Noncardiac chest pain: diagnostic evaluation

Noncardiac chest pain (NCCP) is a common and challenging clinical problem. It is estimated that more than 70 million Americans (23% of the population) suffer from this condition yearly. Patients with NCCP represent a diagnostic dilemma. Their chest pain is often indistinguishable from cardiac pain leading to extensive and expensive evaluations. Once coronary artery disease and other cardiac and pulmonary sources of chest pain are excluded, patients are frequently referred to gastroenterologists to look primarily for esophageal sources of pain. A variety of diagnostic tests are available to the practicing clinician to identify the origin of pain, including ambulatory pH testing, esophageal motility, upper endoscopy, provocative testing and even therapeutic trials.     

The pathophysiology of non-cardiac chest pain

Abstract:   Various underlying mechanisms have been described in patients with non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP). By far, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is the most common cause and thus requires initial attention when patients with NCCP are managed. Esophageal dysmotility can be demonstrated in 30% of the NCCP patients, but appears to play a very limited role in symptom generation. A significant number of patients with NCCP lack any evidence of GERD and have been consistently shown to have reduced perception thresholds for pain. Peripheral and/or central sensitization have been suggested to be responsible for visceral hypersensivity in NCCP patients. Further understanding of the underlying mechanisms for pain in patients with NCCP will likely improve our current therapeutic approach.     

Clinical usefulness of subgrouping of patients with non-cardiac chest pain according to characteristic symptoms in Korea

BACKGROUND: Non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP) is a heterogeneous disorder. There is controversy about the associations between symptoms and causes in NCCP patients. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of subgrouping according to characteristic symptoms in NCCP patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight patients were classified into two groups, as patients with typical reflux symptoms (group I, n = 24) and those without typical reflux symptoms (group II, n = 34). They underwent upper endoscopy, manometry, and 24-h esophageal pH monitoring. RESULTS: Twenty-four (41%) of the patients were diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) at upper endoscopy or 24-h esophageal pH monitoring. Eleven (19%) were diagnosed with GERD-associated esophageal motility disorder and 13 (22%) were diagnosed with non-GERD-associated esophageal motility disorder. The two groups did not differ significantly in age, sex, weight, smoking history, history of chronic alcoholism, or the severity, duration and frequency of symptoms. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and likelihood ratio of group I for GERD-related NCCP were significantly higher than those of group II. Group I had a higher proportion of patients with GERD-associated esophageal motility disorder (55%) than non-GERD-associated esophageal motility disorder (23%). CONCLUSION: Typical reflux symptoms can be used to distinguish patients with GERD-related NCCP from patients with NCCP, and subgrouping according to characteristic symptoms may assist the diagnosis of these patients in Korea.     

Neurophysiologic assessment of esophageal sensory processing in noncardiac chest pain

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophageal hypersensitivity is thought to be important in the generation and maintenance of symptoms in noncardiac chest pain (NCCP). In this study, we explored the neurophysiologic basis of esophageal hypersensitivity in a cohort of NCCP patients. METHODS: We studied 12 healthy controls (9 women; mean age, 37.1 +/- 8.7 y) and 32 NCCP patients (23 women; mean age, 47.2 +/- 10 y). All had esophageal manometry, esophageal evoked potentials to electrical stimulation, and NCCP patients had 24-hour ambulatory pH testing. RESULTS: The NCCP patients had reduced pain thresholds (PT) (72.1 +/- 19.4 vs 54.2 +/- 23.6, P = .02) and increased P1 latencies (P1 = 105.5 +/- 11.1 vs 118.1 +/- 23.4, P = .02). Subanalysis showed that the NCCP group could be divided into 3 distinct phenotypic classifications. Group 1 had reduced pain thresholds in conjunction with normal/reduced latency P1 latencies (n = 9). Group 2 had reduced pain thresholds in conjunction with increased (>2.5 SD) P1 latencies (n = 7), and group 3 had normal pain thresholds in conjunction with either normal (n = 10) or increased (>2.5 SD, n = 3) P1 latencies. CONCLUSIONS: Normal esophageal evoked potential latencies with reduced PT, as seen in group 1 patients, is indicative of enhanced afferent transmission and therefore increased esophageal afferent pathway sensitivity. Increased esophageal evoked potential latencies with reduced PT in group 2 patients implies normal afferent transmission to the cortex but heightened secondary cortical processing of this information, most likely owing to psychologic factors such as hypervigilance. This study shows that NCCP patients with esophageal hypersensitivity may be subclassified into distinct phenotypic subclasses based on sensory responsiveness and objective neurophysiologic profiles.     

Comparison of one-week and two-week empirical trial with a high-dose rabeprazole in non-cardiac chest pain patients

Background:  In patients with non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP), the optimal duration of an empirical trial with a high-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is unclear. We aimed to compare the efficacy of one-week and two-week PPI trial in patients with weekly or more than weekly NCCP and to determine its optimal duration for diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD)-related NCCP.
Methods:  Forty-two patients with at least weekly NCCP were enrolled. The baseline symptoms were assessed using a daily symptom diary for seven days. Also, esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy and 24 h esophageal pH monitoring were performed for the diagnosis of GERD. Then, patients were treated with rabeprazole 20 mg twice daily for 14 days. To assess NCCP improvement during the PPI trial, the first week and the second week symptom diary were kept for 1–7 and 8–14 days. The PPI test was considered positive if a symptom score improved (50% compared to the baseline.
Results:  There was no significant difference for a positive PPI test between GERD-related NCCP group ( n  = 8, 50%) and non GERD-related NCCP group ( n  = 6, 23%) during the first week of the PPI test. However, during the second week, GERD-related NCCP had a higher positive PPI test ( n  = 13, 81%) than non GERD-related NCCP ( n  = 7, 27%) ( P  = 0.001) with a sensitivity and specificity of 81% and 62%, respectively.
Conclusions:  The rabeprazole empirical trial was diagnostic for patients with GERD-related NCCP, and its optimal duration was determined to be at least two weeks.     

Clinically distinct characteristics in patients younger than 40 years old with non-cardiac chest pain

Background and Aim: Little is known about non‐cardiac chest pain (NCCP) in young patients. We aimed to examine the proportion of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in young patients with NCCP compared to the average‐aged NCCP patients and to evaluate their symptomatic characteristics and the clinical efficacy of a 2‐week proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trial. Methods: Ninety‐six patients with NCCP ≥ 1/week were classified into the young‐aged (≤ 40 years, n = 38) and the average‐aged groups (> 40 years, n = 58). Typical reflux symptoms were assessed. The patients were defined into a GERD group and non‐GERD group according to reflux esophagitis on esophagogastroduodenoscopy and/or pathologic acid exposure on 24‐h esophageal pH monitoring. Then the patients were treated with 30 mg of lansoprazole bid for 14 days. Results: Nine patients (23%) in the young‐aged group and 22 patients (38%) in average‐aged group were diagnosed with GERD‐related NCCP (P = 0.144). The proportion of typical reflux symptoms was higher in the GERD group compared with the non‐GERD group in both age groups. A PPI test improved symptoms in the GERD group irrespective of age, but this improvement was not observed in non‐GERD group. Conclusions: In young NCCP patients, the prevalence of GERD was relatively low compared to average‐aged NCCP, but the difference was insignificant. The PPI test was very effective in diagnosing GERD in the NCCP patients in both age groups. Therefore, in young NCCP patients, if there is a negative response to a 2‐week PPI trial, the possibility of extra‐esophageal disease origin needs to be considered.     

食管混合性酸反流和低动力在非心源性胸痛发作的作用研究

目的胃食管反流病（GERD）是引起非心源性胸痛（NCCP）的最常见因素,本研究探讨酸反流和食管动力障碍在NCCP患者中的作用。 方法按照纳入、排除标准选取2018年9月至2019年6月在新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院急救中心以及微创,疝和腹壁外科住院收治的40例NCCP患者和50例典型GERD症状患者,两组患者均行食管24 h pH监测以及高分辨率食管测压监测。 结果NCCP组食管远端收缩平均积分（DCI）明显低于GERD组,并具有统计学意义（P＜0.05）,提示食管运动功能受损。在NCCP组患者中,与胸痛有关的混合性酸反流明显高于GERD组（P＜0.05）。在NCCP组患者中,与NCCP相关的反流发作在食管5、9和15cm处的反流清除时间比GERD组患者期长（28.3±4.21)s vs(22.6±3.28)s;(13.7±1.32)s vs (18.3±1.47)s;(9.58±1.02)s vs(14.3±1.06)s（P＜0.05）。 结论酸反流性质,食管运动功能受损和延缓反流清除时间与NCCP患者症状发作可能存在密切的关系。     

Effectiveness of voice therapy in reflux-related voice disorders

Gastroesophageal reflux (GER) with laryngopharyngeal reflux plays a significant role in voice disorders. A significant proportion of patients attending ear, nose, and throat clinics with voice disorders may have gastresophageal reflux disease (GERD). There is no controlled study of the effect of voice therapy on GERD. We assessed the effect of voice therapy in patients with dysphonia and GERD. Thirty‐two patients with dysphonia and GERD underwent indirect laryngoscopy and voice analysis. Esophageal and laryngeal symptoms were assessed using the reflux symptom index (RSI). At endoscopy, esophagitis was graded according to Los Angeles classification. Patients were randomized to receive either voice therapy and omeprazole (20 mg bid) (n = 16, mean [SD] age 36.1 [9.6] y; 5 men; Gp A) or omeprazole alone (n = 16, age 31.8 [11.7] y; 9 men; Gp B). During voice analysis, jitter, shimmer, harmonic‐to‐noise ratio (HNR) and normalized noise energy (NNE) were assessed using the Dr. Speech software (version 4 1998; Tigers DRS, Inc). Hoarseness and breathiness of voice were assessed using a perceptual rating scale of 0–3. Parameters were reassessed after 6 weeks, and analyzed using parametric or nonparametric tests as applicable. In Group A, 9 patients had Grade A, 3 had Grade B, and 1 had Grade C esophagitis; 3 had normal study. In Group B, 8 patients had Grade A, 2 had Grade B esophagitis, and 6 had normal study. Baseline findings: median RSI scores were comparable (Group A 20.0 [range 14–27], Group B 19.0 [15–24]). Median rating was 2.0 for hoarseness and breathiness for both groups. Values in Groups A and B for jitter 0.5 (0.6) versus 0.5 (0.8), shimmer 3.1 (2.5) versus 2.8 (2.0), HNR 23.0 (5.6) versus 23.1 (4.2), and NNE ?7.3 (3.2) versus ?7.2 (3.4) were similar. Post‐therapy values for Groups A and B: RSI scores were 9.0 (5–13; P < 0.01 as compared with baseline) and 13.0 (10–17; P < 0.01), respectively. Ratings for hoarseness and breathiness were 0.5 (P < 0.01) and 1.0 (P < 0.01) and 2.0. Values for jitter were 0.2 (0.0; P = 0.02) versus 0.4 (0.7), shimmer 1.3 (0.7; P < 0.01) versus 2.3 (1.2), HNR 26.7 (2.3; P < 0.01) versus 23.7 (3.2), and NNE ?12.3 (3.0, P < 0.01) versus ?9.2 (3.4; P < 0.01). Improvement in the voice therapy group was significantly better than in patients who received omeprazole alone. Dysphonia is a significant problem in GER. Treatment for GER improves dysphonia, but in addition, voice therapy enhances the improvement.     

Prevalence and clinical picture of gastroesophageal prolapse in gastroesophageal reflux disease

The prevalence of gastroesophageal (GE) mucosal prolapse in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was investigated as well as the clinical profile and treatment outcome of these patients. Of the patients who were referred to our service between 1980 and 2008, those patients who received a complete diagnostic work-up, and were successively treated and followed up at our center with interviews, radiology studies, endoscopy, and, when indicated, esophageal manometry and pH recording were selected. The prevalence of GE prolapse in GERD patients was 13.5% (70/516) (40 males and 30 females with a median age of 48, interquartile range 38-57). All patients had dysphagia and reflux symptoms, and 98% (69/70) had epigastric or retrosternal pain. Belching decreased the intensity or resolved the pain in 70% (49/70) of the cases, gross esophagitis was documented in 90% (63/70) of the cases, and hiatus hernias were observed in 62% (43/70) of the cases. GE prolapse in GERD patients was accompanied by more severe pain (P < 0.05) usually associated with belching, more severe esophagitis, and dysphagia (P < 0.05). A fundoplication was offered to 100% of the patients and was accepted by 56% (39/70) (median follow up 60 months, interquartile range 54-72), which included two Collis-Nissen techniques for true short esophagus. Patients who did not accept surgery were medically treated (median follow up 60 months, interquartile range 21-72). Persistent pain was reported in 98% (30/31) of medical cases, belching was reported in 45% (14/31), and GERD symptoms and esophagitis were reported in 81% (25/31). After surgery, pain was resolved in 98% (38/39) of the operative cases, and 79% (31/39) of them were free of GERD symptoms and esophagitis. GE prolapse has a relatively low prevalence in GERD patients. It is characterized by epigastric or retrosternal pain, and the need to belch to attenuate or resolve the pain. The pain is allegedly a result of the mechanical consequences of prolapse of the gastric mucosa into the esophagus.     

Factors predictive of gastroesophageal reflux disease and esophageal motility disorders in patients with non-cardiac chest pain

Background: Patients with non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP) are referred for esophageal motility testing and pH monitoring since gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and esophageal motility disorders are frequently encountered in these patients. Our aim was to determine the prevalence and distribution of these disorders and to identify predictors of abnormal esophageal function testing.

Methods: We performed a retrospective study of NCCP patients who presented after a negative cardiac evaluation and underwent esophageal manometry, esophageal pH monitoring and upper endoscopy from January 2010 to January 2017.

Key results: In a total of 177 patients, esophageal motility disorders were diagnosed in 31% and GERD in 35% of the patients. The most common diagnoses were ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) in 14.1%, jackhammer esophagus in 6.8%, diffuse esophageal spasm in 5.1% and achalasia in 2.3% patients. Older age [for every 5-year increment, odds ratio (OR) 1.2 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.00–1.3) p?=?.047] and dysphagia [OR 3.8 (95% CI, 1.9–7.5) p?p?=?.032] was predictive of GERD. Abnormal esophageal testing was associated with male gender [OR 2.2 (95% CI, 1.04–4.6) p?=?.039], older age [for every 5-year increment, OR 1.2 (95% CI, 1.03–1.3) p?=?.016] and Caucasian race [OR 3.1 (95% CI, 1.1–8.7) p?Conclusions: Approximately two thirds of patients presenting with NCCP have GERD or esophageal motility disorders. Esophageal function testing in NCCP should be considered in older patients, men, Caucasians and those presenting with dysphagia.     

Non-cardiac chest pain: Prevalence of reflux disease and response to acid suppression in an Asian population

Background:  Gastroesophageal reflux disease is thought to be the commonest cause of 'non-cardiac chest pain'. The use of proton-pump inhibitors resulting in improvement in the chest pain symptom would support this causal association.
Objectives:  To determine the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease in non-cardiac chest pain and the response of chest pain to proton-pump inhibitor therapy.
Methods:  Patients with recurrent angina-like chest pain and normal coronary angiogram were recruited. The frequency and severity of chest pain were recorded. All patients underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and 48-h Bravo ambulatory pH monitoring before receiving rabeprazole 20 mg bd for 2 weeks.
Results:  The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease was 66.7% (18/27). The improvement in chest pain score was significantly higher in reflux compared to non-reflux patients ( P  = 0.006). The proportion of patients with complete or marked/moderate improvement in chest pain symptoms were significantly higher in patients with reflux (15/18, 83.3%) compared to those without (1/9, 11.1%) ( P  < 0.001).
Conclusion:  The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease in patients with 'non-cardiac chest pain' was high. The response to treatment with proton-pump inhibitors in patients with reflux disease, but not in those without, underlined the critical role of acid reflux in a subset of patients with 'non-cardiac chest pain'.     

Pharmacologic management and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common diagnoses in daily practice. Diagnosis can be made on symptom evaluation, on pH-monitoring or on endoscopic findings. In contrast to commonly held opinion there is no strong evidence that lifestyle factors are a dominant factor in the pathophysiology of GERD. The various agents currently used for treatment of GERD include mucoprotective substances, antacids, H(2)-blockers and proton pump inhibitors. This article gives an overview of the pharmacological management of GERD and focuses on the differential therapy of endoscopy-negative GERD, GERD with esophagitis and maintenance therapy.     

Comparison of omeprazole and ranitidine in treatment of refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease in patients with gastric acid hypersecretion

Secretion of gastric acid and volume, serum gastrin concentration, and ambulatory 24-hr esophageal pH monitoring were evaluated prospectively in 12 patients with idiopathic gastric acid hypersecretion (basal acid output greater than 10.0 meq/hr) undergoing treatment for refractory chronic long-standing pyrosis. Treatment lasted six months and consisted of three months of ranitidine (mean 2150 mg/day, range 1200–3000 mg/day), followed by three months of omeprazole (mean 33 mg/day, range 20–60 mg/day). Both ranitidine and omeprazole significantly reduced gastric acid output (P<0.001) and gastric volume output (P<0.001) compared to a basal evaluation and resulted in complete disappearance of pyrosis. Total reflux time (percent 24 hr intraesophageal pH less than 4) was significantly reduced by ranitidine (P<0.02) and omeprazole (P<0.001) compared to basal evaluation; however, the effects of omeprazole were significantly greater than ranitidine (P<0.05). Omeprazole caused a significant increase in serum gastrin concentration compared to both basal and ranitidine (P<0.05). Endoscopically documented erosive esophagitis was present in nine of the 12 patients, and seven of the 12 patients had Barrett's epithelium. All 12 patients had complete resolution of pyrosis and healed esophagitis by six months, but no significant endoscopic regression was observed in the extent of Barrett's epithelium. No side effects occurred with these high doses of ranitidine or omeprazole. These results indicate that high-dose ranitidine and omeprazole are effective therapy for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease. However, with omeprazole, total reflux times are reduced more than with ranitidine, often into the normal range. That marked reduction of gastric acid secretion with omeprazole, which greatly reduces total reflux times, accounts for the significant elevation of serum gastrin concentration seen during omeprazole therapy.     

Characteristics of patients with erosive and nonerosive GERD in high-Helicobacter-pylori prevalence region

It is still not known whether there are differences between erosive and nonerosive GERD. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the prevalence of Helicobacter pylori (HP) infection, and other differences between erosive and nonerosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (NERD) patients. One-hundred and four consecutive GERD patients (mean age: 41.6 +/- 12.3 years) were interviewed, endoscoped and tested for HP. Erosive GERD was defined according to the Los Angeles classification. Patients who had no erosions in the esophagus but complained of heartburn or/and acid regurgitation at least twice a week and for whom these symptoms had a negative impact on daily activities were considered to be NERD patients. Erosive GERD was identified in 53 (51%) patients (mean age: 41.0 +/- 12.7 years) and NERD in 51 (49.0%) patients (mean age: 42.2 +/- 11.9 years). HP infection was found in 32 (60.4%) erosive GERD patients, and 41 (80.4%) NERD patients, P < 0.05. Multivariate analysis revealed that there were two statistically significant prediction factors for NERD: female sex with odds ratio (OR) of 6.34 (95% CI: 2.41-16.64; P = 0.0002) and HP infection with odds ratio (OR) of 3.28 (95% CI: 1.26-8.58; P = 0.015). The presence of HP and female sex are found to be statistically significant predictors of NERD.     

Lifestyle factors and risk for symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux in monozygotic twins

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Lifestyle and genetic factors dominate the etiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease. We investigated associations between lifestyle factors and gastroesophageal reflux (GER) symptoms, with and without controlling for genetic predisposition. METHODS: In 1967 and 1973, questionnaires including lifestyle exposures were mailed to twins in the Swedish Twin Registry, and data on GER symptoms were collected by telephone interview during 1998-2002. Two analytic methods were used: external control analysis (4083 twins with GER symptoms and 21,383 controls) and monozygotic co-twin control analysis (869 monozygotic twin pairs discordant for GER symptoms). RESULTS: In the external control analysis, leanness (body mass index [BMI] <20), upper normal weight (BMI 22.5-24.9), overweight (BMI 25-29.9), and obese (BMI > or =30) conferred -19%, 25%, 46%, and 59% increased risk of frequent GER symptoms compared with normal weight (BMI 20-22.4), respectively, among women, whereas no such associations were evident among men. When adjusted for genetic and nongenetic familial factors, these estimates were -28%, 44%, 187%, and 277%, respectively, among men. Frequent smoking rendered a 37% increased risk of frequent GER symptoms among women and 53% among men compared with nonsmokers. Physical activity at work was dose dependently associated with increased risk of frequent GER symptoms, and recreational physical activity decreased this risk. CONCLUSIONS: BMI, tobacco smoking, and physical activity at work appear to be risk factors for frequent GER symptoms, whereas recreational physical activity appears to be beneficial. Association between BMI and frequent GER symptoms among men seems to be attenuated by genetic factors.     

Cardiac autonomic function and oesophageal acid sensitivity in patients with non-cardiac chest pain

BACKGROUND: Acid reflux can elicit non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP), possibly through altered visceral sensory or autonomic function. The interactions between symptoms, autonomic function, and acid exposure are poorly understood. AIM: To examine autonomic function in NCCP patients during exposure to oesophageal acid infusion. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Autonomic activity was assessed using power spectral analysis of heart rate variability (PSHRV), before and during oesophageal acidification (0.1 N HCl), in 28 NCCP patients (40.5 (10) years; 13 females) and in 10 matched healthy controls. Measured PSHRV indices included high frequency (HF) (0.15-0.5 Hz) and low frequency (LF) (0.06-0.15 Hz) power to assess vagal and sympathetic activity, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 19/28 patients had angina-like symptoms elicited by acid. There were no significant manometric changes observed in either acid sensitive or insensitive patients. Acid sensitive patients had a higher baseline heart rate (82.9 (3.1) v 66.7 (3.5) beats/min; p<0.005) and lower baseline vagal activity (HF normalised area: 31.1 (1.9)% v 38.9 (2.3)%; p< 0.03) than acid insensitive patients. During acid infusion, vagal cardiac outflow increased (p<0.03) in acid sensitive but not in acid insensitive patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with angina-like pain during acid infusion have decreased resting vagal activity. The symptoms elicited by perception of acid are further associated with a simultaneous increase in vagal activity in keeping with a vagally mediated pseudoaffective response.     

Non‐erosive reflux disease,functional heartburn and gastroesophageal reflux disease; insights into pathophysiology and clinical presentation

Non‐erosive reflux disease (NERD) has emerged as a real entity in the spectrum of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and may, indeed, represent the most common manifestation of reflux disease. Recent information indicates NERD can be further subclassified based on the results of pH studies and suggests that functional heartburn needs to be differentiated as that subgroup of patients in which there appears to be no relationship between symptoms, however ‘typical’ of GERD, and acid exposure. Other aspects of NERD need to be appreciated, including overlap with functional dyspepsia and the potential variations in response to such therapeutic interventions as acid‐suppressive therapy and fundoplication. It seems quite possible that our failure to separate functional heartburn from NERD, in general, has contributed, in large measure, to diagnostic difficulties and therapeutic disappointment in GERD. An appreciation of the range of entities, of different etiology and pathology, within NERD will foster the development of effective approaches to the assessment and therapy of this challenging disorder.     

Macroscopic healing of esophagitis does not improve esophageal motility

The purpose of the present study was to prospectively determine if healing of esophagitis as assessed by endoscopy results in improved esophageal motility. Thirty-one patients with erosive esophagitis who were randomized to receive either omeprazole 20 mg once daily or placebo completed the double-blind study. All patients underwent endoscopy and esophageal motility before treatment and at four weeks after treatment. Twenty-two healthy volunteers underwent esophageal manometry and served as normal controls. Manometric tracings were coded, randomized, and analyzed blindly. Compared to normal controls, patients with esophagitis had significantly lower LESP, decreased amplitude of peristaltic contractions, and increased occurrence of abnormal contractions. Omeprazole was superior to placebo in healing of esophagitis. However, healing of esophagitis was not associated with any improvement in esophageal motility. The manometric data suggest that the motility disturbance seen in esophagitis is not secondary to the esophagitis but rather a primary phenomenon. The lack of improvement of esophageal motility with healing may explain the high recurrence of esophagitis in clinical trials following discontinuation of omeprazole.This work was supported by a grant from Astra Canada, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.