Inclusion of supine period in short-duration pH monitoring is essential in diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Prolonged esophageal pH monitoring is the most accurate method for detecting abnormal gastroesophageal reflux (GER) in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, some investigators have found that short-duration postprandial pH monitoring in the upright position is also useful, while others have failed to find such results. Therefore, we have compared a 6-hr period of pH monitoring (3-hr postprandial period after daytime meal and 3-hr supine period) with a total 24-hr period in detecting abnormal gastroesophageal reflux. Sixty-five patients (44 men, mean age 41.3 years) with GERD and 16 healthy volunteers (11 men, mean age 34.3 years) underwent 24-hr pH monitoring according to a standard protocol. Various reflux parameters during 24-hr pH monitoring were compared with reflux parameters during the 6-hr period. Abnormal GER was detected in 56 patients presenting with typical symptoms of GERD (sensitivity 86.2%). These patients could be further divided into upright (N=18), supine (N=15), and combined (N=23) refluxers, depending on the posture in which abnormal reflux occurred. Esophageal pH monitoring during the 3-hr postprandial upright period showed abnormal reflux in only 35 patients (sensitivity 53.8%;P<0.00005, compared with the 24-hr pH monitoring period). Abnormal GER was identified in 13 of 18 upright, 19 of 23 combined, and only one of 15 supine refluxers, as well as in two of nine patients with normal 24-hr pH-metry. However, inclusion of the 3-hr supine monitoring period in the 3-hr postprandial upright period improved detection of abnormal GER to 78.5% (51 patients;P=NS compared with 24-hr pH monitoring period). This was related mainly to improved detection of abnormal GER in supine refluxers (11 of 15; 73.3%). Esophageal acid exposure time correlated significantly with severity of esophagitis only during the total and supine periods of both the 24- and 6-hr periods and not during the upright period. Esophageal acid clearance correlated significantly with increasing grades of esophagitis for the supine and total periods only. We conclude that 3-hr postprandial pH monitoring, as has been conventionally practiced, is not appropriate in the detection of abnormal GER; inclusion of a supine period in the short-duration pH monitoring schedule increases the detection of pathological reflux. We therefore recommend that a supine period should be included in short-duration pH monitoring schedules. We also found that supine reflux was the most important factor in the development of esophagitis.     

Esophageal Motility in Nonacid Reflux Compared with Acid Reflux

Esophageal motility has been well studied in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and acid reflux, but not in nonacid reflux. Consecutive patients who had both 24-h multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) and esophageal motility tests for suspected GERD were studied. Patients were grouped into nonacid refluxers, acid refluxers, and nonrefluxers based on positive symptom correlation and objective findings of acid reflux. Of 96 patients enrolled, 21 patients (22%) were nonacid refluxers, 44 patients (46%) were acid refluxers, and 31 patients (32%) had no objective evidence of reflux. Normal motility was recorded in 86% of nonacid refluxers, 71% of acid refluxers, and 60% of nonrefluxers. Ineffective esophageal motility was seen in 24% of acid refluxers, and 5% of nonacid refluxers (P = 0.11). Symptomatic nonacid reflux events comprised 22% of patients studied for GERD symptoms by MII-pH. Esophageal motility in nonacid reflux is normal 86% of the time.     

Effects of a pH electrode across the lower esophageal sphincter

Recent studies have suggested that combined monitoring of the esophagus and stomach for prolonged periods may be the best method for investigating patients with upper gastrointestinal complaints. However, the effects of an electrode across the LES on esophageal reflux parameters have not been extensively studied. We studied 10 healthy volunteers and 10 patients with GERD twice with 24-hr pH monitoring. In phase 1, two glass electrodes were placed 1 cm below the UES and 5 cm above the LES. One week later in phase 2, patients were restudied with one electrode 5 cm above and one 5 cm below the LES. Although total acid exposure remained the same in healthy volunteers, three volunteers who spontaneously refluxed at night had abnormal prolongation of their supine acid exposure during phase 2 of the study. In patients with GERD, the electrode across the LES resulted in significant (P=0.01) increase in supine acid exposure and showed a strong tendency for the number of reflux episodes >5 min supine (P=0.02) and longest reflux episode supine (P=0.06) to increase without a change in the number of reflux episodes. In conclusion, a small glass electrode across the LES results in prolongation of supine acid exposure in both healthy volunteers spontaneously refluxing at night and the majority of patients with GERD. This results from the electrode interfering with clearance of refluxed acid in the supine position. Thus, combined esophageal and gastric pH monitoring may have important limitations in investigating gastroesophageal symptoms.     

Relationship between 24 h ambulatory esophageal pHmetry and upper digestive endoscopy in reflux esophagitis patients]

The reflux gastroesophageal patients can be divided in three patterns, according with ambulatorial esophageal 24 h-pHmetry: orthostatic, which the reflux episodes occur when the patients are upright; supine, which the reflux episodes occur when the patients are sleeping; combined, when the reflux episodes are both observed in upright or lay down position. There are presented 56 patients with endoscopic reflux esophagitis who are divided according to the patterns of reflux by 24 h-pHmetry. The results are similar to those of international reports. Complicated esophagitis is more common in the combined refluxers following by supine refluxers. In the orthostatic refluxers were not observed complicated esophagitis. The 24 h-pHmetry is an useful tool for clinical use and prognosis in the gastroesophageal reflux disease.     

Exclusion of meal periods from ambulatory 24-hour pH monitoring May improve diagnosis of esophageal acid reflux

Distal esophageal pH less than 4 is frequently seen during meal ingestion in 24-hr ambulatory pH monitoring for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The characteristics of this meal-related apparent reflux without diet restriction was evaluated. Data from normal volunteers (N=21) and consecutive patients (N=66) referred with heartburn and/or chest pain were studied with ambulatory pH monitoring. The median percent times pH<4 in the distal esophagus were significantly greater in symptomatic patients than controls for total 24-hr, upright, and supine periods, and postprandial periods of 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 min (P values of 0.007–0.03). However, the median percent time pH<4 during the meal periods was the same for patients (4.4%) and for controls (6.6%) withP=0.23. Excluding the meal periods from analysis resulted in greater separation between controls and patients with abnormal acid exposure when compared to the conventional method. Patients should maintain their usual routine without diet restriction during 24-hr ambulatory pH studies in the clinical setting. Furthermore, exclusion of meal periods can eliminate meal-time pH variabilities without affecting postprandial acid exposure and improve the diagnosis of GERD.     

Upright versus supine reflux in gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND: Postural measures are early recommendations in the management of heartburn, and are aimed at preventing acid reflux through an incompetent lower esophageal sphincter (LES). However, LES incompetence is found in only a minority of patients, and transient LES relaxations, primarily in the upright position, are currently recognized as the main pathophysiological abnormality in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). We investigated the importance of supine acid reflux in patients with GERD. METHODS: Upon review of their clinical, manometric, pH monitoring and endoscopic characteristics, 85 patients with reflux symptoms were classified into three groups: Group A (n=22), consisting of symptomatic patients without esophagitis or pathological reflux; group B (n=38), symptomatic patients with reflux but no endoscopic esophagitis; and group C (n=25), symptomatic patients with both ulcerative or complicated esophagitis and pathological reflux. RESULTS: All groups were similar in age distribution. Groups B and C had a higher prevalence of hiatal hernia and reflux symptoms. Manometry revealed similar LES pressures in groups A and B, but lower LES pressure in group C (P < 0.005). In groups A and B, supine reflux, in terms of percentage of time with pH < 4, was less pronounced than upright reflux (P < 0.0001). In contrast, group C supine reflux was as pronounced as the upright reflux. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients reflux in the upright position. Only patients with complicated esophagitis have significant bipositional acid reflux. These findings suggest that unless the patient has severe reflux disease, postural measures may not be indicated.     

Role of Diaphragmatic Crura and Lower Esophageal Sphincter in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Manometric and pH-Metric Study of Small Hiatal Hernia

The rapid pull-through (RPT) technique during esophageal manometry helps to identify various pressure profiles of hiatal hernia (HH), based on the presence of two high pressure zones: the diaphragmatic crura (DC) and the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). Our aim was to correlate different HH profiles with frequency of reflux episodes in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Seventy-eight patients with GERD and HH underwent esophageal manometry with RPT and were grouped according to the prevalent pressure profile of HH. Twenty-four-hour pH-metry served to quantify traditional (TR) and nontraditional refluxes (drop of 1 pH unit with pH > 4 or pH < 4 and time < 5 sec) (NTR) during total, upright, and recumbent periods. The group with a prevalent flat HH profile, representing LES and DC impairment, had significantly more TRs in total time of reflux (P < 0.01) and in recumbent and upright periods (P < 0.05) compared to the group with a prevalence of the two pressure peaks, corresponding to LES and DC efficiency. However, the group with the flat profile had significantly more NTRs + TRs than the group with pressure peaks in total time (P < 0.01) and recumbent position (P < 0.001) but not in the upright position. Hiatal hernia predisposes to GERD, but only the associated impairment of the LES and diaphragmatic crura pressures represents a condition of high risk for gastroesophageal reflux events.     

The utility of ambulatory pH monitoring in patients presenting with chronic cough and asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in patients presenting with asthma and chronic cough. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The charts of 358 consecutive patients who were referred for ambulatory gastroesophageal pH monitoring to the Lung Centre in Vancouver, British Columbia, were reviewed, and the data of 108 (30%) patients with asthma and 134 (37%) patients with chronic cough were analyzed. The maintenance treatment for GERD was discontinued before patients underwent the pH monitoring study. One hundred eighteen (33%) patients were excluded. RESULTS: Reflux episodes identified reflux events as the percentage of time where the pH was less than four. For asthma patients, 70 (64.8%) had distal total reflux, 50 (46.3%) had distal upright reflux, 41 (38.3%) had distal supine reflux and 73 (67.6%) had other distal refluxes. Proximal total reflux in asthmatic patients was present in 56 (52%), proximal upright reflux in 55 (51%) and proximal supine reflux in 56 (52%) patients. For chronic cough patients, 70 (52.6%) had distal total reflux, 59 (44.4%) had distal upright reflux, 45 (34.4%) had distal supine reflux and 75 (56%) patients had other distal refluxes. In chronic cough patients, proximal total reflux was present in 70 (52%), proximal upright reflux in 80 (60%) and proximal supine reflux in 59 (44%). Presenting respiratory and/or reflux symptoms were absent in approximately 25% of patients with asthma and reflux, and in approximately 50% of patients with chronic cough and reflux. During pH monitoring, symptoms did not differ significantly between those with and without distal reflux in both study groups, except for more significant heartburn in patients with chronic cough and reflux (RR 2.0). CONCLUSIONS: The data of the present study support the observation that there is a high prevalence of GERD in patients with asthma or chronic cough. The use of different pH parameters for detecting acid reflux during 24 h ambulatory pH monitoring, such as proximal esophageal acid measurement, should be considered as part of the routine interpretation of such testing. A low threshold for diagnosing GERD in patients with asthma or chronic cough is essential, because respiratory and/or reflux symptoms can be absent or atypical in some of these patients.     

NERD, GERD, and Barrett’s Esophagus: Role of Acid and Non-acid Reflux Revisited with Combined pH-Impedance Monitoring

Introduction Gastroesophageal reflux is the most important factor in the development of Barrett’s metaplasia. The effect of acid reflux is commonly accepted today, but there is controversy about the role of non-acid reflux. With introduction of combined esophageal pH-impedance monitoring, a precise diagnostic test for acid and non-acid reflux is now available. Methods Ninety two consecutive patients (33 women) off acid-suppressive therapy underwent diagnostic work-up for suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease including upper-GI endoscopy, esophageal manometry, barium swallow, and combined esophageal pH-impedance monitoring. Patients were subdivided into three groups according to symptoms and endoscopic appearance: typical symptoms without esophagitis (n = 28; NERD); erosive esophagitis (n = 52, ERD), and patients with intestinal metaplasia (n = 12, BE). Results Pathologic acid reflux during pH-metry was found in 35.7%, 63.5%, and 75.0% for NERD, ERD, and BE patients, respectively (P = 0.022). Likewise, the percentage of time pH < 4 rose significantly during upright, supine, and total phases. In contrast, combined pH-impedance monitoring showed no significant difference between groups for the number of acid reflux events and for percentage of acid bolus reflux time. However, BE patients had significantly more non-acid reflux events and a higher percentage of non-acid bolus reflux time during the supine (P = 0.043, P = 0.020, respectively), but not during the upright phase (P = 0.740, P = 0.730, respectively). Conclusion Patients with BE are exposed to increased supine non-acid reflux and to increased acid reflux during upright and supine phases. This observation supports the concept that nocturnal non-acid reflux may play a role in the pathogenesis of BE.     

Endoscopic and histological correlation of the findings of mucosa of the distal esophagus in nonerosive reflux disease

Background

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is frequently requested for patients with gastroesophageal reflux symptoms. When the distal esophagus mucosa shows no erosions, questions are posed: (1) Does the esophageal biopsy contribute to confirm reflux as the cause of the symptoms? (2) Do minimum endoscopic changes have correspondence with histology?

Methods

A total of 1901 patients were prospectively interviewed by a standard questionnaire to obtain a clinical diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD); 150 patients (98 males; median age, 42 years) with clinical manifestations of GERD and an intact esophageal mucosa were assigned to nonerosive reflux disease (NERD) patients, and 49 patients (24 males; median age, 46 years) with no complaints of GERD were assigned to Controls. The EGD images were documented on tape. Four biopsies were performed at the distal esophagus. Experienced endoscopists and pathologists examined twice, at different times and separately, the respective endoscopic and histological examinations. For all comparisons, kappa (K) match, 95% confidence interval, and the P value were determined.

Results

In NERD patients, the match between endoscopic and histological findings as to the aspect of the mucosa of the esophagus was poor (K = 0.08). EGD showed 17.2% sensitivity and 90.2% specificity, whereas the esophagus histological study showed 39% sensitivity and 73% specificity. NERD patients presented a greater frequency of esophagitis than Controls (38.6% vs. 22.4%), but this value was nonsignificant (P = 0.023).

Conclusion

Agreement between patient symptoms or endoscopic findings and histological diagnosis is poor; therefore, histology of the esophageal mucosa as a diagnostic test of NERD demonstrates low sensitivity and does not justify routine use.     

Study of Respiratory Disorders in Endoscopically Negative and Positive Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Background/Aim:

The relation between respiratory disorders and reflux symptoms has been debated since the beginning of the last century and the interest in this question has increased during the last few decades. This study aims to investigate the relation between specified respiratory disorders and reflux symptoms and examine the correlations between respiratory disorders and endoscopic findings in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Patients and Methods:

This study included 515 patients evaluated for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) by patient self-report symptom questionnaire; modified four grade Likert scale and endoscopic assessment using endoscopic Los Angeles Classification. All participants were asked about various respiratory symptoms experienced during the past six months and exposed to measuring body mass index (BMI), medical history, pulmonary physical examination, chest X-ray, respiratory function tests and available sleep studies.

Results:

A total number of 515 patients were categorized according to endoscopic findings into two groups; (group1) subjects with normal endoscopic studies (NERD) 118 (22.9%) patients and (group2) subjects with abnormal endoscopic studies (ERD) 397 (77.1%). The proportion of females was significantly higher in ERD group (80.1%) as compared with NERD group (62.7%) (P<0.02). Duration of reflux symptoms found to be significantly prolonged in ERD group (P<0.03). The cases of ERD group were more likely to be overweight (BMI > 25) P<0.02. History of pulmonary symptoms preceding GERD symptoms was found in 15% of patients. There were 294 patients (57.1%) with different pulmonary manifestations. These manifestations were significantly higher among female group (P<0.01) and among obese, above 40 years old (P<0.001, 0.05 respectively). Among all patients with respiratory manifestations the commonest disorders diagnosed were chronic pharyngitis (50.3%), chronic bronchitis (15.8%), bronchial asthma (12.6%) and recurrent pneumonia (3.3%). Obstructive sleep apnea and recurrent hemoptysis were present in 2.7% and 1.5% of the studied patients respectively. There were three cases of chronic lung abscess. There was a significant difference between ERD and NERD groups in their relations to respiratory disorders (P<0.001). There were statistically significant differences in FEV1, FVC and FEV1/FVC (P<0.02, P<0.05 and P<0.05) respectively in ERD group as compared with NERD group.

Conclusion:

The study confirms the strong link between gastroesophageal reflux symptoms and various respiratory disorders. Endoscopy of the upper digestive tract remains an important exam in the evaluation of GERD. Respiratory symptoms are more prevalent among erosive esophagitis patients with a positive correlation with degree of severity. There is direct relationship between the severity of airways obstruction as detected by FEV₁ and FEV1/FVC and GER symptoms.     

Esophageal Histology Does Not Provide Additional Useful Information Over Clinical Assessment in Identifying Reflux Patients Presenting for Esophagogastroduodenoscopy

We prospectively evaluated the value of histology in identifying gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in consecutive patients enrolled for upper endoscopy. GERD was defined as heartburn occurring at least weekly. Macroscopic esophagitis was graded and an esophageal biopsy was taken 2 cm above the gastroesophageal junction. Histological esophagitis was identified by: (1) basal cell hyperplasia >15%, (2) increased papillary length >66%, and (3) infiltration by leukocytes/eosinophils. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of histological esophagitis in patients with and without typical reflux symptoms, with and without endoscopic changes, or both were evaluated. Of 178 patients, reflux symptoms were present in 59% (N = 105) and esophageal erosions in 19% (N = 34); 75 patients had reflux symptoms but no erosions. While the specificity of histology was adequate (78%), it was insensitive (30%). The positive and negative predictive values were 67% and 44%, respectively. No single individual parameter was better than any other. Thus, histology appears to be of no additional value in identifying GERD.     

Acid and Non-Acid Reflux Patterns in Patients with Erosive Esophagitis and Non-Erosive Reflux Disease (NERD): A Study Using Intraluminal Impedance Monitoring

Background Non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) and erosive esophagitis (EE) are the most common phenotypic presentations of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Aim To assess acid and non-acid reflux patterns in patients with EE and NERD using combined esophageal pH-impedance monitoring. Methods A total of 26 GERD patients off acid-suppressive medication and ten healthy volunteers (HV) underwent upper endoscopy and 24-h pH-impedance monitoring. Analysis of the pH-impedance signals included total reflux time, number of reflux episodes according to gas–liquid composition, and pH (acid, non-acid). Results EE was identified in 13 patients and NERD in 13 patients. Pathologic acid reflux was found in 92.3 and 69.2% of patients with EE and NERD, respectively (P = 0.15). When compared to HV, EE patients and NERD patients showed a higher incidence of acid (P = 0.002 and P < 0.001, EE vs. HV and NERD vs. HV, respectively) and non-acid reflux episodes (P = 0.03 and P = 0.001, EE vs. HV and NERD vs. HV, respectively). Mean reflux times, as assessed by both pH-metry and impedance monitoring, and incidence of acid and non-acid reflux episodes were similar in EE and NERD patients. In the supine position, however, EE patients showed a higher incidence of acid (P = 0.048) and liquid reflux episodes (P = 0.07). Conclusion Whereas EE patients have more acid reflux episodes in the supine position than NERD patients, patients with EE and NERD have similar non-acid reflux patterns. This observation lends support to the notion that non-acid reflux is less damaging to the esophageal mucosa than acid reflux.     

Lower esophageal sphincter pressure in patients with gastroesophageal reflux diseases and posture and time patterns

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is caused predominantly by lower esophageal sphincter insufficiency. Reports suggest that it is possible to distinguish between two main mechanisms causing reflux: low basal sphincter pressure leading to free reflux, mostly occurring at night in the supine position, and increased transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations with normal or increased resting pressure leading to reflux during the day in an upright position. Lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP)-- s determined by stationary pull-through manometry--was compared to profiles of acidic reflux measured by 24-h pH monitoring in 207 patients with proven gastroesophageal reflux disease. Differences in LESP were not significant among patients with reflux predominantly during the day in an upright position and those with reflux predominantly at night in a supine position (16.1 +/- 7.4 mmHg versus 15.1 +/- 7.8 mmHg; t-test: P = 0.355). For both patterns of LESP, there was a slight negative correlation with the amount of acidic reflux (determined as a percentage of time with pH < 4). Pearson correlation coefficients were -0.196 for upright refluxers and -0.137 for bipositional/supine refluxers (P = 0.006 and P = 0.049, respectively). As there are no differences in LESP with regard to posture or time patterns of acidic reflux it seems unlikely that upright reflux is associated with increased LESP, whereas supine reflux manifests due to a hypotensive LESP. Alternatively, it may be concluded that stationary pull-through manometry is inadequate for determining the cause of gastroesophageal reflux disease and is therefore of limited use in its routine diagnosis.     

Ineffective motility is not a marker for gastroesophageal reflux disease

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have suggested that ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) may be a marker for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), particularly supraesophageal reflux disease. We evaluated the relationship between esophageal acid exposure and esophageal body motility in patients undergoing both esophageal manometry and 24-h pH metry in the absence of antisecretory therapy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective database review of 84 patients (mean age 47 yr, 46% male) evaluated in our GI physiology laboratory. The indication for testing was recorded and characterized as esophageal or supraesophageal. Abnormal esophageal acid exposure was defined as a distal esophageal pH <4 for more than 4.2% of the total monitoring time (>6.3% upright, >1.2% supine) or a proximal esophageal acid exposure time of greater than 1.1% total (>1.3% upright, 0% supine). IEM was defined as more than two of 10 ineffective peristaltic waves. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients had esophageal-presenting symptoms, and 12 had supraesophageal symptoms. The prevalence of abnormal esophageal acid exposure was similar in patients with esophageal and supraesophageal symptoms (69% vs 92%, p = 0.17). Abnormal motility was identified in 26 patients (31%). IEM was the most common motility disturbance (77%, 20 patients). The frequency of motility disorders was similar in patients with and without abnormal esophageal acid exposure (30% vs 35%, p = 0.79), in patients with esophageal or supraesophageal symptoms (32% vs 25%, p = 0.75, for all patients; 30% vs 27%, p = 1.00, for patients with abnormal esophageal acid exposure), and among upright, supine, and combined refluxers (33%, 9%, and 35%, p = 0.26).CONCLUSIONS: IEM does not stand alone as a significant marker for the presence of GERD in general or supraesophageal reflux disease in particular.     

Determinants of Abnormal Supine Reflux in 24-Hour pH Recordings

A previous study showed that supine gastroesophageal reflux occurs mainly in the early nighttime period and is greater if the patient retires within 2 hr of a meal. We analyzed 306 consecutive esophageal pH studies between January and July 2003. Ninety-two patients had abnormal supine reflux. The recumbent period was divided into quarters (Q1–Q4) and reflux parameters were calculated for each period. Reflux was maximal in Q1, and decreased progressively from Q1 to Q4 (P<0.001). Median time between evening meal and retiring was no different from that for 44 upright gastroesophageal reflux patients. Patients retiring within 2 hr of a meal had a higher percentage supine reflux time (P=0.012), but no increase in reflux was observed in those retiring within 3 hr. Supine reflux occurs maximally in the early nighttime period. Although not fully explained as a postprandial phenomenon, these patients should avoid going to bed within 3 hr of a meal.     

Correlation of Narrow Band Imaging Endoscopy and Histopathology in the Diagnosis of Nonerosive Reflux Disease

Background /Aim:

Narrow band imaging (NBI) is a novel, innovative high-resolution endoscopic technique, which utilizes spectral narrow band filter for the visualization of mucosal patterns and microvasculature. Nonerosive reflux disease (NERD) is a type of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and it is characterized by reflux symptoms without mucosal breaks on white light endoscopy (WLE). Biopsies from distal esophagus of GERD patients show group of histologic features such as basal cell hyperplasia, elongation of lamina propria papillae, and inflammatory cells. The present study was undertaken to evaluate diagnostic utility of NBI endoscopy and biopsy study in NERD patients and also to correlate NBI endoscopy findings with histologic features of GERD.

Patients and Methods:

A total of 71 cases of NERD having symptom score more than 10 and those not having erosion on WLE were recruited prospectively and underwent NBI endoscopic examination. Two mucosal biopsies were taken at 3 cm above the squamocolumnar junction.

Results:

Histologic features of GERD were seen in 50 (70.4%) out of 71 cases. No significant correlation between NBI endoscopic findings with histologic features of GERD was found.

Conclusion:

The present study showed that histopathologic evaluation of distal esophageal mucosa has promising diagnostic value over NBI endoscopy in NERD patients. Use of newly introduced NBI technique requires tremendous familiarity for the detection of the cases of NERD, which show histologic features of GERD.     

Randomized,double-blind,placebo-controlled crossover trial of pirenzepine in patients with gastroesophageal reflux

A muscarinic receptor subtype 1 (M1) antagonist, pirenzepine, recently has been shown to be relatively free of the usual anticholinergic side effects on esophageal smooth muscle and thus has been implicated for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of pirenzepine on GERD remains to be defined. Thirteen patients who demonstrated GERD in a baseline 24-hr ambulatory intraesophageal pH monitoring study were randomized in a double-blind crossover fashion to receive pirenzepine and placebo. An ambulatory 24-hr intraesophageal pH monitor was used to assess reduction in reflux (esophageal pH less than 4.0) with respect to position (upright vs supine), to total number of reflux episodes, and to episodes greater than 5 min. A significant effect for pirenzepine was seen for episodes greater than 5 min (t = 2.61, P = 0.023) and a trend towards significance was seen for total (upright and supine positions combined) percent time of reflux (t = 2.13, P = 0.055). Although not statistically significant, pirenzepine consistently showed greater reduction in all parameters of reflux tested. A greater reduction in percent time of reflux in supine vs upright positions (pirenzepine: 58.9% vs 21.4%; placebo: 43.6% vs 7.3%) may be clinically important in prevention of esophageal injury due to reflux in the recumbent position. Pirenzepine may provide a unique alternative for some GERD patients who may be refractory to other therapies of GERD.     

Acid Perfusion Test: A Useful Test for Evaluating Esophageal Acid Sensitivity

The acid perfusion test (APT) is a test of esophageal acid sensitivity. In gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), the APT has largely been superseded by indexes derived from 24-hr esophageal pH monitoring: symptom index (SI), symptom sensitivity index (SSI), and symptom association probability (SAP). To evaluate the role of APT in patients with GERD we compared values of SI, SSI, and SAP in 126 APT+ and 146 APT− patients. Median values for SI, SSI, and SAP were higher in the APT+ compared with the APT− group (P < 0.001). More patients had a positive SI, SSI, and SAP in the APT+ compared with the APT– group (SI, P < 0.0001; SSI and SAP, P < 0.001). Patients with a negative APT were unlikely to have symptoms caused by acid reflux (negative predictive value, 86%). APT may be useful in detecting acid sensitivity in patients who do not report symptoms on 24-hr esophageal pH monitoring.     

Effect of positions,eating, and bronchodilators on gastroesophageal reflux in asthmatics

Gastroesophageal reflux is common in asthmatics. To determine whether bronchodilators, the supine position, or eating affect gastroesophageal reflux, we performed ambulatory 24-hr pH monitoring on 44 controls and 104 unselected adult asthmatics. All asthmatics had discrete attacks of wheezing and documented reversible airway obstruction of at least 20%. The presence or absence of gastroesophageal reflux symptoms was not used as a criterion for patient selection. Chronic bronchodilator therapy was required by 71.2% of the asthmatics, and was continued during the test. Asthmatics had significantly worse GER than controls during the 3-hr postprandial period, which continued into the nonpostprandial period up to the next meal. Significant differences were present for esophageal mucosal acid contact time, frequency of reflux episodes, and clearance times. During the nonpostprandial periods asthmatics had four times the acid reflux as controls and 19-fold the frequency of prolonged reflux episodes. There were no differences between asthmatics on bronchodilators and those not on bronchodilators in any of the reflux parameters during the upright (postprandial, nonpostprandial) period or supine (sleep) period (P=NS). We conclude that: (1) regardless of the use of bronchodilator therapy, asthmatics have significant GER when asleep and after meals that continues beyond the postprandial period to the next meal; and (2) asthmatics receiving bronchodilators have similar gastroesophageal reflux patterns after eating, in the nonpostprandial period, and when asleep as asthmatics not receiving bronchodilators.