Failure to respond to physiologic challenge characterizes esophageal motility in erosive gastro‐esophageal reflux disease

Background Non‐specific esophageal dysmotility with impaired clearance is often present in patients with gastro‐esophageal reflux disease (GERD), especially those with erosive disease; however the physio‐mechanic basis of esophageal dysfunction is not well defined. Methods Retrospective assessment of patients with erosive reflux disease (ERD; n = 20) and endoscopy negative reflux disease (ENRD; n = 20) with pathologic acid exposure on pH studies (>4.2% time/24 h) and also healthy controls (n = 20) studied by high resolution manometry. Esophageal motility in response to liquid and solid bolus swallows and multiple water swallows (MWS) was analyzed. Peristaltic dysfunction was defined as failed peristalsis, spasm, weak or poorly coordinated esophageal contraction (>3 cm break in 30 mmHg isocontour). Key Results Peristaltic dysfunction was present in 33% of water swallows in controls, 56% ENRD and 76% ERD respectively (P < 0.023 vs controls, P = 0.185 vs ENRD). The proportion of effective peristaltic contractions improved with solid compared to liquid bolus in controls (18%vs 33%, P = 0.082) and ENRD (22%vs 54%, P = 0.046) but not ERD (62%vs 76%, P = 0.438). Similarly, MWS was followed by effective peristalsis in 83% of controls and 70% ENRD but only 30% ERD patients (P < 0.017 vs controls and P < 0.031 vs ENRD). The association between acid exposure and dysmotility was closer for solid than liquid swallows (r = 0.52 vs 0.27). Conclusions & Inferences Peristaltic dysfunction is common in GERD. ERD patients are characterized by a failure to respond to the physiologic challenge of solid bolus and MWS that is likely also to impair clearance following reflux events and increase exposure to gastric refluxate.     

The frequency of apneas in very preterm infants is increased after non‐acid gastro‐esophageal reflux

Background To evaluate whether physical and/or chemical features of gastro‐esophageal reflux (GER) influence its relationship with apnea of prematurity (AOP). Methods Fifty‐eight preterm newborns (GA ≤33 weeks) with recurrent apneas were studied by simultaneous polysomnography and combined impedance and pH monitoring, to analyze whether the correlation between GER and AOP varies according to the acidity, duration and height of GERs. Key Results The frequency of apnea (number apnea/min) occurring after‐GER [median (range) 0.07 (0–0.25)] was higher than the one detected in GER‐free period [0.06 (0.04–0.13), P = 0.015], and also than the one detected before‐GER [0 (0–0.8), P = 0.000]. The frequency of apneas detected in the 30’’ after pH‐GER [median (range), 0 min^?1 (0–1.09)] was higher than the frequency detected in the 30’’ before [0 (0–0.91), P = 0.04]; even more, the frequency of apneas detected after non‐acid MII‐GER episodes [0 (0–2)] was significantly higher than the one detected before [0 (0–1), P = 0.000], whereas the frequency of apneas detected before acid MII‐GER episodes [0 (0–0.67)] did not differ from the one detected after [0 (0–2), P = 0.137]. The frequency of pathological apneas detected in the 30’’ after‐GER (0 min^?1, range 0–0.55) was higher than the frequency detected before (0, range 0–0.09; P = 0.001). No difference in mean height or in mean duration was found between GERs correlated and those non‐correlated to apnea. Conclusions & Inferences Non‐acid GER is responsible for a variable amount of AOP detected after‐GER: this novel finding must be taken into consideration when a therapeutic strategy for this common problem is planned.     

Measurement of acid exposure of proximal esophagus: a better tool for diagnosing non‐erosive reflux disease

Background The sensitivity of 24‐h pH monitoring is poor in non‐erosive reflux disease (NERD). In NERD patients, the proximal extent of acid reflux is one of the main determinants of reflux perception. The present study was aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of acid exposure time (AET), at 5 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter, with those at 10 cm and at 3 cm below the upper esophageal sphincter as well as the reproducibility of these parameters. Methods A total of 93 consecutive NERD patients, with typical symptoms responsive to proton pump inhibitor treatment, and 40 controls underwent esophageal manometry and multi‐channel 24‐h pH‐test; 13 patients underwent the same study on two occasions. Symptom association probability (SAP) values were evaluated at each esophageal level. Key Results The ROC curve indicates that the area under the curve was 0.79 at distal (SE = 0.039), 0.87 (SE = 0.032) at proximal (P = 0.029 vs distal), and 0.85 (SE = 0.033) at very proximal esophagus (P = 0.148). AET showed a reproducibility of 61% (Kappa 0.22) at distal esophagus, 77% (Kappa 0.45) at proximal and 53% (Kappa 0.05) at very proximal esophagus. The percentage of patients with a positive SAP was not significantly different when assessed at the distal compared with the proximal esophagus. Conclusions & Inferences In NERD patients, the diagnostic yield of the pH test is significantly improved by the assessment of AET at the proximal esophagus. As this variable seems to be less affected by the day to day variability, it could be considered a reliable and useful diagnostic tool in NERD patients.     

Increase of weakly acidic gas esophagopharyngeal reflux (EPR) and swallowing‐induced acidic/weakly acidic EPR in patients with chronic cough responding to proton pump inhibitors

Background Gastro‐esophageal reflux disease (GERD)‐related chronic cough (CC) may have multifactorial causes. To clarify the characteristics of esophagopharyngeal reflux (EPR) events in CC patients whose cough was apparently influenced by gastro‐esophageal reflux (GER), we studied patients with CC clearly responding to full‐dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy (CC patients). Methods Ten CC patients, 10 GERD patients, and 10 healthy controls underwent 24‐h ambulatory pharyngo‐esophageal impedance and pH monitoring. Weakly acidic reflux was defined as a decrease of pH by >1 unit with a nadir pH >4. In six CC patients, monitoring was repeated after 8 weeks of PPI therapy. The number of each EPR event and the symptom association probability (SAP) were calculated. Symptoms were evaluated by a validated GERD symptom questionnaire. Key Results Weakly acidic gas EPR and swallowing‐induced acidic/weakly acidic EPR only occurred in CC patients, and the numbers of such events was significantly higher in the CC group than in the other two groups (P < 0.05, respectively). Symptom association probability analysis revealed a positive association between GER and cough in three CC patients. Proton pump inhibitor therapy abolished swallowing‐induced acidic/weakly acidic EPR, reduced weakly acidic gas EPR, and improved symptoms (all P < 0.05). Conclusions & Inferences Most patients with CC responding to PPI therapy had weakly acidic gas EPR and swallowing‐induced acidic/weakly acidic EPR. A direct effect of acidic mist or liquid refluxing into the pharynx may contribute to chronic cough, while cough may also arise indirectly from reflux via a vago‐vagal reflex in some patients.