Effect of Antisecretory Therapy on Atypical Symptoms in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

The effect of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy on extraesophageal or atypical manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of atypical manifestations in patients with acid reflux disease and the effect of PPI treatment. Patients with symptoms and signs suggestive of reflux were enrolled. Erosive esophagitis was stratified using the Los Angeles classification. Demographic data and symptoms were assessed using a questionnaire and included typical symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation, dysphagia, odynophagia), and atypical symptoms (e.g., chest pain, sialorrhea, hoarseness, globus sensation, chronic coughing, episodic bronchospasm, hiccup, eructations, laryngitis, and pharyngitis). Symptoms were reassessed after a 3-month course of b.i.d. PPI therapy. A total of 266 patients with a first diagnosis of GERD (erosive, 166; non-erosive, 100) were entered in the study. Presentation with atypical symptoms was approximately equal in those with erosive GERD and with non-erosive GERD, 72% vs 79% (P = 0.18). None of the study variables showed a significant association with the body mass index. PPI therapy resulted in complete symptom resolution in 69% (162/237) of the participants, 12% (28) had improved symptoms, and 20% (47) had minimal or no improvement. We conclude that atypical symptoms are frequent in patients with GERD. A trial of PPI therapy should be considered prior to referring these patients to specialists.     

Management strategies for gastroesophageal reflux disease

Abstract   In the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), the most effective treatment option is the use of proton pump inhibitor (PPI), which minimizes the effect of gastric acid on the distal esophagus. Both the step-up and step-down treatment strategies have advantages and disadvantages. Most physicians would like to choose the step-down therapy rather than the step-up therapy. The 'No-step' PPI therapy (i.e. continuous PPI therapy) is another relevant option. After an initial remission, long-term PPI therapy is an appropriate form of maintenance therapy in many patients.
As a treatment plan for non-erosive reflux disease, a standard dose of PPI for 4–8 weeks followed by either the step-down strategy or the on-demand treatment strategy is acceptable. When treating erosive esophagitis, PPI is better than H₂ receptor blockers in healing mucosal breaks and relieving symptoms. Long-term maintenance PPI therapy is reported to be very effective in maintaining the remission of reflux esophagitis for up to 5 years. On-demand PPI is also another good option for a maintenance therapy in erosive esophagitis. In Barrett's esophagus, symptoms seem to be well-controlled with PPIs. Unfortunately, however, PPIs have no effect on the shortening of Barrett's esophagus or in preventing the progression to dysplasia and adenocarcinoma.
In summary, after reviewing existing guidelines a rather simple guideline on the management of GERD is suggested – PPI should be given for 4–8 weeks followed by either on-demand or maintenance PPI therapy according to the clinical severity.     

Proton pump inhibitor resistance,the real challenge in gastro-esophageal reflux disease

Gastro-esophageal reflux disease(GERD)is one of the most prevalent chronic diseases.Although proton pump inhibitors(PPIs)represent the mainstay of treatment both for healing erosive esophagitis and for symptom relief,several studies have shown that up to 40%of GERD patients reported either partial or complete lack of response of their symptoms to a standard PPI dose once daily.Several mechanisms have been proposed as involved in PPIs resistance,including ineffective control of gastric acid secretion,esophageal hypersensitivity,ultrastructural and functional changes in the esophageal epithelium.The diagnostic evaluation of a refractory GERD patients should include an accurate clinical evaluation,upper endoscopy,esophageal manometry and ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring,which allows to discriminate non-erosive reflux disease patients from those presenting esophageal hypersensitivity or functional heartburn.Treatment has been primarily based on doubling the PPI dose or switching to another PPI.Patients with proven disease,not responding to PPI twice daily,are eligible for anti-reflux surgery.     

Report of the Asia-Pacific consensus on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease

This report summarizes the conclusions and recommendations of a panel of gastroenterologists practising in the Asia-Pacific region. The group recognized that although gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is less common and milder in endoscopic severity in Asia than in the West, there is nevertheless data to suggest an increasing frequency of the disease. During a 2-day workshop, the evidence for key issues in the diagnosis and clinical strategies for the management of the disease was evaluated, following which the recommendations were made and debated. The consensus report was presented at the Asia-Pacific Digestive Week 2003 in Singapore for ratification. Upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of erosive GERD. There is no gold standard for the diagnosis of non-erosive GERD (NERD). Diagnosis therefore relies on symptoms, a positive 24-h pH study or a response to a course of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment. The goals of treatment for GERD are to heal esophagitis, relieve symptoms, maintain the patient free of symptoms, improve quality of life and prevent complications. The PPI are the most effective medical treatment. Following initial treatment, on-demand therapy may be effective in some patients with NERD or mild (GI) erosive esophagitis. Anti-reflux surgery by a competent surgeon could achieve a similar outcome, although there is an operative mortality of 0.1-0.8%. The decision is dependent on the patient's preference and the availability of surgical expertise. Currently, endoscopic treatment should be performed only in the context of a clinical trial. Treatment of patients with typical GERD symptoms without alarm features in primary care could begin with PPI for 2 weeks followed by a further 4 weeks before going to on-demand therapy.     

Pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment of non-erosive reflux disease (NERD)

Up to 70% of patients with typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) have neither definite endoscopic oesophageal breaks nor Barrett's oesophagus at upper endoscopy. These patients suffer from non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), also termed endoscopy-negative reflux disease or symptomatic GERD. NERD patients appear as a heterogeneous population with multiple and substantially different mechanisms implicated in the genesis of symptoms. In fact, patients with NERD may be divided into 3 groups on the basis of 24-hour pH monitoring: 1) patients with an abnormal acid exposure time (AET); 2) patients who demonstrate a normal AET, but in whom symptoms and reflux events are significantly correlated (hypersensitive oesophagus) and 3) patients with typical reflux symptoms but in whom all parameters of the pH study are normal. There is no gold standard for the diagnosis of NERD but a well-taken history can be, usually, sufficient to confirm the diagnosis and begin therapy. Thus, the more sensitive tool for the diagnosis of NERD is proton pump-inhibitor (PPI) test. The aims of NERD treatment are: symptoms relieve, restore quality of life and maintain clinical remission. Proton pump-inhibitors (PPIs) in full doses represent the treatment of choice of NERD patients, even if overall, clinical trials showed a lower efficacy in symptoms control when compared to patients with erosive oesophagitis. Patients with NERD often need long-term therapy for symptoms control. 'On demand' PPI therapy has been considered as the most cost-effective strategy for the long-term treatment of NERD. In conclusion, many data indicate that NERD is a disorder in its own right that shares symptoms with other GERD groups. However further studies are needed to better define the natural history and improve the treatment of this disorder.     

Visceral fat thickness of erosive and non-erosive reflux disease subjects in Indonesia's tertiary referral hospital

BackgroundThere has been an increasing number of reports regarding the correlation between obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Visceral fat thickness is thought to be a risk factor for GERD and its severity. Several studies have conflicting results, so this study aimed to determine visceral fat thickness difference between erosive and non-erosive reflux disease.MethodsA cross-sectional study of 56 adult subjects with GERD symptoms was held at Cipto Mangunkusumo National General Hospital between April and November 2018. Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaires (GERDQ) were utilized to determine the presence of GERD. Ultrasonography was used to determine visceral fat thickness. Esophageal erosions were diagnosed using upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The difference in visceral fat thickness between esophagitis and non-esophagitis group was analysed using T-test.ResultsFrom 56 total subjects, 55.4% have erosive reflux disease (ERD), in which were dominated by subjects with grade A esophagitis (64.5%) based on Los Angeles Classification of Esophagitis (LA classifications). There was no significant difference of visceral fat thickness between non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) and ERD (p = 0,831). There was, however, an increasing trend of visceral fat thickness with the advancing severity of esophagitis, although statistical significance was not reached.ConclusionVisceral fat thickness as measured by ultrasonography has no significant difference between NERD and ERD.     

It Is Possible to Classify Non-erosive Reflux Disease (NERD) Patients into Endoscopically Normal Groups and Minimal Change Groups by Subjective Symptoms and Responsiveness to Rabeprazole—A Report from a Study with Japanese Patients

The hypothesis that non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) patients comprise various subgroups is gaining popularity. This study was conducted to investigate the possibility of categorizing NERD patients according to symptom types and response to acid-suppressive drug rabeprazole (RPZ) 10 mg/day. NERD patients were classified as grade N (endoscopically normal), M (minimal change), or erosive GERD, and answered a 51-item, yes-or-no questionnaire pre and post-treatment. Compared to erosive GERD, clear differences existed in pretreatment prevalence of symptoms and responsiveness to RPZ in grades N and M; the results suggested stomachaches (especially at night) were significant symptoms in grade N and dysmotility-like symptoms like bloated stomach were significant in grade M while gastroesophageal reflux symptoms were significant in erosive GERD. Clinical significance of classifying NERD was indicated from different symptoms and responsiveness to PPI. The authors of The Acid-Related Symptom (ARS) Research Group are given in Appendix I. An erratum to this article can be found at     

A comparison of the clinical, demographic and psychiatric profiles among patients with erosive and non-erosive reflux disease in a multi-ethnic Asian country

AIM: To examine the clinical spectrum of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and compare erosive (ERD) with non-erosive (NERD) in terms of clinical, demographic and psychiatric profiles. METHODS: Patients with reflux symptoms were enrolled and stratified to NERD and ERD after endoscopy (LA classification). Patients with ERD presenting with dyspepsia were included. Patients on proton pump inhibitors (PPI) or H2 receptor antagonists before endoscopy were excluded. Demographic data, Helicobacter pylori(H pylori) status and presence of minor psychiatric morbidity (based on General Health Questionnaire-28) were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 690 patients screened, 533 were eligible for analysis (male to female ratio: 3:2; Chinese: 75.4%; Malay: 9.8%; Indian: 14.8%). Clinical spectrum of GERD: N: 40.5%; A: 46%; B: 9.2%; C: 2.1%; D: 0.6%; Barrett's esophagus: 1.7%. Compared to patients with NERD, patients with ERD were significantly older (45 vs 39.4 years), more likely to be male (64.4% vs 53.7%), tended to smoke (19.6% vs 9.7%), less likely to have minor psychiatric morbidity (26.4 vs 46.7%) and were more likely to respond to PPI (79.7 vs 66.8%). There was also a trend towards a higher BMI (24.5 vs 23.5). Race, alcohol consumption and H pylori status were not significant. On multivariate analysis, age and presence of minor psychiatric morbidity remained with significant differences. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients who have typical symptoms of GERD have NERD or mild erosive reflux disease. Compared to patients with erosive reflux disease, patients with NERD were younger and had a higher prevalence of minor psychiatric morbidity.     

Diagnostic options for patients with refractory GERD

Patients with refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are those who have persistent symptoms while being treated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). One third of GERD patients requiring a daily PPI are estimated to eventually experience treatment failure. These patients are usually referred for further investigation to confirm the presence of GERD or to identify other entities as the cause of symptoms. Tools that can be used in this diagnostic process include upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with analysis of esophageal biopsies, esophageal pH monitoring, impedance-pH monitoring, and esophageal bilirubin monitoring. The conventional diagnostic approach includes upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and ambulatory pH monitoring while receiving PPI therapy. New diagnostic techniques that may be useful with refractory GERD include impedance-pH monitoring, which is very sensitive in detecting persistent weakly acidic reflux, and bilirubin monitoring, which detects increased esophageal exposure to bile. Gastric pH monitoring should be reserved for patients in whom PPI resistance is suspected.     

Lesser known aspects of gastroesophageal reflux disease: non-acid reflux and functional pyrosis

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is defined as a pathologic condition that develops when reflux of stomach contents produce annoying symptoms and/or complications. According to whether esophagitis is present, GERD is classified as being erosive and non-erosive. Functional pyrosis is defined by the presence of retrosternal burning for at least 6 months in the absence of structural or metabolic alterations, GERD, or motor disorders that could cause the symptoms. Currently, functional pyrosis does not include patients with an acid-sensitive esophagus or those who improve with antisecretory drugs, which differentiates this entity from non-erosive GERD. GERD has usually been identified with acid reflux. However, the availability of new diagnostic methods such as Bilitec and, especially, impedance monitoring has revealed that acid, weakly acidic and gas reflux is able to produce distressing symptoms and complications in some patients.     

Extra-Esophageal Manifestations of Gerd: Who Responds to GERD Therapy?

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common disease that is defined as a condition that develops when the reflux of stomach contents causes troublesome symptoms. In addition to the esophageal manifestations of heartburn and regurgitation, the role of GERD in causing extra-esophageal symptoms, such as laryngitis, asthma, cough, chest pain, and dental erosions, is increasingly recognized with renewed interest. Due to the poor sensitivity of endoscopy and pH monitoring, and the poor specificity of laryngoscopy, empiric therapy with proton pump inhibitors (PPI) is now considered the initial diagnostic step in patients suspected of having GERD-related symptoms. In those who are unresponsive to such therapy, other diagnostic testing such as impedance/pH monitoring may be reasonable in order to exclude continued acid or weakly acid reflux. Recent data suggest that patients with extra-esophageal symptoms who have concomitant typical symptoms, moderate-sized hiatal hernia and moderate reflux on pH testing may respond better to acid suppressive therapy. This group only accounts for 20?30 % of patients commonly referred for suspected GERD. PPI-unresponsive patients usually have causes other than GERD for their extra-esophageal signs and symptoms and continued PPI therapy in this group is not recommended.     

Multimodality evaluation of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms who have failed empiric proton pump inhibitor therapy

Patients with symptoms suggestive of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), such as chest pain, heartburn, regurgitation, and dysphagia, are typically treated initially with a course of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The evaluation of patients who have either not responded at all or partially and inadequately responded to such therapy requires a more detailed history and may involve an endoscopy and esophageal biopsies, followed by esophageal manometry, ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring, and gastric emptying scanning. To assess the merits of a multimodality ‘structural’ and ‘functional’ assessment of the esophagus in patients who have inadequately controlled GERD symptoms despite using empiric PPI, a retrospective cohort study of patients without any response or with poor symptomatic control to empiric PPI (>2 months duration) who were referred to an Esophageal Studies Unit was conducted. Patients were studied using symptom questionnaires, endoscopy (+ or – for erosive disease, or Barrett's metaplasia) and multilevel esophageal biopsies (eosinophilia, metaplasia), esophageal motility (aperistalsis, dysmotility), 24‐hour ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring (+ if % total time pH < 4 > 5%), and gastric emptying scanning (+ if >10% retention at 4 hours and >70% at 2 hours). Over 3 years, 275 patients (147 men and 128 women) aged 16–89 years underwent complete multimodality testing. Forty percent (n= 109) had nonerosive reflux disease (esophagogastroduodenoscopy [EGD]–, biopsy–, pH+); 19.3% (n= 53) had erosive esophagitis (EGD+); 5.5% (n= 15) Barrett's esophagus (EGD+, metaplasia+); 5.5% (n= 15) eosinophilic esophagitis (biopsy+); 2.5% (n= 7) had achalasia and 5.8% (n= 16) other dysmotility (motility+, pH–); 16% (n= 44) had functional heartburn (EGD–, pH–), and 5.8% (n= 16) had gastroparesis (gastric scan+). Cumulative symptom scores for chest pain, heartburn, regurgitation, and dysphagia were similar among the groups (mean range 1.1–1.35 on a 0–3 scale). Multimodality evaluation changed the diagnosis of GERD in 34.5% of cases and led to or guided alternative therapies in 42%. Overlap diagnoses were frequent: 10/15 (67%) of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis, 12/16 (75%) of patients with gastroparesis, and 11/23 (48%) of patients with achalasia or dysmotility had concomitant pathologic acid reflux by pH studies. Patients with persistent GERD symptoms despite empiric PPI therapy benefit from multimodality evaluation that may change the diagnosis and guide therapy in more than one third of such cases. Because symptoms are not specific and overlap diagnoses are frequent and multifaceted, objective evidence‐driven therapies should be considered in such patients.     

Outcome of nonerosive gastro-esophageal reflux disease patients with pathological acid exposure

AIM: To assess the management and outcome of nonerosive gastro-esophageal reflux disease (NERD) patients who were identified retrospectively, after a 5-year follow-up.METHODS: We included patients with gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms who had a negative endoscopy result and pathological 24-h esophageal pH-monitoring while off therapy. We interviewed them after an average period of 5 years (range 3.5-7 years) by means of a structured questionnaire to assess presence of GERD symptoms, related therapy, updated endoscopic data and other features. We assessed predictors of esophagitis development by means of univariate and multivariate statistical analysis.RESULTS: 260 patients (137 women) were included. Predominant GERD symptoms were heartburn and regurgitation in 103/260 (40%). 70% received a maintenance treatment, which was proton pump inhibitor (PPI) in 55% of cases. An average number of 1.5 symptomatic relapses per patient/year of followup were observed. A progression to erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (ERD) was found in 58/193 (30.0%) of patients undergoing repeat endoscopy;72% of these were Los Angeles grade A-B.CONCLUSION: This study shows that progression to ERD occurs in about 5% of NERD cases per year,despite therapy. Only two factors consistently and independently influence progression: smoking and absence of PPI therapy.     

Asthma and gastroesophageal reflux disease： Effect of long-term pantoprazole therapy

AIM: To define the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in mild persistent asthma and to value the effect of pantoprazole therapy on asthmatic symptoms. METHODS: Seven of thirty-four asthmatic patients without GERD served as the non-GERD control group. Twenty-seven of thirty-four asthmatic patients had GERD (7/27 also had erosive esophagitis, sixteen of them presented GERD symptoms. An upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was performed in all the subjects to obtain five biopsy specimens from the lower 5 cm of the esophagus. Patients were considered to have GERD when they had a dilation of intercellular space (DIS)>0.74 urn at transmission electron microscopy. Patients with GERD were treated with pantoprazole, 80 mg/day. Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was performed at entry and after 6 mo of treatment. Asthmatic symptoms were recorded. The required frequency of inhaling rapid acting β2-agonists was self-recorded in the patients' diaries. RESULTS: Seven symptomatic patients presented erosive esophagitis. Among the 18 asymptomatic patients, 11 presented DIS, while all symptomatic patients showed ultrastructural esophageal damage. Seven asymptomatic patients did not present DIS. At entry the mean of FEV1 was 1.91 L in symptomatic GERD patients and 1.88 L in asymptomatic GERD patients. After the treatment, 25 patients had a complete recovery of DIS and reflux symptoms. Twenty-three patients presented a regression of asthmatic symptoms with normalization of FEV1. Four patients reported a significant improvement of symptoms and their FEV1 was over 80%. CONCLUSION: GERD is a highly prevalent condition in asthma patients. Treatment with pantoprazole (80 mg/day) determines their improvement and complete regression.     

Voluntary and controlled weight loss can reduce symptoms and proton pump inhibitor use and dosage in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease: a comparative study

A wide variety of pieces of evidence has suggested that obesity is associated with a significant increase in the risk for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms and its complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of weight loss on reflux symptoms in overweight/obese patients with proven GERD. We enrolled overweight/obese patients with typical GERD symptoms and erosive esophagitis. At baseline, patients underwent detailed reflux symptoms evaluation and anthropometric assessment, and were divided into two treatment groups: group A received proton pump inhibitor (PPI) and a personalized hypocaloric diet and aerobic exercise; and group B received PPI and a ‘standard of care diet’. The dietetic treatment was considered effective if at least 10% of weight loss was achieved within 6 months. All patients were evaluated in terms of anthropometric data, GERD symptoms, and PPI use. In group A, mean body mass index (BMI) decreased from 30.3 ± 4.1 to 25.7 ± 3.1 (P < 0.05), and mean weight decreased from 82.1 ± 16.9 kg to 69.9 ± 14.4 kg (P < 0.05). In group B, there was no change in BMI and weight. Symptom perception decreased (P < 0.05) in both groups during PPI therapy, but a higher improvement was recorded in group A. In group A, PPI therapy was completely discontinued in 27/50 of the patients, and halved in 16/50. Only 7/50 continued the same PPI dosage. In group B, 22/51 halved the therapy and 29/51 maintained full dosage of therapy, but none was able to discontinue PPI due to a symptom recurrence. Overall, weight loss of at least 10% is recommended in all patients with GERD in order to boost the effect of PPI on reflux symptom relief and to reduce chronic medication use.     

A prospective multicenter clinical and endoscopic follow-up study of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND: Despite its high prevalence, data on the course of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are still sparse. There is also an ongoing debate on the natural history of its various manifestations, i.e., non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) vs. erosive reflux disease (ERD) vs. Barrett's esophagus (BE). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was conducted within the framework of a prospective multicenter study on the course and prevalence of intestinal metaplasia at the gastroesophageal junction. 1014 dyspeptic patients were screened by the means of upper GI endoscopy. Clinical data were recorded by the use of a questionnaire. At least 15 months after the initial examination, all patients were invited for follow-up (FU) examination. Patients were analyzed separately with respect to their clinical and endoscopic findings. For the latter, only patients without any treatment with proton-pump-inhibitors (PPI) prior to initial and follow-up examinations were included. Patients were categorized as GERD positive if typical symptoms were present and/or proton pump inhibitors were used. RESULTS: Sufficient clinical and/or endoscopic data were available in 590 GERD patients with heartburn at least once a week. Follow-up data could be obtained in 320 patients (clinical FU: n = 304; endoscopic FU: n = 52) after a mean follow-up period of 35 months (18-48 months). 96 of 144 previously asymptomatic patients (67%) remained asymptomatic at follow-up, the rest (n = 48) were symptomatic. 143 of 304 previously symptomatic patients (47%) were symptom-free at follow-up, and only 161 patients (53%) remained symptomatic or had concomitant therapy with proton-pump-inhibitors (PPI). For follow-up endoscopy in patients off PPI (n = 52), ERD was no longer confirmed in 7/12 ERD patients (58%), whereas progress to ERD was found in 3/34 patients (9%) in the NERD group. BE was newly diagnosed in two NERD patients but could no longer be detected in 2 of 6 patients with an initial diagnosis of BE. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to its clinical as well as its endoscopic manifestations, gastroesophageal reflux disease does not appear to be very stable over time. However, in most cases this is due to regression rather than progression of the disease.     

The diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is known to cause erosive esophagitis, Barrett esophagus and has been linked to the development of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Currently, endoscopy is the main clinical tool for visualizing esophageal lesions, but the majority of GERD patients do not have endoscopic visible lesions and other methods are required. Ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring is the gold standard in diagnosing GERD, since it measures distal esophageal acid exposure and demonstrates the relationship between symptoms and acid reflux. The effectiveness of selective gastric acid suppressive therapy led to the introduction of short trials of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) to diagnose GERD and they are often used as a first line diagnostic tool in clinical practice and, in particular, in the primary care setting, the current trend being that gastroenterologists are asked to evaluate mainly patients with persistent GERD symptoms while on PPI therapy. In these patients the question is whether the persistent symptoms are or not associated with reflux (acid or nonacid). Recently, either combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH monitoring or bilimetry allow to study the mechanisms underlying the persistent symptoms on acid suppressive therapy. Manometry is mandatory prior to any surgical approach and to verify motility disorders that could be associated to GERD.     

Effect of omeprazole on symptoms and ultrastructural esophageal damage in acid bile reflux

AIM: To value whether omeprazole could induce the healing of DIS and regression of symptoms in patients with DGER. METHODS: We enrolled 15 symptomatic patients with a pathological esophageal 24-h pH-metry and bilimetry. Patients underwent endoscopy and biopsies were taken from the distal esophagus. Specimens were analyzed at histology and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Patients were treated with omeprazole 40 mg/d for 3 mo and then endoscopy with biopsies was repeated. Patients with persistent heartburn and/or with an incomplete recovery of DIS were treated for 3 more months and endoscopy with biopsies was performed. RESULTS: Nine patients had a non-erosive reflux disease at endoscopy (NERD) while 6 had erosive esophagitis (ERD). At histology, of the 6 patients with erosive esophagitis, 5 had mild esophagitis and 1 moderate esophagitis. No patients with NERD showed histological signs of esophagitis. After 3 mo of therapy, 13/15 patients (86.7%,P<0.01) showed a complete recovery of DIS and disappearance of heartburn. Of the 2 patients treated for 3 more months, complete recovery of DIS and heartburn were achieved in one. CONCLUSION: Three or 6 mo of omeprazole therapy led to a complete regression of the ultrastructural esophageal damage in 86.7% and in 93% of patients with DGER, NERD and ERD respectively. The ultrastructural recovery of the epithelium was accompanied by regression of heartburn in all cases.     

Prevalence of supraesophageal manifestations in patients with gastroesophageal erosive and non-erosive reflux disease

BACKGROUND: Respiratory, ear-nose and throat complaints, chest pain and dysphagia can be a part of clinical manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The first two are named supraesophageal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Controversy about the prevalence of these clinical manifestations in patients with non-erosive and erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease exists. AIMS: Evaluate the prevalence of supraesophageal manifestations in patients with erosive and non-erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease. METHODS: Files from patients submitted to upper endoscopy, esophageal manometry and pH monitoring for the investigation of gastroesophageal reflux disease (heartburn as the chief complaint) were reviewed and respiratory and ear, nose and throat symptoms were recorded. Patients with erosive disease (grades I to III according to Savary-Miller classification) and with non-erosive disease (normal endoscopy with abnormal pH monitoring were selected. Statistical analysis included the chi-square test. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria being 162 with erosive disease (70% with grade I esophagitis) and 118 with non-erosive disease. Overall, 88 patients had ear, nose and throat symptoms (31%), the more frequent were hoarseness and clearing and 42, respiratory manifestations (15%), being cough the more prevalent. In the ear, nose and throat symptoms group, 45 were erosive disease (28%) and 43 non-erosive disease (36.4%). As for the respiratory symptom group, 21 patients (13%) were erosive disease and 21 (18%) were non-erosive disease. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the prevalence of supraesophageal manifestations between patients with gastroesophageal erosive and non-erosive reflux disease.     

胃食管反流病食管外表现的临床研究

目的探讨胃食管反流病（GERD）食管外表现（EED）的临床特征和质子泵抑制剂对EED的治疗效果。方法本研究为多中心、开放、前瞻性临床研究,在上海市的4家医院同期入选GERD患者,均符合内镜下有反流性食管炎（RE）的诊断标准,无RE者则为24h食管pH监测阳性的非糜烂性反流病（NERD）。进行GERD典型症状和EED相关症状的问卷调查并记录积分,有EED症状者行电子喉镜检查并记录有关征象,然后对上述资料进行统计、比较分析。结果共分析200例符合标准的GERD患者,伴有EED者95例,无EED者105例;NERD患者66例,RE134例,其中65例为具有EED的RE患者。EED的症状最常见的为咽球感和（或）咽部异物感,发生率为27％,其他常见的依次为咳嗽、咽喉灼痛、声音嘶哑,哮喘较少,其发生率分别为21％、16％、11％、3％。有EED的患者中并存典型GERD症状的发生率为56％,EED症状的严重程度在RE和NERD患者间差异无统计学意义。喉镜检查示声带红斑、水肿32％,杓区红肿25％,咽后壁淋巴增生20％,未见明显异常的42％。95％的EED患者治疗8周后症状基本消失。结论较大比例的GERD患者中有EED存在,而喉镜、常规24hpH监测对诊断的阳性预测值不高,高剂量质子泵抑制剂对EED的治疗有效。