-LPS complexes removal from circulation.
Brocke-Utne et al. [40] suggested that nausea, vomiting, and
diarrhea are related to this rise in LPS. Jeukendrup et al. [39]
suggested that endotoxemia was not a direct cause of GI
symptoms, but rather an intermediate step contributing to
release of cytokines tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin-
6. The latter are then directly correlated with GI complaints
Gastrointestinal Problems in Runners • Simons and Kennedy 115
[39]. Brouns and Beckers [37] assert that the well-trained
runner generally experiences fewer GI symptoms. Although
there are many possible explanations, increased levels of
induced anti-LPS may be a positive training response,
thereby lessening the effects of LPS release. Endotoxic entry
to the portal circulation may also contribute to portal vein
thrombosis via a hypercoagulable state [41].
Lower gastrointestinal bleeding
The incidence of GI bleeding in runners is estimated by
reports of frank hematochezia and occult blood testing
among marathon race competitors. A flurry of studies was
conducted in the 1980s during peak marathon participa-
tion, but more recent incidence data are lacking. Also, race
participation allows for incidence estimates among more
serious runners, but incidence figures are not available for
the recreational runner. Utilizing occult blood testing and
more recently Monohaem (a monoclonal antibody test
specific for human hemoglobin) can only document the
presence of stool hemoglobin without differentiating the
source between upper or lower GI tract. Endoscopy is often
unremarkable but has shown significant bleeding sites at
the cecum and splenic flexure [24•,42]. Incidence figures
for GI bleeding ranges from 7.4% up to 85% in ultramara-
thon distances [43•].
The etiology of lower GI bleeding focuses on ischemic
colitis. Blood flow to the GI tract can decrease to 20% of
normal. If this is sustained then mucosal injury and necro-
sis occurs. Exercise intensity and duration are associated
with higher rates of blood loss. Watershed areas between
mesenteric arteries are probably most vulnerable. Mechan-
ical irritation to the mucosa is also suggested as a potential
contributor to injury.
The clinician must remain vigilant to non–exercise-
related reasons for GI blood loss. Inflammatory bowel
disease predominates in the young population, whereas
carcinoma is more prevalent in the older runner. Hemor-
rhoids, anal fissures, arteriovenous malformations, colonic
polyps, infectious diseases, and other sources of bleeding
may be precipitated by intense exercise. Frequent or severe
GI bleeding deserves a work-up for blood loss anemia. This
is particularly important in the runner who notices a
performance decline.
Management of lower GI disturbances focuses on
dietary manipulations, dietary timing, and pharmacologic
means. During important training or competition phases
the runner can reduce the incidence of problems by trying
a low-fiber diet, minimizing lactose products, and increase
nutrition with an elemental diet. Pre-race vitamin E sup-
plementation might reduce the incidence of GI distur-
bance, but does not affect symptom severity [44].
Buchman et al. [45] also studied the effects of arginine and
glycine on marathon runners; they found no evidence to
suggest reduced ischemic bowel injury.
Antidiarrheal medications such as loperamide are used
cautiously for frequent diarrhea episodes, but Putukian
and Potera [30] worry about depressing the central nervous
system. Concerns about interfering with sweating mitigate
the use of anticholinergic medications.
Conclusions
Runners experience a myriad of GI symptoms that could be
avoided with a more sedentary lifestyle. However, these
complications rarely threaten the health of the runner and
are more of an annoyance to be persevered or averted.
There are measures that can be taken to alleviate these
problems (Table 1). Further study of the endotoxin role
provides a potentially enlightening insight into some of
these problems. However, until this research provides a
direction for treatment, we must work with the exercise
regimen and dietary changes, as well as occasional medica-
tion, to provide aid to runners with GI disturbances.
References and Recommended Reading
Papers of particular interest, published recently,
have been highlighted as:
Of importance
•• Of major importance
1. Clayton D: Runners World. May 1979:72.
2. Gil SM, Yazaki E, Evans DF: Aetiology of running-related
gastrointestinal dysfunction. How far is the finishing line?
Sports Med 1998, 26:365–378.
3. Costil DL, Wilmore JH: Cardiorespiratory function and
performance. In Physiology of Sport and Exercise, edn 2.
Edited by Costil DL, Wilmore JH. Champaign: Human
Kinetics; 1999:205–242.
4. Sullivan SN, Wong C, Heidenheim P: Does running cause
gastrointestinal symptoms? A survey of 93 randomly selected
runners compared with controls. N Z Med J 1994, 107:328–330.
5. Clark CS, Kraus BB, Sinclair J, Castell DO: Gastroesophageal
relux induced by exercise in healthy volunteers. JAMA
1989, 261:3599–3601.
6. Kruass BB, Sinclair JW, Castell DO: Gastroesophageal reflux
in runners. Ann Intern Med 1990, 112:429–433.
Table 1. Methods for reducing the risk of
gastrointestinal problems
Eliminate suspect foods and slowly reintroduce
them one at a time
Increase the time between eating and training
Limit intake of gas-forming foods
(eg, broccoli, onions, beans)
Limit intake of fiber-rich foods
Avoid coffee and other caffeine
Experiment with liquid meals before races
Never try a new supplement or drink for the
first time in a race
Increase training volume and intensity steadily
Don’t take large doses of vitamin C, sodium bicarbonate,
or carbohydrate drinks before races
Keep well hydrated
Try to evacuate before exercise
(Adapted from Coolrunning Australia [34].)
116 Abdominal Conditions
7. Collins KL, Pratt FP, Rodriguez-Stanley S, et al.: Esophageal
reflux in conditioned runners, cyclists, and weightlifters.
Med Sci Sport Exerc 2003, 35:730–735.
8. Peters HP, Bos M, Seebregts L, et al.: Gastrointestinal symp-
toms in long-distance runners, cyclists, and triathletes:
prevalence, medication, and etiology. Am J Gastroenterol
1999, 94:1570–1581.
9. Rehrer NJ, Brouns F, Beckers EJ, et al.: Physiologic changes
and gastrointestinal symptoms as a results of ultra-
endurance running. Eur J Appl Physiol 1992, 64:1–8.
10. Glace B, Murphy C, McHugh M: Food and fluid intake
and disturbances in gastrointestinal and mental function
during and ultramarathon. Intl J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab
2002, 12:414–427.
11. Peters HP, Zweers M, Backx FJ, et al.: Gastrointestinal symp-
toms during long-distance walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc
1999, 31:767–773.
12. Soffer EE, Merchant RK, Duethman G, et al.: Effect of graded
exercise on esophageal motility and gastroesophageal reflux
in trained athletes. Dig Dis Sci 1993, 38:220–224.
13. van Nieuwenhoven MA, Brouns F, Brummer RJ: The effect of
physical exercise on parameters of gastrointestinal function.
Neurogastroenterol Motil 1999, 11 : 431–439.
14. Choi SC, Yoo KH, Kim TH, et al.: Effect of graded running
on esophageal motility and gastroesophageal reflux in fed
volunteers. J Korean Med Sci 2001, 16:183–187.
15. Weiner P, Konson N, Sternberg A, et al.: Is gastro-oesophageal
reflux a factor in exercise-induced asthma. Respir Med 1998,
92:1071–1075.
16. DeMeester TR, O’Sullivan GC, Bermudez G, et al.: Esophageal
function in patients with anginal-type chest pain and normal
coronary angiograms. Ann Surg 1982, 196:488–498.
17. Schofield PM, Bennett DH, Whorwell PJ, et al.: Exertional
gastro-esophageal reflux: a mechanism for symptoms
in patients with angina pectoris and normal coronary
angiograms. BMJ 1987, 294:1459–1461.
18. Bovero E, Torre F, Poletti M, DeIaco F: Exertional gastroesoph-
ageal pH-metry: a new provocative physiological test in the
diagnosis of chest pain. Gastroenterol Clin Bio l 1993, 17:4–8.
19. Kondo T: Exercise-induced nausea is exaggerated by eating.
Appetite 2001, 36:119–125.
20. Baska RS, Moses FM, Deuster PA: Cimetidine reduces running-
associated gastrointestinal bleeding. Dig Dis Sci 1990,
35:956–960.
21. Smetanka RD, Lambert GP, Murray R, et al.: Intestinal
permeability in runners in the 1996 Chicago marathon.
Int J Sport Nutr 1999, 9:426–433.
22. Ryan AJ, Chang RT, Gisolfi CV: Gastrointestinal permeability
following aspirin intake and prolonged running. Med Sci
Sport Exer 1996, 28:698–705.
23. Lambert GP, Broussard LJ, Mason BL, et al.: Gastrointestinal
permeability during exercise: effects of aspirin and energy-
containing beverages. J Appl Physiol 2001, 90:2075–2080.
24.• Choi SC, Choi SJ, Kim JA, et al.: The role of gastrointestinal
endoscopy in long-distance runners with gastrointestinal
symptoms. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2001, 13:1089–1094.
In this study of 16 competitive runners, the authors directly assessed
mucosal damage with endoscopy. Additionally, they compare the
findings with hematologic parameters.
25. Moses FM, Baska RS, Peura DA, Deuster PA: Effect of cimeti-
dine on marathon-associated gastrointestinal bleeding.
Dig Dis Sci 1992, 36:1390–1394.
26. Cheng Y, Macera CA, Davis DR, Blair SN: Physical activity
and peptic ulcers. We s t J M e d 2000, 173:101–107.
27. Morton DP, Callister R: Characteristics and etiology of
exercise-related transient abdominal pain. Med Sci Sports Exerc
2000, 32:432–438.
28.• Morton DP, Callister R: Factors influencing exercise-related
transient abdominal pain. Med Sci Sport Exerc 2002,
34:745–749.
This survey of runners expands the previous reference to define factors
that influence the prevalence of this transient abdominal pain.
29. Loudon CP, Corroll V, Butcher J, et al.: The effects of physical
exercise on patients with Crohn’s disease. Am J Gastroenterol
1999, 94:697–703.
30. Putukian M, Potera C. Don't miss gastrointestinal disorders
in athletes. Phys Sportsmed 1997, 25:80–84.
31. Lustyk MK, Jarrett ME, Bennett JC, Heitkemper MM: Does
a physically active lifestyle improve symptoms in women
with irritable bowel syndrome? Gastroe nterol Nurs 2001,
24:129–137.
32. Keefe EB, Lowe DK, Goss JR, Wayne R: Gastrointestinal symp-
toms of marathon runners. Wes t J Med 1984, 141:481–484.
33. Worobetz LJ, Gerrard DF: Gastrointestinal symptoms during
exercise in endurance athletes: prevalence and speculations
on the aetiology. N Z Med J 1985, 98:644–646.
34. Toilet Training. http://www.coolrunning.com.au/editorials/
1998e007.shtml
35. Rehrer NJ, Meijer GA: Biomechanical vibration of the
abdominal region during running and bicycling. J Sports
Med Phys Fitness 1991, 31: 231–234.
36. Rehrer NJ, Janssen ME, Brouns F, Saris WH: Fluid intake
and gastrointestinal problems in runners competing in
a 25 km race and a marathon. Int J Sports Med 1989,
10(Suppl 1):S22–S25.
37. Brouns F, Beckers E: Is the gut an athletic organ? Digestion,
absorption and exercise. Sports Med 1993, 15:242–257.
38. O’Connor AM, Johnston CF, Buchanan KD, et al.: Circulating
gastrointestinal hormone changes in marathon running.
Int J Sports Med 1995, 16:283–287.
39. Jeukendrup AE, Vet-Joop K, Sturk A, et al.: Relationship
between gastro-intestinal complaints and endotoxaemia,
cytokine release and the acute-phase reaction during and
after a long-distance triathlon in highly trained men.
Clin Sci 2000, 98:47–55.
40. Brock-Utne JG, Gaffin SL, Wells MT, et al.: Endotoxaemia
in exhausted runners after a long-distance race. S Afr Med J
1988, 73:533–536.
41. Walsh M, Moriarity J, Peterson J, et al.: Portal venous thrombo-
sis in a backpacker: the role of exercise. Phys Sportsmed
1996, 24:75.
42. Moses FM, Brewer TG, Peura DA: Running associated proximal
hemorrhagic colitis. Ann Intern Med 1988, 108:385–386.
43.• Green GA: Gastrointestinal disorders in the athlete. Clin
Sports Med 1992, 11 : 453–470.
Excellent and comprehensive general review of GI disorders.
44. Buchman AL, Killip D, Ou CN, et al.: Short-term vitamin E
supplementation before marathon running: a placebo
controlled trial. Nutrition 1999, 15:278–283.
45. Buchman AL, O'Brien W, Ou CN, et al.: The effect of arginine
or glycine supplementation on gastrointestinal function,
muscle injury, serum amino acid concentrations and perfor-
mance during a marathon run. Int J Sports Med 1999, 20:31.
... The pathophysiology of GI dysfunction in ultrarunners is not fully understood and is likely multifactorial. The mechanical pounding and jostling associated with running is widely cited as a direct cause of GI distress (de Oliveira & Burinin, 2009;Gil, Yazaki, & Evans, 1998;Simons & Kennedy, 2004;Simons & Shaskan, 2005). This mechanical theory is supported by the observation that GI problems are more common in running events than in cycling or swimming (de Oliveira & Burinin, 2009;Peters et al., 1999). ...
... Low consumption rates of carbohydrate may result in hypoglycemia and nausea (Eberle, 2007). In contrast, concentrated carbohydrate sources can delay gastric emptying (Gisolfi, 2000), resulting in nausea and vomiting, and can cause fluid shifts into the intestines, resulting in abdominal cramping and diarrhea (Simons & Shaskan, 2005). Thus, there may be an optimal balance in fluid and fuel consumption for prevention of GI symptoms. ...
Article
Context: Gastrointestinal (GI) distress is common during ultrarunning. Purpose: To determine if race diet is related to GI distress in a 161-km ultramarathon. Methods: Fifteen (10 male, 5 female) consenting runners in the Javelina Jundred (6.5 loops on a desert trail) participated. Body mass was measured immediately prerace and after each loop. Runners reported if they had nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, and/or diarrhea after each loop. Subjects were interviewed after each loop to record food, fluid, and electrolyte consumption. Race diets were analyzed using Nutritionist Pro. Results: Nine (8 male, 1 female) of 15 runners experienced GI distress including nausea (89%), abdominal cramps (44%), diarrhea (44%), and vomiting (22%). Fluid consumption rate was higher (p = .001) in runners without GI distress (10.9 ± 3.2 ml · kg-1 · hr-1) than in those with GI distress (5.9 ± 1.6 ml · kg-1 · hr-1). Runners without GI distress consumed a higher percentage fat (p = .03) than runners with GI distress (16.5 ± 2.6 vs. 11.1 ± 5.0). In addition, fat intake rate was higher (p = .01) in runners without GI distress (0.06 ± 0.03 g · kg-1 · hr-1) than in runners with GI distress (0.03 ± 0.01 g · kg-1 ·hr-1). Lower fluid and fat intake rates were evident in those developing GI distress before the onset of symptoms. Conclusions: A race diet with higher percentage fat and higher intake rates of fat and fluid may protect ultramarathoners from GI distress. However, these associations do not indicate cause and effect, and factors other than race diet may have contributed to GI distress.
... Gastrointestinal complaints in endurance athletes are common but mostly minor. 1 Symptoms include crampy abdominal pain, heartburn, bloating and diarrhoea. Although in this group occult gastrointestinal blood loss is relatively common, it rarely presents as symptomatic anaemia. 2 Ischaemic colitis is rare and has been reported in long distance runners. 1 There are no published reports of ischaemic colitis associated with other endurance sports. ...
... Although in this group occult gastrointestinal blood loss is relatively common, it rarely presents as symptomatic anaemia. 2 Ischaemic colitis is rare and has been reported in long distance runners. 1 There are no published reports of ischaemic colitis associated with other endurance sports. ...
Article
Participation in endurance sports is growing and gastrointestinal complaints including abdominal pain and rectal bleeding are common. The most severe lower gastrointestinal complication of endurance sport is ischaemic colitis. Only a few cases have been reported, all in amateur long distance runners. The majority of cases involve the right colon and, if diagnosed early and managed appropriately, few patients require operative intervention. A 51-year-old male presented 24 h after completing an ironman triathlon with severe right-sided abdominal pain and bloody diarrhoea. Computed tomography confirmed right-sided ischaemic colitis. Conservative management with intravenous rehydration and antibiotics led to the complete resolution of his symptoms over a 72 h period. Participation in endurance sport is increasing and awareness of its complications is important. In the case of ischaemic colitis related to extreme exertion, early recognition and appropriate management will decrease the risk of potentially life-threatening complications.
... 3 Intense exercise can decrease splanchnic flow, and dehydration further reduces the intraabdominal perfusion. 10 Pathophysiological mechanisms are probably induced by the degree of decrease in GI blood flow and the secretion of secretory substances such as vasoactive intestinal peptide, secretin and peptide-histidine-methionine. 11 Clausen et al. demonstrated reduction of sphlanchnic blood flow up to 80% at maximal exercise. ...
Article
Full-text available
Gastrointestinal complaints are common in long distance runners. The symptoms may occur during or immediately after a strenous workout. Long distance running is becoming very popular and large numbers of trained and untrained people participate in competitions. We report two cases of marathon runners who were presented at the Medical Emergency Unit after having vomited black gastric content which was hemoccult positive. An urgent gastroscopy showed erosive gastritis and severe erosive bulbitis with no sign of active bleeding. Both patients were discharged without any sequelae.
... The factor we termed 'oesophageal discomfort' emerged as a separate factor, and consisted of heartburn and chest pain of presumed oesophageal origin. This factor was associated with excessive exercise only and this is entirely consistent with reports of heartburn and chest pain, and disorders such as gastroesophageal reflux and altered oesophageal motility, occurring in runners [16]. The factor 'self-induced vomiting' was to be expected in this sample of ED patients, and not surprisingly was more common in patients with bulimia nervosa, as this phenomenon is included in the diagnostic criteria for ED. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are common in patients with eating disorders. The aim of this study was to determine, using factor analysis, whether these GI symptom factors (clusters) in eating disorder patients hold true to the Rome II classification of functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs). Methods Inpatients in a specialised eating disorder unit completed the Rome II questionnaire. Data from 185 patients were analysed using factor analysis of 17 questions cited as present in 30% to 70% of the patients. Results Five factors emerged accounting for 68% of the variance and these were termed: ‘oesophageal discomfort’, ‘bowel dysfunction’, ‘abdominal discomfort’, ‘pelvic floor dysfunction’, and ‘self-induced vomiting’. These factors are significantly related to the Rome II FGID categories of functional oesophageal, bowel and anorectal disorders, and to the specific FGIDs of IBS, functional abdominal bloating, functional constipation and pelvic floor dyssynergia. Both heartburn and chest pain were included in the oesophageal discomfort factor. The ‘pelvic floor dysfunction’ factor was distinct from functional constipation. Conclusions The GI symptoms common in eating disorder patients very likely represent the same FGIDs that occur in non-ED patients. Symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction in the absence of functional constipation, however, are prominent in eating disorder patients. Further investigation of the items comprising the ‘pelvic floor dysfunction’ factor in other patient populations may yield useful results.
Article
Full-text available
Digestion is a process which takes place in resting conditions. Exercise is characterised by a shift in blood flow away from the gastrointestinal (GI) tract towards the active muscle and the lungs. Changes in nervous activity, in circulating hormones, peptides and metabolic end products lead to changes in GI motility, blood flow, absorption and secretion. In exhausting endurance events, 30 to 50% of participants may suffer from 1 or more GI symptoms, which have often been interpreted as being a result of maldigestion, malabsorption, changes in small intestinal transit, and improper food and fluid intake. Results of field and laboratory studies show that pre-exercise ingestion of foods rich in dietary fibre, fat and protein, as well as strongly hypertonic drinks, may cause upper GI symptoms such as stomach ache, vomiting and reflux or heartburn. There is no evidence that the ingestion of nonhypertonic drinks during exercise induces GI distress and diarrhoea. In contrast, dehydration because of insufficient fluid replacement has been shown to increase the frequency of GI symptoms. Lower GI symptoms, such as intestinal cramps, diarrhoea — sometimes bloody — and urge to defecate seem to be more related to changes in gut motility and tone, as well as a secretion. These symptoms are to a large extent induced by the degree of decrease in GI blood flow and the secretion of secretory substances such as vasoactive intestinal peptide, secretin and peptide-histidine-methionine. Intensive exercise causes considerable reflux, delays small intestinal transit, reduces absorption and tends to increase colonic transit. The latter may reduce whole gut transit time. The gut is not an athletic organ in the sense that it adapts to increased exercise-induced physiological stress. However, adequate training leads to a less dramatic decrease of GI blood flow at submaximal exercise intensities and is important in the prevention of GI symptoms.
Article
Full-text available
One hundred and seventy-two competitors of the Swiss Alpine Marathon, Davos, Switzerland, 1988, volunteered for this research project. Of these volunteers 170 (158 men, 12 women) finished the race (99%). The race length was 67 km with an altitude difference of 1,900 m between the highest and lowest points. Mean age was 39 (SEM 0.8) years. Average finishing times were 8 h 18 min (men) and 8 h 56 min (women). Loss of body mass averaged 3.4% body mass [mean 3.3 (SEM 0.2)%; 4.0 (SEM 0.4)%; men and women, respectively]. Blood samples from a subgroup of 89 subjects (6 women and 83 men) were taken prior to and immediately after completion of the race. Changes in haemoglobin (9.3 mmol.l-1 pre-race, 9.7 mmol.l-1 post-race) and packed cell volume (0.44 pre, 0.48 post-race) were in line with the moderate level of dehydration displayed by changes in body mass. Mean plasma volume decreased by 8.3%. No significant changes in plasma osmolality, sodium, or chloride were observed but plasma potassium did increase by 5% (4.2 mmol.l-1 pre-race, 4.4 mmol.l-1 post-race). Mean fluid consumption was 3290 (SEM 103) ml. Forty-three percent of all subjects, and 33% of those who gave blood samples, complained of gastro-intestinal (GI) distress during the race. No direct relationship was found between the quantity or quality of beverage consumed and the prevalence of GI symptoms.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Article
Full-text available
The incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) distress reported among long distance runners and not in practitioners of other sports with more gliding movements, such as bicycling, leads one to speculate that there is a difference in concussions and vibration of the GI region and that this may possibly be associated with the disparity in GI disorders. The present experiment was conducted to quantify the difference in vibration (accelerations/decelerations) of the GI region during running as compared to bicycling. An actometer was used which included a piezoelectric sensor. The sensor was placed on the abdomen of six subjects during identical trials of bicycling and running. Movement in three planes was detected by the sensor and recorded. The accelerometer output (AO) is an integral of these measurements. AO was used in making comparisons of the two types of movement, expressed as counts per minute. Mean AO was more than doubled in running, 859.5 +/- 130.1 (SD), versus bicycling, 425.8 +/- 149.5 (SD) (p less than .0001). The common assumption that running results in more body vibrations than bicycling has been substantiated and quantified. Although the differences are large, it can only be speculated that these differences explain the high frequency of GI symptoms among runners.
Article
Background: Although Helicobacter pylori has been identified as a major cause of chronic gastritis, not all infected patients develop ulcers, suggesting that other factors such as lifestyle may be critical to the development of ulcer disease. Objective: To investigate the role physical activity may play in the incidence of peptic ulcer disease. Methods: The participants were men (n = 8,529) and women (n = 2,884) who attended the Cooper Institute for Aerobics Research, Dallas, Texas, between 1970 and 1990. The presence of gastric or duodenal ulcer disease diagnosed by a physician was determined from a mail survey in 1990. Participants were classified into 3 physical activity groups according to information provided at the baseline clinic visit (before 1990): active, those who walked or ran 10 miles or more a week; moderately active, those who walked or ran less than 10 miles a week or did another regular activity; and the referent group consisting of those who reported no regular physical activity. Results: With the use of gender-specific proportional hazards regression models that could be adjusted for age, smoking, alcohol use, body mass index, and self-reported tension, active men had a significantly reduced risk for duodenal ulcers (relative hazard [95% confidence interval] for the active group, 0.38 [0.15-0.94], and 0.54 [0.30-0.96] for the moderately active group). No association was found between physical activity and gastric ulcers for men or for either type of ulcer for women. Conclusion: Physical activity may provide a nonpharmacologic method of reducing the incidence of duodenal ulcers among men.
Article
Background Although Helicobacter pylori has been identified as a major cause of chronic gastritis, not all infected patients develop ulcers, suggesting that other factors such as lifestyle may be critical to the development of ulcer disease. Objective To investigate the role physical activity may play in the incidence of peptic ulcer disease.Methods The participants were men (n = 8,529) and women (n = 2,884) who attended the Cooper Institute for Aerobics Research, Dallas, Texas, between1970 and 1990. The presence of gastric or duodenal ulcer disease diagnosed by a physician was determined from a mail survey in 1990. Participants were classified into 3 physical activity groups according to information provided at the baseline clinic visit (before 1990): active, those who walked or ran 10miles or more a week; moderately active, those who walked or ran less than 10miles a week or did another regular activity; and the referent group consisting of those who reported no regular physical activity. ResultsWith the use of gender-specific proportional hazards regression models that could be adjusted for age, smoking, alcohol use, body mass index, and self-reported tension, active men had a significantly reduced risk for duodenal ulcers (relative hazard [95% confidence interval] for the active group, 0.38 [0.15-0.94], and 0.54 [0.30-0.96] for the moderately active group). No association was found between physical activity and gastric ulcers for men or for either type of ulcer for women. Conclusion Physical activity may provide a non pharmacologic method of reducing the incidence of duodenal ulcers among men.
Article
The present study investigates the effects of truncal vagotomy and drug treatment, comprising atropine methylbromide and chlorisondamine, on the development of activity-stress ulcers in rats. To induce gastric lesions, female rats were housed individually in activity-wheel cages and subjected to a food-restricted schedule of only 1 hr food availability per day. Bilateral truncal vagotomy significantly prevented gastric ulceration, while those rats with vagotomy showed more running activity than shamoperated rats. Daily treatment with either methylatropine (3 and 6 mg/kg, s.c.) or chlorisondamine (2 and 4 mg/kg, i.p.) also significantly decreased the severity of lesions without a significant reduction in running activity. This evidence suggests that the development of activity-stress ulcers is mainly due to the hyperactivity of the peripheral parasympathetic nervous system.
Article
Effort thrombosis usually afflicts an extremity and is caused by compression. This case report, in contrast, involves superior mesenteric and left portal vein septic thrombosis in a backpacker following prolonged hiking and abdominal straining. The condition may have been caused by localized splanchnic venous ischemia, erosion of the bowel-blood barrier, and release of bacterial endotoxin in this dehydrated and detrained athlete. Diagnosis of this disorder is aided by noting characteristic abdominal pain, fever, nausea, and vomiting, as well as by imaging with MRI, CT, or duplex ultrasonography. Antibiotics and anticoagulants are key to treatment.
Article
Gastrointestinal symptoms in physically active persons can be caused by gut ischemia, dehydration, the use of tobacco and alcohol, medications, and certain foods and fluids. Exercise may also unmask underlying medical problems, the more serious being inflammatory bowel disease, ulcers, and malignancy. Athletes often ignore or are reluctant to talk about symptoms, so physicians must ask specific questions. Diagnosis requires checking orthostatic blood pressure to detect dehydration and conducting a thorough physical examination. Laboratory tests may include a complete blood count, iron studies, thyroid and occult-blood tests, and stool cultures. Treatment may include simple dietary or exercise modifications or medications. Antidiarrheal medications, however, may cause troublesome central nervous system side effects.
Article
This article presents an overview of some of the more commonly encountered disorders of the gastrointestinal tract that are seen in athletes. As with other medical conditions, the clinician can often be blinded by an athlete's physical activity and overlook underlying disease. Fortunately, most of the maladies described here are amenable to medical treatment, and with proper diagnosis and management the athlete should be able to achieve his or her maximal athletic performance. The study of the gastrointestinal tract and exercise is still in its early stages and was prompted by the need to explain clinical observations. Although some questions have been answered, the positive and negative effects of physical activity on the gastrointestinal tract have many avenues of research left to explore.