Treatment of severe reflux esophagitis with cimetidine and metoclopramide

Reflux esophagitis may be unresponsive to standard medical therapy with an H2-receptor antagonist drug. Twenty-five patients with chronic reflux esophagitis, refractory to cimetidine treatment alone, were randomly assigned in a double-blind design to receive cimetidine (1200 mg/d), in combination with metoclopramide (40 mg/d) or placebo. Nine of twelve patients receiving cimetidine with metoclopramide had significant symptomatic improvement at the end of the 8-week study period, compared with 3 of 12 patients receiving cimetidine with placebo (p less than 0.02). Endoscopic appearance improved in 9 patients receiving metoclopramide and in 4 patients receiving placebo (p less than 0.05). Neither group had significant improvement in lower esophageal sphincter pressure, 24-hour esophageal pH recordings, and esophageal histologic findings. Side effects were common with cimetidine and metoclopramide but were rarely disabling. This combination is efficacious in the management of chronic reflux esophagitis but, because of frequent side effects, should be reserved for patients refractory to treatment with cimetidine alone.     

Sucralfate used as adjunctive therapy in patients with severe erosive peptic esophagitis resulting from gastroesophageal reflux

A total of 36 patients with grade 2 or greater erosive esophagitis and an abnormal 24-h pH monitor study, were treated in a randomized, double-blind fashion to assess the efficacy of sucralfate suspension as adjunctive therapy to cimetidine for severe esophagitis secondary to gastroesophageal reflux. Treatment consisted of cimetidine, 300 mg qid and either sucralfate suspension (1 g/10 ml) or an identical placebo suspension, 10 ml after meals and 20 ml hs. Patients were treated for 12 wk unless endoscopic healing occurred earlier. Initial evaluation and monthly follow-up consisted of symptom monitoring, endoscopic evaluation and pre- and post-therapy esophageal manometry, Bernstein test, and 24-h pH monitoring. The combination of cimetidine and sucralfate suspension was superior to cimetidine alone in improving daytime heartburn symptoms (p less than 0.05) but not nighttime heartburn, dysphagia, or regurgitation. Sucralfate plus cimetidine improved the overall endoscopic outcome of esophagitis more than cimetidine alone (p less than 0.05). More patients exhibited endoscopic healing in the adjunctive sucralfate group than in the cimetidine-only group. Endoscopic healing, however, was not statistically different between groups. We conclude that sucralfate used as adjunctive therapy to cimetidine resulted in improvement of some of the symptoms of reflux, and probably increases the likelihood of complete healing of esophagitis, compared with cimetidine alone.     

兰索拉唑治疗反流性食管炎多中心临床观察

目的探讨兰索拉唑对反流性食管炎的疗效。方法上海地区４所医院用兰索拉唑３０ｍｇ,每日一次,治疗９２例经内镜证实的反流性食管炎患者。分别于治疗后２、４、６周观察反酸、烧心、反食等症状疗效,并于６周后复查胃镜,观察镜下治愈率,其中１０例患者分别与治疗前、后进行食管２４小时ｐＨ监测。结果兰索拉唑治疗２周,即可见症状明显改善,症状记分较治疗前明显下降（Ｐ＜０．０１）,治疗２、４、６周后,症状治疗显效率分别为５３．２６％、８０．４３％及８２．６１％（治疗４周及６周后,与２周比,Ｐ＜０．０１）。治疗６周症状改善总有效率为９３．４８％。６周后Ⅰ级食管炎治愈率为９３．７５％,高于Ⅱ级７５．７６％、Ⅲ级与Ⅳ级６３．６４％（Ｐ＜０．０５）;但各级食管炎改善,即有效率比较差异无显著性。１０例进行食管２４小时ｐＨ监测患者,治疗后,反流总时间百分率及反流总次数分别由１６．３７±５．９３％及１５０．２±３６．５０次,降至４．８１±０．４４％（Ｐ＜０．０１）及５８．１±１６．９９次（Ｐ＜０．０１）。结论兰索拉唑是治疗反流性食管炎的有效药物。     

Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: clinical, endoscopic, histologic findings, and response to treatment with fluticasone propionate

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis is an increasingly recognized disorder characterized by intense eosinophilic infiltration of the esophageal mucosa. The aim of this study was to define the clinical syndrome, the endoscopic features, and the distribution of the eosinophil infiltrate in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis. We undertook a prospective evaluation of the symptomatic and histologic response to treatment with fluticasone propionate. METHODS: Twenty-six patients (18 men; mean age 36 years) had symptom assessment and barium studies, esophageal motility recordings, and 24-hour esophageal pH studies. Upper-GI endoscopy was performed with quantitative eosinophil counts of biopsy specimens from the proximal and distal esophagus, the gastric antrum, and the duodenum. Nineteen subjects received 4 weeks of swallowed fluticasone propionate. After treatment, symptom assessment and endoscopic biopsies were repeated. RESULTS: All 26 patients had a history of dysphagia, and 11 presented acutely with food-bolus obstruction. Esophageal peristalsis was normal in most and gastroesophageal reflux coexisted in 10 patients. Characteristic endoscopic findings of furrows (20) and rings (18) were observed. All 19 treated patients had symptom improvement and a significant decrease in esophageal eosinophil counts. CONCLUSIONS: Eosinophilic esophagitis is a distinct entity that may coexist with gastroesophageal reflux. Swallowed fluticasone propionate is an effective treatment.     

The symptom index

The symptom index is a quantitative measure developed for assessing the relationship between gastroesophageal reflux and symptoms. Controversy exists, however, over its accuracy and the appropriate threshold for defining acid-related symptoms of heartburn and chest pain. Therefore, a retrospective review was done of 153 consecutive patients referred to our esophageal laboratory. Three groups were identified: patients with normal 24-hr pH tests and no esophagitis, patients with abnormal 24-hr pH tests and no esophagitis, and patients with abnormal 24 hr pH values and endoscopic esophagitis. If symptoms occurred during the pH study, a symptom index (number of acid related symptoms/total number of symptoms x 100%) was calculated separately for heartburn and chest pain. Heartburn and chest pain episodes were similar among the three groups. However, the mean symptom index for heartburn was significantly (P<0.001) higher in the patient groups with abnormal pH values [abnormal pH/no esophagitis: 70±7.1% (±se); abnormal pH/esophagitis: 85±4.6%] as compared to those with normal studies, ie, functional heartburn (26±10.7%). The mean symptom index for chest pain was similar for all three groups. Using receiver operating characteristic curves, a heartburn symptom index≥50% had excellent sensitivity (93%) and good specificity (71%) for acid reflux disease, especially if patients complain of multiple episoldes of heartburn. In contrast, an optimal symptom index threshold for defining acid-related chest pain episodes could not be defined.     

Utility of inpatient 24-hour intraesophageal pH monitoring in diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux

The aims of the present study were to evaluate the accuracy of 24-hr intraesophageal pH monitoring in the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux in the hospital setting and to establish whether there were any differences in terms of reflux events between patients with and without endoscopic esophagitis. Fifteen control subjects and 47 patients with proven gastroesophageal reflux disease were studied. A composite score of reflux events (number of reflux episodes; total, upright, and supine reflux time; number of refluxes lasting more than 5 min; and duration of the longest reflux) provided the best discrimination between controls and patients (94% sensitivity and 100% specificity). Patients with esophagitis showed concurrently a longer total reflux time and supine reflux time, and more prolonged reflux episodes than those without esophagitis. On the other hand the severity of esophagitis was directly related to the duration of both total and supine reflux. The results indicate that inpatient 24-hr pH-metry is very accurate in the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux. They also suggest that prolonged esophageal exposure to acid, particularly at night, and slow esophageal acid clearing are factors that determine the appearance and/or perpetuation of esophagitis in patients with reflux.     

Determinants of Long-Term Outcome of Patients with Reflux-Related Ear, Nose, and Throat Symptoms

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is present in up to 75% of patients with chronic refractory ear, nose, and throat (ENT) symptoms, and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy induces symptom relief in the majority of these patients. It has been suggested that endoscopic findings and quantification of esophageal acid exposure may help to predict the long-term outcome of medical therapy, but prospective studies that confirm this hypothesis are lacking. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship of endoscopic findings and quantification of reflux with long-term outcome in patients with reflux-related ENT symptoms. One hundred six consecutive patients with chronic refractory unexplained ENT symptoms underwent upper GI endoscopy, 24-hr dual-channel esophageal pH and Bilitec (n = 35) monitoring, and esophageal manometry. Subsequently, all were treated with omeprazole, 20 mg b.i.d., and patients were followed at 2-week intervals until symptom relief. Four weeks later, omeprazole therapy was gradually decreased and the lowest effective omeprazole maintenance dose, if any, was determined. Eighty-one patients (49 men; mean age, 50) experienced a clear or excellent therapeutic response after, on average, 4 weeks of omeprazole, 20 mg b.i.d. In 36 patients (44%; group A), PPI treatment could be stopped completely, 27 patients (33%; group B) required a maintenance dose of omeprazole, 20 mg/day, and 18 patients (22%; group C) required maintenance with omeprazole, 40 mg/day. The prevalence of reflux esophagitis was significantly lower in group A patients, who also had significantly lower distal esophageal acid exposure, proximal esophageal acid exposure, and esophageal duodenogastroesophageal reflux exposure compared to groups B and C. Multivariate analysis identified the presence of esophagitis and pathological distal esophageal acid exposure as risk factors for the need of maintenance therapy. In patients with reflux-related ENT symptoms, initial findings on upper GI endoscopy and 24-hr pH-metry help to predict the need for maintenance therapy.     

Acid and duodenogastroesophageal reflux after esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction

OBJECTIVE: Patients who undergo esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction incur increased risk for acid reflux and duodenogastroesophageal reflux. Few postesophagectomy studies of gastroesophageal reflux disease have included simultaneous 24-h pH and bilirubin monitoring. The aim of this study is to evaluate acid reflux and duodenogastroesophageal reflux after esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction. METHODS: Reflux symptom evaluation, endoscopy, and simultaneous 24-h pH and bilirubin monitoring in the cervical esophagus were performed in 25 patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy, and digital dilation of the pyloric ring as treatment for esophageal cancer. RESULTS: Reflux symptoms were severe, mild, and absent in 2, 7, and 16 patients, respectively. Reflux esophagitis and Barrett's esophagus was observed in 11 and 1 patients, respectively. Elevated acid reflux occurred in 7 patients (28%). Elevated duodenogastroesophageal reflux was recorded in 11 patients (44%). Reflux profile analysis identified three patterns: 4 subjects (16%) with both elevated acid reflux and duodenogastroesophageal reflux; 3 (12%) with only elevated acid reflux; and 7 (28%) with only elevated duodenogastroesophageal reflux. Of 7 patients with only elevated duodenogastroesophageal reflux, 4 developed reflux esophagitis. Although reflux symptoms did not correlate with endoscopic esophagitis, a significant correlation was observed between endoscopic esophagitis and acid reflux and/or duodenogastroesophageal reflux. CONCLUSIONS: Reflux symptoms represented a poor indication of esophagitis in patients with esophagectomy and gastric tube reconstruction. Simultaneous 24-h pH and bilirubin monitoring can help in identifying patients at high risk for reflux esophagitis, as well as indicating the cause of esophagitis.     

Comparison of 3 methods of recording esophageal pH in the diagnosis of gastroesophageal acid reflux

The aim of this prospective work was to analyze the results of 3 methods of esophageal pH recording (i. e. short-term pH test, 3-hr postprandial recordings, and 12-hr nocturnal pH recording) in 47 patients with suspected gastroesophageal reflux. Nocturnal pH recording was used as a reference for evaluation of the diagnostic value of the 2 other pH tests. Normal ranges were established from 20 control subjects. Esophageal endoscopy with biopsies were performed systematically in order to evaluate the relationship between pH results and the grades of esophagitis. According to the results of nocturnal pH recordings, 32 patients were considered to suffer from acid gastroesophageal reflux and 15 patients as being free of reflux. The sensitivity and specificity of the pH measurements were 0.94 and 0.13 for the short-term pH test and 0.91 and 0.80 for 3-hr postprandial recordings respectively. The total duration of reflux (expressed as a percentage of total duration of the test) was the most discriminative parameter for the diagnosis of reflux and was simpler to determine than previously described pH scores. Because of the absence of lamina propria in the biopsy specimens obtained at endoscopy, histological diagnosis of esophagitis was possible in only 35 patients (74 p. 100). No relationship was found between the grade of esophagitis and the results of short-term pH tests. On the other hand, the mean duration of reflux episodes, the duration of the longest episode, the total duration of reflux measured by 12-hr nocturnal pH recording, and the number of low pH reflux episodes determined by postprandial tests were significantly higher in patients with macroscopic lesions than in those with normal endoscopic aspect or mild (histological) lesions of esophagitis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Duodenogastroesophageal reflux: results of medical treatment and antireflux surgery

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Recent studies have shown that reflux of the duodenal content to the esophagus plays an important role in esophageal mucosal damage. The aim of the study is to compare the duodenogastroesophageal (DGER) reflux with the severity of reflux esophagitis and evaluate its response to either medical and/or antireflux surgery. METHODOLOGY: Ninety-six patients with DGER were subjected to thorough history, upper GI endoscopy, barium study, esophageal manometry and 24-hr esophageal pH metry combined with Bilitec 2000. Medical treatment was given for all, while Nissen fundoplication was done for 28 patients. All patients were evaluated after Nissen fundoplication and treatment. RESULTS: The age of studied patients was 36.26+/-12.7 years with male to female ratio 2:1. The chief symptom was heartburn in 73 (76%) patients. Upper GI endoscopy revealed, 30 (31.2%) patients had grade I reflux, 30 (31.2%) patients had grade II reflux, 7 patients had grade III reflux, 5 patients had grade VI reflux, Barrett's esophagus in 14 patients (14.5%), hiatus hernia (HH) in 26 (27%) patients. Barium study revealed that, 40 (41.6%) patients had evidence of reflux, while 34 (35.4%) patients had reflux with HH. Esophageal motility revealed the mean LESP (12.7+/-7.6), 68 patients (70.8%) had normotensive body while ineffective esophageal body motility was encountered in 28 (29.1%) patients. Esophageal 24-hr pH study and Bilitec 2000 revealed that 54 (56.2%) patients had bile reflux with pathological acid reflux, while 42 (43.7%) patients had bile reflux in alkaline pH. Medical treatment gave excellent to good response in 68 (70.8%) patients, while Nissen fundoplication was done for 28 (29.2%) patients. Endoscopic examination 6 months after Nissen fundoplication showed marked improvement in endoscopic injury. Barium study after Nissen fundoplication revealed repair of HH and control of GERD in all patients except one. Esophageal motility, 24 hr pH study and Bilitec 2000, after 6 months of Nissen shows high significant increase in LESP, decrease in acid and bile reflux. No significant difference between open or laparoscopic fundoplication in LESP, acid and bile reflux. CONCLUSIONS: DGER in acid medium is more injurious to the esophagus than DGER in alkaline pH. The severity of esophageal injury does not correlate with the severity of acid or bile reflux but has a direct correlation with impaired distal esophageal motility. Medical treatment gives satisfactory control of symptoms and healing of esophageal lesion in 70% of DGER. The response to medical treatment does not depend on the severity of esophageal injury but depends on the severity of bile and acid reflux. Nissen fundoplication in refractory patients, either open or laparoscopic, was effective in control of heartburn in 95% of patients contrary to 50% in mixed symptoms.     

Pattern of acid reflux in patients with reflux esophagitis 'resistant' to H2-receptor antagonists

Ambulatory 24-h esophageal pH monitoring was carried out in 54 patients with erosive/ulcerative reflux esophagitis before a 12- to 24-week treatment with either ranitidine, 150 to 300 mg twice daily, or famotidine, 20 to 40 mg twice daily. After this period, 21 patients continued to present endoscopic evidence of esophagitis. Patients who did not respond to the therapy showed a more severe pretreatment pattern of acid reflux than those who healed, with regard to both median percentage time of reflux (16.2% versus 11.0%, respectively, p less than 0.05) and median number of reflux episodes (88.0 versus 55.0; p less than 0.05). Ambulatory 24-h esophageal pH-metry is therefore to be recommended in all patients with acid reflux symptoms, even in those who already show endoscopic lesions of the esophageal mucosa, since this test is a valid prognostic indicator of response to treatment.     

Esophageal intraluminal pH recording in the assessment of gastroesophageal reflux and its consequences

Intraluminal pH in the lower esophagus has been recorded during a 3-hr period following a light meal and a consecutive 12-hr nocturnal period in 20 patients with typical symptoms and radiological evidence of gastroesophageal reflux and in 10 patients without such signs of reflux. Evidence of acid reflux was obtained in 3 of the patients without reflux during the postcibal period but in only one during the 12-hr nocturnal period. In contrast all except one of the 20 patients who had evidence of reflux showed spells of high acidity both in the postcibal and nocturnal periods. There was no clear correlation between the frequency of pain from gastroesophageal reflux over the preceding two weeks and the duration of high acidity in the nonturnal period. Those patients with endoscopic evidence of severe esophagitis showed a significantly longer duration of high esophageal acidity in the nocturnal period. We conclude that nocturnal exposure of the esophageal mucosa to acid is a major factor in the causation of reflux esophagitis.     

Failure of Initial 24-Hour Esophageal pH Monitoring to Predict Refractoriness and Intractability in Reflux Esophagitis

Prolonged esophageal pH monitoring is considered to be the most sensitive and specific test for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the role of pH monitoring in predicting the clinical and endoscopic response of reflux esophagitis is not well defined. In this study, 106 patients with moderate to severe symptoms of GERD and esophagitis (grades 0-IV) by endoscopy were initially studied by ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring, and their clinical response to standard H2 antagonist therapy was monitored at 8 wk. Refractory patients were defined as those who failed to heal and/or had intractable reflux symptoms after 8 wk of H2 antagonist therapy, and who required continuous therapy with higher doses of H2 antagonists, addition of prokinetic agents, or omeprazole. There was a positive correlation (r = 0.89) between endoscopic severity of esophagitis upon entry into the study and refractoriness to standard medical therapy. However, there were no differences in the various pH parameters analyzed between the 58 patients who responded and the 48 patients who were refractory to medical therapy, regardless of the endoscopic grading of their esophagitis. We conclude that 24-h ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring does not predict refractoriness of reflux esophagitis to standard therapy. The decision for more aggressive methods of treatment probably requires assessment of symptomatic and endoscopic response after 8 week standard H2 antagonist therapy.     

Ambulatory 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring

If 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring is to be a useful diagnostic tool, it must reliably discriminate gastroesophageal reflux patients despite daily variations in distal esophageal acid exposure. To address this issue, we studied 53 subjects (14 healthy normals, 14 esophagitis patients, and 25 patients with atypical symptoms) with two ambulatory pH tests performed within 10 days of each other. Intrasubject reproducibility of 12 pH parameters to discriminate the presence of abnormal acid reflux was determined. As a group, the parameters of percent time with pH<4 (total, upright, recumbent) were most reproducible (80%). Therefore, a subject was defined as having gastroesophageal reflux disease if at least one of these three values were abnormal. Intrasubject reproducibility for the diagnosis of reflux disease was 89% for the entire sample. Among subsets, the reproducibility was 93% for the normals and esophagitis patients and 84% for the atypical symptom patients. Total percent time with pH<4 was the single most discriminate pH parameter (85%) and nearly equaled that of the three combined parameters (89%). The intrasubject variability of this parameter was determined by the mean ±2sd of the relative differences between the two test results for all 53 subjects. Total percent time with pH<4 may vary between tests by a factor of 3.2-fold or less (218% higher to 69% lower). We conclude: (1) ambulatory 24-hr esophageal monitoring is a reproducible test for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease; and (2) the large intrastudy variability in 24-hr total acid exposure may limit this test's usefulness as a measurement of therapeutic improvement.Supported, in part, by Public Health Services Grant AM 34200-01A1 from NIADDIK.     

Nonobstructive Dysphagia in Reflux Esophagitis

Dysphagia in the absence of organic esophageal stricture may occur in patients with reflux esophagitis. Although the exact mechanism of this "nonobstructive dysphagia" (NOD) is not known, it is believed to be related to transient segmental esophageal motor disorder. The goals of this study were to determine the frequency of NOD in patients with reflux esophagitis and correlate it with esophageal pH and motility changes. Sixty-three consecutive patients with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction were studied with endoscopy, infusion esophageal manometry, and 24-h ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring. Forty-seven had severe erosive esophagitis unresponsive to medical therapy; 16 with esophageal motility disorders were used as symptomatic controls. Twenty-eight of 63 patients studied experienced NOD during the 24-h pH study; 22 had esophagitis and six had esophageal dysmotility without esophagitis. NOD was noted with similar frequency in the two groups; 22/47 (46.8%) of patients with esophagitis and 6/16 (37.5%) with esophageal dysmotility experienced NOD during the period of study. NOD correlated with pH less than 4.0 in 88.6% of patients with esophagitis but in only 7% of patients with esophageal dysmotility (p less than 0.001). There was no difference in acid reflux patterns in esophagitis patients who experienced NOD (22/47), and in those who did not (25/47). There was no correlation between NOD and baseline esophageal motility abnormalities. In summary, 1) NOD is a common, intermittent symptom that occurred in up to 46.8% of esophagitis patients and 37.5% of symptomatic controls during the 24-h period of this study; 2) NOD correlates with esophageal pH less than 4.0 in patients with esophagitis and not in patients with esophageal dysmotility. These data strongly suggest that acid in the distal esophagus frequently triggers the sensation of dysphagia in esophagitis patients, but not in patients with esophageal motility disorders. Combined ambulatory intraesophageal motility and pH monitoring may further elucidate the mechanism of dysphagia in these patients.     

胃食管反流病患者酸反流与食管运动功能障碍的关系

背景：异常酸反流和食管运动功能障碍与胃食管反流病（GERD）密切相关。目的：研究GERD患者的食管运动和酸反流与食管黏膜损害的关系，以及两者之间的相关性。方法：选取有反酸、烧心、胸痛等典型胃食管反流症状的患者72例行上消化道内镜检查、食管测压和24hpH监测。根据pH〈4总时间百分比〈4．5％且DeMeester计分〈14．7的标准。将食管炎患者分为生理性酸反流组（pH^-组）和病理性酸反流组（pH^＋组）。结果：内镜下食管炎组24hpH监测各项指标较无食管炎组显著增高（P〈0．05），病理性酸反流的发生率显著高于无食管炎组（P〈0．01）。两组食管测压各项指标无显著差异，食管炎组pH^＋者的食管下括约肌压力（LESP）较pH^-者显著降低，食管体部蠕动波传导速度减慢，湿咽成功率减少（P〈0．05）。结论：GERD患者食管炎的发生与酸反流密切相关，有病理性酸反流的GERD患者易见食管运动功能障碍。     

How well can quantitative 24-hour intraesophageal pH monitoring distinguish various degrees of reflux disease?

Twenty-four normal subjects and 64 symptomatic patients with various degrees of reflux disease (24 with reflux symptoms without esophagitis and 21 with mild and 19 with severe esophagitis) underwent quantitative 24-hr intraesophageal pH monitoring. Various reflux parameters during supine, interprandial, and postprandial periods were examined by binary logistic regression and by CART analysis to determine the sensitivity and specificity to separate the various groups of subjects and patients. The distinction was excellent between asymptomatic controls and patients with severe erosive esophagitis (sensitivity and specificity both 100% by logistic regression and 95% and 88%, respectively, by CART), but discrimination was poor when asymptomatic controls were compared to symptomatic patients without esophagitis (71% and 79% by logistic regression and 75% and 92% by CART), which is the most important indication for pH recording in clinical practice. A 3-hr postprandial pH recording was inadequate to distinguish the various groups. The acidity of the reflux episodes during the night appeared to be a crucial factor in the development of severe erosive esophagitis. The duration of esophageal acid exposure was another important factor in the development of reflux lesions.     

Low reproducibility of 2 x 24-hour continuous esophageal pH monitoring in infants and children: a limiting factor for interventional studies

The aim of this study was to investigate the day-to-day reproducibility of 24-hr esophageal pH monitoring. The procedure was performed continuously for 48 hr in order to enable future studies on dietary challenges, using consecutive 2 × 24 hr pH recording. Furthermore, one objective was to relate the degree of reproducibility to endoscopic evidence of mucosal injury. Upper endoscopy and 2 × 24-hr consecutive pH monitoring were performed in 30 infants and children referred for gastroesophageal reflux disease. The monitoring was performed without dietary or activity restrictions in order to assess reflux parameters in a near-normal physiologic setting. The NASPGHAN criteria for pathological reflux index (RI, % fraction of time with pH < 4.0) were employed. Based upon the NASPGHAN criteria for the RI, 9/30 subjects (30%) had discordant (normal vs pathologic) results at the two recording days, yielding an overall reproducibility of 70%. The limits of agreement for RI at day 2 were 0.2–3.3 times the initially obtained value at day 1. No difference was found in terms of reproducibility between groups with and without esophageal mucosal changes (erythema and esophagitis). No significant difference was noted in the association between pH monitoring and macroscopic esophageal mucosal changes between the two recordings days. In conclusion; a considerable intraindividual variability in reflux parameters was observed between the measurements from day 1 to day 2. This physiologic variability should be taken into consideration when evaluating gastroesophageal reflux disease in infants and children by means of pH monitoring. The day-to-day variability limits the use of simultaneous pH monitoring and dietary challenges as a procedure to identify a possible causative relation between GERD and dietary allergy/intolerance.     

A prospective study of effects of belsey MK IV antireflux surgery on endoscopic esophagitis,lower esophageal sphincter pressure,and 24-Hr pH measurements

A prospective study on the effect of the Belsey MK IV operation on esophagitis, lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP), and acid reflux as monitored on 24-hr pH recording was conducted to investigate the association between objective changes and the effect of operation on reflux-associated symptoms. Thirty-one patients were included. The effect of surgery on symptoms was recorded in all patients, and 22 patients agreed to undergo endoscopy, manometry, and 24-hr pH recording. Follow-up ranged from three to nine years (mean five years); 87% reported long-lasting improvement (50% free of symptoms, 37% major improvement, no medication needed). The combination of symptomatic improvement and absence of esophagitis was found in 70%. LESP significantly increased [8±6 mm Hg preoperatively, 14±5 mm Hg postoperatively (P<0.001)] to a level above 5 mm Hg in 96% of the patients. No endoscopic esophagitis was found in 17 of 20 patients (85%;P<0.05) (two patients refused endoscopy). The 24-hr pH monitoring normalized in 11 of the 20 patients (55%) (one registration failed). The operation-induced rise in LESP correlated with improvement on endoscopy (r=0.51;P<0.002) and with reduction of reflux parameters (number of episodes with pH<4:r=0.64;P<0.05, percentage of total time pH<4:r=0.42;P=0.07). A rise in LESP must be an important aim of antireflux surgery. The Belsey MK IV does not induce a rise to a level that causes severe dysphagia or bloating, but the trade-off is less control of acid reflux. The Belsey MK IV provides long-lasting symptomatic improvement in 87% of patients. Normalization of the 24-hr pH profile is an essential marker for successful surgery, and we propose to score the results of antireflux surgery by a combination of clinical symptoms and endoscopic findings.     

Bethanechol or cimetidine in the treatment of symptomatic reflux esophagitis: a double-blind control study

We conducted a double-blind study to compare the effectiveness of oral bethanechol chloride or cimetidine in treating reflux esophagitis to evaluate the drugs' effects on the symptoms of esophagitis and its verification by endoscopy. Forty-three patients were treated with either 300 mg of cimetidine or 25 mg of bethanechol chloride, each administered four times a day for six weeks. In addition to this drug treatment, the patients all received conventional medical therapy. Patients who were treated with either of the two drugs experienced a decrease in symptoms and less severe endoscopic lesions. While cimetidine treatment resulted in complete endoscopic healing in 15 of 22 patients, bethanechol treatment resulted in the same healing in 11 of 21 patients. During therapy, neither endoscopic lesions or symptoms worsened. Our study indicated that either cimetidine or bethanechol is an effective drug in treating reflux esophagitis. The effects of the two drugs can be favorably compared.