Esophageal motility abnormalities in gastroesophageal reflux disease

Esophageal motility abnormalities are among the main factors implicated in the pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The recent introduction in clinical and research practice of novel esophageal testing has markedly improved our understanding of the mechanisms contributing to the development of gastroesophageal reflux disease, allowing a better management of patients with this disorder. In this context, the present article intends to provide an overview of the current literature about esophageal motility dysfunctions in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Esophageal manometry, by recording intraluminal pressure, represents the gold standard to diagnose esophagealmotility abnormalities. In particular, using novel techniques, such as high resolution manometry with or without concurrent intraluminal impedance monitoring, transient lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxations, hypotensive LES, ineffective esophageal peristalsis and bolus transit abnormalities have been better defined and strongly implicated in gastroesophageal reflux disease development. Overall, recent findings suggest that esophageal motility abnormalities are increasingly prevalent with increasing severity of reflux disease, from nonerosive reflux disease to erosive reflux disease and Barrett's esophagus. Characterizing esophageal dysmotility among different subgroups of patients with reflux disease may represent a fundamental approach to properly diagnose these patients and, thus, to set up the best therapeutic management. Currently, surgery represents the only reliable way to restore the esophagogastric junction integrity and to reduce transient LES relaxations that are considered to be the predominant mechanism by which gastric contents can enter the esophagus. On that ground, more in depth future studies assessing the pathogenetic role of dysmotility in patients with reflux disease are warranted.     

Esophageal testing: What we have so far

Gastroesophageal reflux disease(GERD) is a common disorder of the gastrointestinal tract. In the last few decades, new technologies have evolved and have been applied to the functional study of the esophagus, allowing for the improvement of our knowledge of the pathophysiology of GERD. High-resolution manometry(HRM) permits greater understanding of the function of the esophagogastric junction and the risks associated with hiatal hernia. Moreover, HRM has been found to be more reproducible and sensitive than conventional water-perfused manometry to detect the presence of transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation. Esophageal 24-h p H-metry with or without combined impedance is usually performed in patients with negative endoscopy and reflux symptoms who have a poor response to anti-reflux medical therapy to assess esophageal acid exposure and symptom-reflux correlations. In particular, esophageal 24-h impedance and p H monitoring can detect acid and non-acid reflux events. Endo FLIP is a recent technique poorly applied in clinical practice, although it provides a large amount of information about the esophagogastric junction. In the coming years, laryngopharyngeal symptoms could be evaluated with up and coming non-invasive or minimally invasive techniques, such as pepsin detection in saliva or pharyngeal p H-metry. Future studies are required of these techniques to evaluate their diagnostic accuracy and usefulness, although the available data are promising.     

Comparison of esophageal manometry,provocative testing,and ambulatory monitoring in patients with unexplained chest pain

Prolonged ambulatory esophageal pH and pressure monitors are being developed to evaluate noncardiac chest pain. This new technology needs comparison with conventional esophageal tests before determining which studies are most useful in diagnosing and treating esophageal chest pain. Therefore, we studied 45 patients with esophageal manometry, acid perfusion and edrophonium tests, and 24 hr pH and pressure monitoring. Manometry was abnormal in 20 patients (44%) with nutcracker esophagus, the most common motility disorder. Fifteen (33%) had positive acid perfusion test and 24 (55%) positive edrophonium test. During ambulatory monitoring, all patients experienced chest pain with a total of 202 individual events: 32 events (15%) secondary to acid reflux, 15 (7%) secondary to motility abnormalities, 7 (3%) to both pH and pressure changes, and 149 events (74%) occurred in the absence of any abnormal pH or motility changes. Patients with normal manometry were significantly (P less than 0.01) more likely to have acid reflux chest pain events than did nutcracker patients, who had an equal frequency of pH and motility events. A positive acid perfusion test was significantly associated with abnormal pressure events (P = 0.02; odds ratio 5.95), while a positive edrophonium test more likely predicted acid reflux chest pain during 24-hr monitoring (P = 0.007; odds ratio 7.25). Therefore, abnormal manometry and positive provocative tests point to the esophagus as the likely source of chest pain. However, ambulatory pH and pressure monitoring are required to accurately define the relationship between chest pain and acid reflux or motility disorders.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Upper esophageal sphincter abnormalities and high-resolution esophageal manometry findings in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux

Background: The association between laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and abnormalities of upper esophageal sphincter (UES) and esophageal motility is not clearly known. High-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) has allowed accurate measurement and evaluation of UES and esophageal function.

Goals: To evaluate the UES function and esophageal motility using HREM in patients with LPR and compare them to patients with typical gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

Study: All patients evaluated for GERD or LPR symptoms with esophageal function testing including HREM, ambulatory distal pH monitoring and upper endoscopy between 2006 and 2014 were retrospectively studied (n?=?220). The study group (group A, n?=?57) consisted of patients diagnosed with LPR after comprehensive evaluation. They were compared to patients who had typical GERD symptoms only (group B, n?=?98) and patients with both GERD and LPR symptoms (group C, n?=?65).

Results: Abnormalities in UES pressures and relaxation were found in about one-third of patients in all groups. There were no significant differences between the groups. Group B had higher prevalence of abnormal esophageal motility compared to others (group A vs. B vs. C?=?20.8% vs. 28% vs. 12.5%, p?=?.029). Group B patients also had higher prevalence of Barrett’s esophagus compared to others (group A vs. B vs. C?=?0% vs.12.2% vs. 4.6%, p?=?.01). Distal pH testing revealed no significant differences between the three groups.

Conclusions: Abnormal UES function was noted in one-third of patients with LPR or GERD. However, there were no abnormalities on esophageal function testing specific for LPR.     

New esophageal function testing (impedance,Bravo pH monitoring,and high-resolution manometry): Clinical relevance

Esophageal testing aims to quantify gastroesophageal reflux or characterize esophageal motility. Reflux monitoring traditionally has been based on the detection of acidic reflux by a transnasal catheter that measures esophageal pH. Recently there have been two major developments in this field: the wireless Bravo pH capsule (Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, MN), which allows catheter-free monitoring, and impedance-pH measurement, a catheter-based technique that enables detection of acidic and nonacidic reflux. The assessment of esophageal motility has relied on conventional manometry for many years. Two new proedures also recently became available to assess esophageal motility: high-resolution manometry, which uses many closely spaced pressure sensors and provides spatiotemporal plots of esophageal pressure changes, and impedance manometry, a test that directly measures bolus transit and provides conventional manometric data. The advantages, disadvantages, and clinical importance of these new esophageal tests are discussed in this review.     

Transcutaneous cervical esophagus ultrasound in adults： Relation with ambulatory 24-h pH-monitoring and esophageal manometry

AIM To determine the gastroesophageal refluxate in the cervical esophagus (CE) and measure transcutaneous cervical esophageal ultrasound (TCEUS) findings [anterior wall thickness (WT) of CE, esophageal luminal diameter (ELD), esophageal diameter (ED)]; to compare TCEUS findings in the patient subgroups divided according to 24-h esophageal pH monitoring and manometry; and to investigate possible cut-off values according to the TCEUS findings as a predictor of gastroesophageal reflux (GER).METHODS In 45/500 patients, refluxate was visualized in TCEUS. 38/45 patients underwent esophagogastroduo denoscopy (EGD), 24-h pH monitoring and manometry.RESULTS The 38 patients were grouped according to 24-h pH monitoring as follows Group A GER-positive (n = 20) [Includes Group B isolated proximal reflux (PR) (n = 6), Group C isolated distal reflux (DR) (n = 6),and Group D both PR/DR (n = 8)]; Group E no reflux (n = 13); and Group F hypersensitive esophagus (HSE) (n= 5). Groups B D indicated total PR patients (n = 14),Groups E F reflux-negatives with HSE (n = 18), and Groups A F reflux-positives with HSE (n = 25). When the 38 patients were grouped according to manometry findings, 24 had normal esophageal manometry; 7 had hypotensive and 2 had hypertensive lower esophageal sphincter (LES); and 5 had ineffective esophageal motility disorder (IEM). The ELD measurement was greater in group A F than group E (P = 0.023, 5.0 ± 1.3 vs 3.9 ± 1.4 mm). In 27/38 patients, there was at least one pathologic acid reflux and/or pathologic manometry finding. The cut-off value for ELD of 4.83 mm had 79% sensitivity and 61% specificity in predicting the PR between Groups B D and E (AUC = 0.775, P = 0.015).CONCLUSION Visualizing refluxate in TCEUS was useful as a pre-diagnostic tool for estimating GER or manometric pathology in 71.1% of adults in our study,but it was not diagnostic for CE WT.     

Hiatal Hernia and Acid Reflux Frequency Predict Presence and Length of Barrett's Esophagus

One third of the general population may experience reflux symptoms, yet only a small fraction of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) have Barrett's esophagus. The aim of the present study was to compare the characteristics of GERD patients with and without Barrett's esophagus and identify potential risk factors for the appearance of Barrett's esophagus in reflux disease. Outpatients from a gastroenterology clinic who underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, esophageal manometry, and 24-hr pH monitoring were recruited into a case-control study. A total of 256 case subjects with endoscopically and histologically proven Barrett's esophagus were compared to a control group of 229 subjects with nonerosive reflux disease. As compared to nonerosive reflux disease, Barrett's esophagus was strongly associated with more reflux episodes. Barrett's esophagus occurred more frequently among subjects with hiatus hernia and among subjects who consumed large amounts of alcohol or cigarettes. Frequent reflux episodes, hiatus hernia, smoking, and alcohol consumption were also risk factors for an increased length of Barrett's mucosa. Total esophageal mucosal acid contact time at pH < 4 was a significant risk factor for the length but not the presence of Barrett's esophagus. Intake of aspirin or NSAIDs was similar in patients with and without Barrett's esophagus. In conclusion, in comparison with nonerosive reflux disease, Barrett's esophagus is characterized by risk factors usually indicative of severe types of GERD. Mechanisms in addition to acid reflux must contribute to the development of Barrett's esophagus.     

Determination of pH turning point with pH mapping of the gastroesophageal junction: an alternative technique to orientate esophageal pH monitoring

Manometric location of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) has been mandatory before esophageal pH monitoring, despite costs and discomfort related with esophageal manometry. The aims of the study were: (i) to map the pH of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) to determine a pH turning point (PTP) and its relation with LES; and (ii) to test the feasibility of this technique to orientate esophageal pH monitoring. We studied 310 adult patients who underwent esophageal manometry and pH monitoring off acid‐suppressive therapy. GEJ pH mapping was carried out by step‐pulling the pH sensor from 5 cm below to 5 cm above LES, and a PTP was determined when pH changed from below to above 4, in centimeters from the nostril. Thirty‐six patients referred only for pH monitoring were studied with pH sensor placed at 5 cm above the PTP. Out of 310 patients, a PTP was found in 293 (94.5%): inside LES in 86.3%, into the stomach in 8.2% and in the esophageal body in 5.5% of patients. The median distance between PTP and place where pH sensor monitored reflux was 8 cm. Among 36 patients who performed pH monitoring without LES manometry, there was no gastric monitoring during reflux testing. In adult patients investigated off acid suppressive therapy, GEJ pH mapping with reflux monitoring 5 cm above the PTP can be an alternative technique to perform esophageal pH monitoring when LES manometry is not available. Additional studies are needed before the widespread use of GEJ pH mapping in the clinical practice.     

Utility of ambulatory 24-hour esophageal pH and motility monitoring in noncardiac chest pain: report of 90 patients and review of the literature

It is unclear whether prolonged motility monitoring improves the diagnostic yield of standard esophageal tests in patients with noncardiac chest pain. Our aim was to assess the diagnostic value of ambulatory 24-hr pH and pressure monitoring in patients with noncardiac chest pain. Stationary manometry, edrophonium testing, and ambulatory pH and motility studies were performed in 90 consecutive patients with recurrent chest pain and normal coronary angiograms. Normality limits of ambulatory 24-hr motility were established in 30 healthy controls. The diagnoses of specific esophageal motility disorders (nutcracker esophagus and diffuse esophageal spasm) by stationary and ambulatory manometry were discordant in 48% of the patients. Edrophonium testing was positive in 9 patients, but correlated poorly with esophageal diagnoses. During ambulatory studies, 144 chest pain events occurred in 42 patients, and 72 (50%) were related to esophageal dysfunction. Strict temporal associations of events with esophageal dysfunction in relation to ambulatory 24-hr pH'motility scores permitted four patient categorizations: true positives (event-related and abnormal tests), N = 15; true negatives (event-unrelated and abnormal tests), N = 10; reduced esophageal pain threshold (event-related and normal tests), N = 4; and indeterminate origin (event-unrelated and normal tests), N = 13. Overall, 19 patients (21%) had a probable esophageal cause for chest pain (14 esophageal motility disorder, 4 acid reflux, 1 both). In conclusion, ambulatory manometry increases the diagnostic yield of standard esophageal testing in noncardiac chest pain, but the gain is small. Causes of chest pain other than high esophageal pressures and acid reflux must still be sought in most patients with chest pain of unknown origin after a negative cardiac work-up.     

轻度反流性食管炎与非糜烂性反流病远端食管酸暴露和食管动力学变化

目的:探讨轻度反流性食管炎(RE)与非糜烂性反流病(NERD)食管远端酸暴露及食管动力变化特点.方法:符合洛杉矶诊断标准的RE30例(LA-A16例,LA-B14例),NERD16例,健康对照组10例被纳入本研究,所有患者及对照组均接受24h食管pH监测及压力测定,比较食管pH监测及测压结果.结果:LA-A组、LA-B组、NERD组DeMeester评分明显高于对照组,差异显著(P<0.05).LA-A组与NERD组比较DeMeester评分无明显差异,但NERD组的立位反流时间百分比与长反流周期数多于LA-A组,差异显著;LA-B组DeMeester评分比LA-A组和NERD组明显增高,LA-B组与LA-A组比较食管pH监测各项指标均存在明显差异.LA-A组、NERD组及对照组比较下食管括约肌静息压(LESP)、食管体部蠕动波幅度(PA)无显著差异,LA-A组和NERD组食管下段PA有增高趋势;LA-B组与LA-A组、NERD组及对照组比较LESP明显降低(P<0.05),LA-B组食管下段PA明显低于LA-A组(P<0.05).RE组无效食管运动(IEM)明显高于对照组,差异显著.结论:轻度RE(LA-B)与NERD远端食管酸暴露存在差异.DeMeester评分、LES功能不全及食管蠕动功能障碍与RE的严重程度呈正相关.LES功能不全及食管蠕动功能障碍可能不是轻度RE(LA-A)及NERD的主要致病因素.IEM与RE关系密切,且与RE有关的食管动力异常主要为IEM.     

反流性食管炎、Barrett食管的食管动力学研究

目的 探讨反流性食管炎(RE)、Barrett食管(BE)的动力学改变。方法 经内镜检查3 400例患者,分 RE、BE、对照组,进行症状调查、食管测压、食管24h pH检测,并行统计学分析。结果 RE与BE组间除吞咽不适外,烧心感、反酸及胸骨后疼痛的症状评分均为RE组大于BE组,且差异有显著性意义。部分RE、BE、对照组间食管运动功能比较,食管下括约肌静息压等差异均无显著性意义。食管24 h pH检测DeMeester评分、pH<4总时间、pH<4时间的百分比等 RE、BE组高于对照组,差异有显著性意义,但RE、BE组间差别无显著性意义。结论 食管反流症状与食管黏膜的内镜下表现不一致;食管组织化生与食管运动功能间无相关。     

以慢性咳嗽为主要表现的胃食管反流病患者的食管功能及反流特点

目的 通过对以慢性咳嗽为主要表现的胃食管反流病(GERD)患者行高分辨食管内压力-阻抗联合测定(MII-HRM)及24h联合多通道腔内阻抗-pH( MII-pH)监测的结果分析,探讨此类患者食管运动功能及胃食管反流的特点.方法 选取2010年3-11月在首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院就诊的19例GERD伴慢性咳嗽患者为研究对象.应用MII-HRM及24 h MII-pH监测系统测定上食管括约肌(UES)和下食管括约肌压力、食管体部蠕动功能、对液体和黏液性物质的传输功能、立位及卧位酸及非酸反流的次数、近端反流的次数、酸暴露时间、酸清除时间以及食团清除时间.以同期仅表现为典型胃食管反流症状的17例GERD患者作为对照,比较两组间食管运动功能以及胃食管反流参数的差异.结果 与仅表现为典型胃食管反流症状的GERD患者相比,以慢性咳嗽为主要表现的GERD患者的UES静息压力明显更低[(122.55 ±60.48)mm Hg比(86.37±41.35) mm Hg(1 mm Hg =0.133 kPa),P＜0.05],食管体部异常蠕动的比例更高[(9.47±15.63)％比(22.16±17.45)％,P＜0.05],食管体部对液体物质传输能力减低[(88.82±12.23)％比(71.68±23.06)％,P＜0.05],卧位时酸及非酸反流次数及卧位近端非酸反流次数明显增多(P＜0.05),卧位食团清除时间延长(P＜0.05).结论 以慢性咳嗽为主要表现的GERD发病机制可能与单纯典型GERD不同,其与UES静息压力减低、卧位酸及非酸反流、近端反流的增多以及食管清除功能障碍密切相关.     

水灌注高分辨率食管测压及24 h pH-阻抗监测在GERD诊断中的应用价值研究

目的探索水灌注高分辨率食管测压及24 h pH-阻抗监测在胃食管反流病(GERD)诊断中的应用价值研究。 方法回顾性分析2014年9月至2015年7月,贵州省兴义市人民医院就诊的慢性浅表性胃炎患者为研究对象。对患者进行水灌注导管高分辨率食管测压和pH-阻抗监测即反流监测,鉴别其是否存在GERD。 结果经胃镜检查后,无论是否存在典型症状,患者均为慢性浅表性胃炎;从液态高分辨率食管测压结果来看,典型症状和非典型症状的LES压力,UES压力以及食管体部功能,胃食管连接处出口梗阻,胡桃夹食管以及食管裂孔疝情况比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。从24 h pH-阻抗监测结果来看,典型症状和非典型症状的反酸次数,所有反流次数和非反酸次数比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。 结论通过本研究提示,胃食管反流病作为消化科的常见病、多发病,通过水灌注高分辨率食管测压、24 h pH-阻抗监测联合胃镜检查,能够提高食管反流病的诊断率,减少依靠症状诊断的误诊率,特别是在临床工作中,需要与反复发作的慢性胃炎进行鉴别诊断,只有在明确诊断后,才能进行有效的治疗,最终达到缓解患者不适症状的目的,提高治愈率。     

Ambulatory esophageal pressure and pH monitoring in patients with high-grade reflux esophagitis

Using conventional manometry and 24-hr ambulatory pressure and pH monitoring, we investigated esophageal motility and the esophageal motor response to reflux in 11 patients with reflux esophagitis Savary-Miller grade III and IV, and an age- and sex-matched group of 11 healthy controls. The patients had a significantly increased esophageal acid exposure. Conventional manometry showed a significantly decreased LES pressure and distal peristaltic amplitude in patients. The 24-hr monitoring yielded a significant decrease in peristaltic contraction duration and peristaltic propagation velocity in the patient group. Distal peristaltic amplitude was not decreased. Analysis of the contractions occurring in the 2-min period after each reflux episode showed a reduced number of contractions during the upright period, caused by a significantly decreased number of peristaltic contractions. During the supine period, there was a trend towards an increased number of contractions. It is concluded that esophageal motor activity and the response to reflux are impaired in patients with high-grade reflux esophagitis. However, the abnormalities found are only minor and are unlikely to play an important role in the pathogenesis of reflux esophagitis.     

高分辨率食管测压下胃食管反流病吞咽延迟时间与食管动力的相关性研究

目的探讨高分辨率食管测压（HRM）下胃食管反流病（GERD）患者吞咽延迟时间（DL）与食管动力的关系。方法51例行HRM且24h食管pH监测诊断为GERD的患者根据HRM结果是否存在食管异常蠕动分成动力异常组（n=28）和阴性组（n=23）,另选择14例非GERD者行HRM作为对照（对照组）,统计分析各组HRM监测结果。结果动力异常组DL（7．27±1．44）S明显高于阴性组的（6．704±41）S和对照组的（5．86±0．96）2,差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．01）,且阴性组也明显高于对照组（P〈0．01）;动力异常组的远端收缩积分（712．49±703．10）mmHg·s·cm明显低于阴性组的（1285．85±850．83）mmHg·s·cm和对照组的（1109．74±611．70）mmHg·s·cm,差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．01）,而阴性组与对照组比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;各组间食管下括约肌压力、收缩前沿速度及食管下括约肌处食团内部压力差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论HRM下DL的延长与GERD患者食管蠕动减弱明显相关,GERD患者表现为更长的DL,证明食管动力的改变是GERD发生发展的重要环节。     

Lower pH values of weakly acidic refluxes as determinants of heartburn perception in gastroesophageal reflux disease patients with normal esophageal acid exposure

Multichannel impedance pH monitoring has shown that weakly acidic refluxes are able to generate heartburn. However, data on the role of different pH values, ranging between 4 and 7, in the generation of them are lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether different pH values of weakly acidic refluxes play a differential role in provoking reflux symptoms in endoscopy‐negative patients with physiological esophageal acid exposure time and positive symptom index and symptom association probability for weakly acidic refluxes. One hundred and forty‐three consecutive patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease, nonresponders to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), were allowed a washout from PPIs before undergoing: upper endoscopy, esophageal manometry, and multichannel impedance pH monitoring. In patients with both symptom index and symptom association probability positive for weakly acidic reflux, each weakly acidic reflux was evaluated considering exact pH value, extension, physical characteristics, and correlation with heartburn. Forty‐five patients with normal acid exposure time and positive symptom association probability for weakly acidic reflux were identified. The number of refluxes not heartburn related was higher than those heartburn related. In all distal and proximal liquid refluxes, as well as in distal mixed refluxes, the mean pH value of reflux events associated with heartburn was significantly lower than that not associated. This condition was not confirmed for proximal mixed refluxes. Overall, a low pH of weakly acidic reflux represents a determinant factor in provoking heartburn. This observation contributes to better understand the pathophysiology of symptoms generated by weakly acidic refluxes, paving the way toward the search for different therapeutic approaches to this peculiar condition of esophageal hypersensitivity.     

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.     

Effect of hiatal hernia on esophageal manometry and pH-metry in gastroesophageal reflux disease

An increased frequency of reflux events and a prolonged acid clearance have been shown in gastroesophageal reflux (GER) patients with a hiatal hernia as compared to those without. The objective of the present study was to further investigate esophageal motility and patterns of reflux in GER patients, in relation to the presence or absence of hiatal hernia. Esophageal manometry and ambulatory 24-hr esophageal pH-metry were used in 42 patients with GER and 18 controls. Eighteen of the patients were considered to have a nonreducing hiatal hernia on endoscopy. Hiatal hernia patients showed a higher extent of reflux (total composite score,P=0.016; total reflux time,P=0.008, reflux time in supine position,P=0.024; reflux time in upright position,P=0.008), a lower frequency of reflux events (P=0.005), a more severe esophagitis on endoscopy (P<0.01) and a lower amplitude of peristalsis at 5 cm proximal to LES (P=0.0009) as compared to patients without hiatal hernia. The amplitude of peristalsis at the distal esophagus was inversely related to the extent of reflux (P=0.024). Acid clearance was also significantly prolonged in the hernia subgroup (P=0.011). Although LES resting pressure did not differ significantly between the two subgroups of patients, it was inversely related to the extent of reflux in the patients with hiatal hernia (P=0.0005). It is concluded, that GER patients with hiatal hernia present with an increased amount of reflux and more severe esophagitis, which results in more severely impaired esophageal peristalsis as compared to patients without hernia. Prolonged acid clearance and impaired esophageal emptying observed in patients with hiatal hernia could be the result of both the presence of the hernia itself and the reduced peristaltic activity of the esophagus.     

Barrett食管、糜烂性食管炎和非糜烂性反流病食管酸暴露及食管动力学分析

目的分析胃食管反流病(GERD)三种亚型Barrett食管(BE)、糜烂性食管炎(EE)和非糜烂性反流病(NERD)患者食管24 h pH监测与高分辨率食管测压结果,探讨不同亚型胃食管反流病食管酸暴露及动力学变化特点。 方法收集2015年12月至2017年12月,新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院接受住院治疗的90例GERD患者的临床资料,其中BE组28例、EE组35例、NERD组27例,通过食管24 h pH监测结果评价患食管酸暴露及反流特点,高分辨率食管测压检查评价食管动力学特点。 结果3组患者年龄及身体质量指数(BMI)等一般资料比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);EE组患者24 h食管pH监测中pH≤4(酸反流)、40.05);3组Demeester评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);LES长度3组无明显差异,BE组LES静息压及残余压较EE组和NERD组稍高,但差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05);3组在食管远端收缩积分比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。 结论食管测酸检查在GERD临床亚型的鉴别方面并无显著差别;Barrett食管、糜烂性食管炎、非糜烂性反流病均存在抗反流屏障功能减退,但不同程度的食管粘膜损伤对食管动力学的影响并无差异。     

Mechanisms of Excessive Esophageal Acid Exposure in Patients with Reflux Esophagitis

The pathophysiology of excessive esophageal acid exposure, including the way refluxed acid extends towards the proximal esophagus, in patients with reflux esophagitis (RE), is not yet clear. For 3 h after a meal, concurrent esophageal manometry and pH monitoring was carried out on 14 patients with severe RE, 15 patients with mild RE, and 15 healthy subjects. At 2 cm above the proximal margin of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) there was no difference between the three groups in the total number of acid-reflux episodes, the rate of transient LES relaxations (TLESRs), or the rate of acid reflux during TLESRs. The rate of acid reflux at 7 cm above the proximal margin of the LES, during TLESRs, in patients with severe RE (50.9%, median) was, however, significantly higher than in patients with mild RE (35.7%) and healthy subjects (15.4%). In addition, the rate of acid reflux during TLESRs in patients with mild RE was significantly higher than in healthy subjects. Both the amplitude and the success rate of primary peristalsis in patients with severe RE were significantly lower than those of healthy subjects and patients with mild RE but there was no difference between healthy subjects and patients with mild RE. The cause of excessive acid exposure in patients with RE is the difference in the way refluxed acid extends towards the proximal esophagus and acid bolus clearance, not the number of acid-reflux episodes.