非糜烂性反流病与反流性食管炎症状及食管酸暴露情况

目的比较非糜烂性反流病（NERD）与反流性食管炎（RE）的临床症状及食管酸暴露情况。方法具有反流症状的患者155例,进行胃镜检查和食管24hpH动态监测。结果155例患者中诊断RE76例（49．0％）,其中A、B、C、D级分别为40、24、8和4例;诊断NERD79例（51．0％）;RE组中pH监测阳性57例（75．0％）,NERD组26例（32．9％）,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;NERD组食管外症状发生率较RE组高,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）,而典型的反流症状发生率两组比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;RE组各项酸反流指标均大于NERD组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;轻度RE（LA-A）组各项酸反流指标低于中度RE（LA—B）和重度RE（LA—C＋D）,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）,但中度RE（LA—B）与重度RE（LA—C＋D）之间的差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;79例NERD中,依据监测当日症状计算SI值,pH阴性sI阳性（NERDpH^-SI^＋）15例,pH阴性sI阴性（NERDpH^-SI^-）28例,NERDpH^-SI^＋组的pH〈4．0（％）和酸反流次数明显高于NERDpH^-SI^-组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论胃酸反流是RE形成的重要因素,其中胃酸的浓度及长反流与食管黏膜接触的次数是直接造成食管黏膜损伤的重要因素;酸反流的程度与RE的严重程度之间可能相关;NERD根据酸反流与症状的关系可分为不同的亚型,病理性酸反流所占比例相对较低,酸反流的强弱在其发病机制中可能未起到决定性作用。     

Barrett食管、反流性食管炎和非糜烂性胃食管反流病的反流物特点

目的应用食管24 h pH-阻抗(MII-pH)等检查方法,分析具有胃食管反流病(GERD)典型症状、并且食管MII-pH检查结果异常的GERD患者,比较分析其各亚型,即Barrett食管(BE)、反流性食管炎(RE)和非糜烂性胃食管反流病(NERD)患者的胃食管反流特点。 方法入选具有典型胃食管反流症状(烧心/反流),并且食管24 h MII-pH检查结果异常的GERD患者,根据内镜检查结果分为BE、RE、NERD三组,收集患者24 h的食管pH-阻抗信息,应用SPSS16.0统计软件进行组间Mann Whitney检验、多因素方差分析,P< 0.05认为具有统计学差异。 结果共入组103例具有典型反流症状且MII-pH监测阳性的GERD患者,其中有15例BE患者、32例RE患者、56例NERD患者。三组患者的平均年龄、性别构成、以及BMI无显著差异性。将三组患者的各项胃食管反流指标数值进行Mann-Whitney检验,显示RE、BE患者的DeMeester评分、pH<4反流时间百分比、长反流周期数显著高于NERD患者,具有显著性差异。BE患者的反流周期数显著多于RE和NERD患者,具有显著性差异。阻抗相关指标在三组患者之间均没有统计学差异。 结论与NERD相比,酸反流对于RE和BE具有更重要的致病意义。     

反流性食管炎与非糜烂性反流病食管酸暴露的特点比较

目的　比较反流性食管炎 (RE)与非糜烂性反流病 (NERD)各亚组食管酸暴露特点。方法　具有典型反酸 烧心等症状的 12 8例患者 ,经胃镜等系统检查诊断为胃食管反流病 (GERD)。便携式 pH监测仪行胃食管 2 4hpH监测 ,DeMeester积分≥ 15分为存在病理性酸反流。 结果　 12 8例患者中 ,37例 (2 8 9% )存在RE ,91例 (71 1% )为NERD。pH监测阳性在RE组和NERD组中分别为 2 5例 (6 7 6 % )和 4 6例 (5 0 5 % ) ,差异无统计学意义 ;两组DeMeester积分均值差异亦无统计学意义 (5 3 4 5± 6 2 0 4比 4 0 0 4± 6 1 80 ,P >0 0 5 )。RE组长反流次数显著高于NERD组 (8 16±10 2 7比 3 96± 6 87,P =0 0 0 4 )。以症状指数 >5 0 %为阳性 ,NERD阳性组 (pH值监测异常 )症状指数阳性率显著高于NERD阴性组 (pH值监测正常 ) (43 5 %比 15 6 % ,P <0 0 0 1)。NERD阴性组中具有阳性症状指数的患者 7例 (15 6 % ) ,阴性症状指数者 38例。前者总反流次数及立位反流时间百分比显著高于后者。RE患者中 ,12例 pH监测阴性者食管及胃内pH的中位值显著高于 pH监测阳性者。结论　RE患者长反流发生率高于NERD患者 ;症状的发生与酸反流相关 ;NERD患者根据酸反流与症状关系可分为不同的亚组。RE阴性组可能存在混合反流或胆汁反流     

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。     

非糜烂性反流病与反流性食管炎酸袋情况比较及相关性探讨

目的通过对非糜烂性反流病(NERD)与反流性食管炎(RE)酸袋情况的研究比较,探讨NERD及RE相关性。方法 15名健康志愿者和59例胃食管反流病(GERD)患者参与本研究。根据胃镜下食管黏膜是否损伤将GERD患者分为NERD组及RE组。对所有受试者进行食管测压、酸袋检测及食管24 h动态pH监测。根据是否存在食管异常酸反流进一步分为食管异常酸反流阴性NERD(n-NERD)组、食管异常酸反流阳性NERD(p-NERD)组、食管异常酸反流阴性RE(n-RE)组及食管异常酸反流阳性RE(p-RE)组。比较各组间酸袋情况。结果各组间酸袋发生率无统计学意义。n-NERD组酸袋持续时间最短,与n-RE组及p-RE组比较有统计学意义(P<0.05)。p-RE组酸袋平均pH值最低,与健康组、n-NERD组及p-NERD组比较有统计学意义(P<0.05)。进一步比较发现n-NERD组较RE组酸袋出现时间晚,持续时间短,平均pH值高(P<0.05)。p-NERD组仅酸袋平均pH值较RE组高(P<0.05)。结论 n-NERD与p-NERD并非单纯为NERD的两种异常酸反流不同的情况。p-NERD与RE有更多相似性,似乎为RE黏膜损伤前状态。     

反流性食管炎和非糜烂性反流病患者酸暴露与食管压力监测结果分析

目的通过对胃食管反流病（GERD）患者的酸暴露情况、食管下括约肌（LES）压力、食管体部压力、幽门螺杆菌（Hp）感染结果的比较，探讨反流性食管炎（RE）、非糜烂性反流病（NERD）的不同状况，为临床治疗提供科学依据。方法2001年10月至2005年7月，具有反流症状（烧心、反酸）的患者80例，胃镜检出RE31例，NERD45例，Barrett食管（BE）4例。行食管24hpH动态监测，并以De—Meester积分均值将GERD分为轻、中、重度，检测LES、食管体部即LES上方5cm、7cm、13cm（简记为L5、L7、L12）和食管上括约肌（UES）下方1cm、6cm、8cm（简记为U1、U6、U8）压力指标，并进行Hp感染的检查。结果RE、NERD两组患者食管24hpH酸暴露各指标的差异，无统计学意义（P〉0．05），De-Meester积分均值亦无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；轻、中、重度GERD患者食管24hpH监测指标具有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。RE、NERD两组患者LES压力、食管体部的L5、L7、L12、U6和u8压力监测指标无统计学意义（P〉0．05），只有RE组U1压力低于NERD组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；轻、中、重度GERD患者LES压力和食管体部的压力监测指标差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。RE和NERD组患者Hp感染率分别为16．1％和22．2％，其差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05），OR为1．309，95％C10．364～4．705。结论RE和NERD患者酸暴露、LES压力和食管体部压力等相应指标无明显差异；NERD在发病机制中，酸反流的强弱没有起到决定性作用。     

非糜烂性反流病诊断进展

非糜烂性反流病（NERD）是最常见的胃食管反流表型，但其发病机制尚未完全明了。目前NERD尚无特异性诊断方法。细胞间隙增宽（DIS）是NERD一个常见但非特异性的组织学特征，可由酸反流引起。本文就NERD的诊断进展作一概述。     

反流性食管炎85例酸及胆汁反流的同步监测

目的：研究反流性食管炎（RE）患者酸和胆汁反流的发生情况。方法：RE患者85例及健康志愿者20例,应用DigitraperMKⅢ型便携式pH监测仪及Bilitec 2000便携式胆汁监测仪同步监测食管24h pH变化及胆汁反流。结果：RE组有酸和胆汁共同反流者为53例（62．4％）,单纯酸反流者26例（30．6％）,单纯胆汁反流者3例（3．5％）,无任何反流者3例（3．5％）。RE组中酸及胆汁反流次数、持续反流大于5min次数、最长持续反流时间及反流总时间百分比均明显高于对照组（P＜0．01）。结论：胆汁反流与酸反流同样常见于RE患者,在胃食管反流病的发生中起重要作用,同步动态监测食管pH值及胆汁变化对RE的诊断有重要意义。     

反流性食管炎和非糜烂性反流病患者症状谱、生活质量和精神心理状态调查

背景：胃食管反流病（GERD）包括非糜烂性反流病（NERD）、反流性食管炎（RE）和Barrett食管（BE），其发病机制可能有所不同。目的：分析比较NERD和RE患者的人口学特征和临床特点，为探讨其发病机制和有效治疗提供依据。方法：对连续入组的278例GERD患者进行问卷调查，内容包括一般人口学资料、胃食管反流以及相关症状评分、食管外症状、重叠症状、生活质量评价和精神心理状态评价。结果：NERD和RE分别占GERD的60．8％和37．1％；与RE组相比，NERD患者以女性多见（P〈0．05），平均年龄较轻（R〈0．05）。胃食管反流症状评分在两组患者间无显著差异，但RE组烧心频率较NERD组高（P〈0．05），而NERD组胸骨后疼痛更突出，反食症状较轻。两组患者的食管外症状、重叠症状发生率无显著差异。NERD组患者生活质量下降更明显。NERD组患者合并精神心理异常的比例显著高于RE组（P〈0．05），且抑郁评分高。结论：本组资料中大部分GERD患者为NERD，NERD和RE的反流以及相关症状谱无显著差异。但NERD患者常合并精神心理异常、生活质量下降，提示精神心理因素在NERD的发病中可能起重要作用。     

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.     

Esophageal epithelial surface in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease： An electron microscopic study

A/M： To investigate the intercellular spaces between the most superficially located esophageal epithelial cells in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease （GERD）.
METHODS： Eighteen patients with erosive esophagitis, 10 patients with non-erosive reflux disease （NERD）, and 18 normal asymptomatic volunteers were enrolled. Biopsy specimens were obtained from the lower esophageal mucosa without ulcer or erosion. Scanning electron microscopy was employed to investigate the tightness of the superficial cellular attachment.
RESULTS： The intercellular space between the most superficially located epithelial cells in patients with erosive esophagitis or NERD was not different from that in asymptomatic healthy individuals.
CONCLUSION： Widened luminal intercellular spaces of esophageal superficial epithelium are not responsible for the induction of reflux symptoms in patients with GERD.     

Esophageal Mucosal Sensitivity: Possible Links with Clinical Presentations in Patients with Erosive Esophagitis and Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

The goal of this study was to assess whether mucosal sensitivity is related to different combinations of symptoms and lesions in laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and erosive esophagitis and to determine whether reflux pattern is important in the development of the symptoms and lesions of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or LPR. We conducted a prospective study of 55 unselected new patients: 27 erosive esophagitis patients and 28 LPR patients. The erosive esophagitis group had a significantly higher rate of Bernstein test positivity than the LPR group. The proportions of patients with pathologic acid reflux at the proximal and distal probe were similar in the erosive esophagitis group and in the LPR group. These results were inconsistent with the endoscopic findings. Both retrosternal heartburn and regurgitation symptoms were higher in erosive esophagitis patients. The paucity of classical GERD symptoms and lesions in LPR patients could be attributable to mucosal insensitivity but not to reflux pattern.     

Predominant nocturnal acid reflux in patients with Los Angeles grade C and D reflux esophagitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Nocturnal gastric acid breakthrough (NAB) is defined as an intragastric pH < 4.0 lasting more than 1 h during the night in patients taking a proton pump inhibitor (PPI). Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients with nocturnal gastroesophageal acid reflux accompanied by NAB are thought to be refractory to PPI treatment. The aim of this study was to endoscopically identify the patients with predominant nocturnal gastroesophageal acid reflux. METHODS: The subjects were 37 patients with erosive reflux esophagitis (Los Angeles classification (LA) grade A, 12; B, 10; C, eight; and D, seven cases) and a control group of 20 patients without esophagitis. The results of ambulatory 24 h gastric and esophageal pH monitoring were compared among different grades of esophagitis. RESULTS: Gastroesophageal reflux during 24 h in patients with high-grade esophagitis was more frequent than for patients with low-grade esophagitis or no esophagitis. Although the length of esophageal acid exposure (percentage time with pH < 4.0) in patients with grade A or without esophagitis was longer in the daytime, that in patients with grades C and D was longer during the night. The reason for the delayed nocturnal acid exposure was the longer nocturnal acid clearance in high-grade reflux esophagitis. CONCLUSIONS: Nocturnal exposure of the esophagus to acid occurs frequently in patients with LA grades C and D esophagitis. Thus, the existence of NAB with resulting nocturnal acid reflux should be considered when the patient with high-grade esophagitis shows resistance to PPI treatment.     

Relevance of ineffective esophageal motility and hyperactive acid sensitization in patients with gastroesophageal reflux

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Esophageal motor abnormalities including ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) and visceral hypersensitivity have been frequently observed in patients with gastroesophageal reflux. The aim of this study was to observe the incidences of hypersensitivity to acid infusion and motor abnormalities in non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) compared with erosive esophagitis. METHODS: We performed upper GI endoscopy, an acid perfusion test and esophageal manometry on 113 NERD patients and 37 erosive esophagitis patients. RESULTS: The frequency of acid sensitization was 69.9% in NERD and 67.6% in erosive esophagitis. The frequency of esophageal motor abnormality in patients with erosive esophagitis (48.6%) was higher than in patients with NERD (25.7%, P = 0.014). The most frequent esophageal motor abnormality was IEM. The frequency of IEM was 15.9% in NERD patients, 42.9% in Los Angeles grade A, 53.8% in Los Angeles grade B and 66.7% in Los Angeles grade C esophagitis (chi(2) = 16.67, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that no difference exists between visceral hypersensitivity in patients with NERD and those with erosive esophagitis, and that IEM occurs in NERD as well as erosive esophagitis patients. The occurrence of IEM is associated with the endoscopic severity of gastroesophageal reflux disease.     

Acid reflux is a poor predictor for severity of erosive reflux esophagitis

It is unknown which factors determine the severity of mucosal damage in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Our aim was to test whether the amount of esophageal acid exposure could predict the severity of esophageal injury in erosive reflux esophagitis. A total of 644 outpatients with symptomatic GERD underwent an esophagogastroduodenoscopy followed by esophageal manometry and 24-h pH monitoring. GERD was graded according to the endoscopic severity of mucosal damage as no erosions, single erosions, confluent erosions, esophageal ulcers, and strictures. A multiple linear regression was used to assess the joint influences of demographic characteristics, social habits, endoscopic anatomy, and various parameters of esophageal function tests on the severity of erosive reflux disease. No clear-cut association between the amount of acid reflux and the severity of erosive reflux esophagitis could be established. All individual parameters of esophageal pH monitoring, such as upright or supine acid contact time, frequency of all or only long reflux episodes, and an overall summary score of pH-metry, revealed no or only a weak correlation with the severity grade of erosive reflux esophagitis. Similarly, the pressure of the lower esophageal sphincter was only slightly more decreased in patients with extensive erosive esophagitis as compared to subjects without esophageal erosions. In the multiple linear regression, the presence of hiatus hernia was a stronger predictor of disease severity than any of the other parameters. In conclusion, factors other than exposure of the esophageal mucosa to acid must contribute to the development of erosive esophagitis.     

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.     

Differences in oesophageal bolus transit between patients with and without erosive reflux disease

BACKGROUND: We determined any difference in oesophageal function between reflux patients with and without erosive esophagitis by the application of concurrent manometry and impedance. METHODS: Twenty patients with erosive esophagitis, 20 patients with non-erosive reflux disease, and 15 controls were included in this study. All subjects underwent studies with a catheter containing four impedance-measuring segments and five solid-state pressure transducers. Each subject received 10 liquid and 10 viscous boluses to be swallowed. RESULTS: Healthy controls had greater distal oesophageal peristaltic amplitude than both patient groups (p < 0.05). Normal oesophageal peristalsis was found more frequently in healthy controls than either of the patient groups (p < 0.05). Patients with erosive esophagitis exhibited a lower percentage of complete bolus transit compared to healthy controls and non-erosive reflux disease patients (both p < 0.05). Patients with erosive esophagitis had a longer total bolus transit time compared to healthy controls and non-erosive reflux disease patients (both p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Erosive esophagitis is characterized by longer oesophageal bolus transit and fewer complete bolus transit than non-erosive reflux disease. The noted differences in oesophageal bolus transit may reflect a continuum of dysfunction secondary to increasing oesophageal mucosal damage.     

Oesophageal mucosal intercellular space diameter and reflux pattern in childhood erosive and non-erosive reflux disease

Background and aims

We sought to compare intercellular space diameter in children with non-erosive and erosive reflux disease, and a control group. We also aimed to characterize the reflux pattern in erosive and non-erosive reflux disease patients, and to explore the relationship between intercellular space diameter values and reflux parameters.

Methods

Twenty-four children with non-erosive reflux disease, 20 with erosive reflux disease, and 10 controls were prospectively studied. All patients and controls underwent upper endoscopy. Biopsies were taken at 2–3 cm above the Z-line, and intercellular space diameter was measured using transmission electron microscopy. Non-erosive and erosive reflux disease patients underwent impedance-pH monitoring.

Results

Mean intercellular space diameter values were significantly higher in both non-erosive (0.9 ± 0.2 μm) and erosive reflux disease (1 ± 0.2 μm) compared to controls (0.5 ± 0.2 μm, p < 0.01). No difference was found between the two patient groups. Acid exposure time, the number of acid, weakly acidic and weakly alkaline reflux events did not differ between the two patient groups. No difference was found in the mean intercellular space diameter between non-erosive reflux disease children with and without abnormal acid exposure time (1 ± 0.3 vs. 0.9 ± 0.2 μm). No correlation was found between any reflux parameter and intercellular space diameter values.

Conclusions

Dilated intercellular space diameter seems to be a useful and objective marker of oesophageal damage in paediatric gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, regardless of acid exposure. In childhood, different gastro-oesophageal reflux disease phenotypes cannot be discriminated on the basis of reflux pattern.     

The Effect of Hiatal Hernia on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Influence on Proximal and Distal Esophageal Reflux

Introduction Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a very common disorder that substantially affects the patient's quality of life. Aim Our aim was to detect the frequency of GERD in patients with hiatal hernia (HH), to compare the acid reflux pattern in patients with and without HH, and to search the relationship between the erosive gastroesophageal reflux (GER) and HH. Methods Forty patients with HH diagnosed by at least two methods, and 121 patients with GERD as a control group were studied. The frequency of GERD in patients with HH, the acid reflux pattern, the relation of body mass index and erosive esophagitis with HH and control group was studied. Results Among patients with HH 67.5% of patients had GER. On comparison of acid reflux pattern, the isolated distal esophageal reflux was seen more in patients with HH than in the control group (P < 0.0001). Erosive GERD was seen more in patients with HH than in the control group (P = 0.017). There was no difference in body mass indices between patients with HH and erosive gastroesopahgeal reflux disease and patients with HH and nonerosive GERD. Conclusion Hiatal hernia is very closely associated with GERD, and isolated distal esophageal reflux is seen more in patients with HH than in patients without HH. There is no effect of body mass index on GER in patients with HH.     

How well can quantitative 24-hour intraesophageal pH monitoring distinguish various degrees of reflux disease?

Twenty-four normal subjects and 64 symptomatic patients with various degrees of reflux disease (24 with reflux symptoms without esophagitis and 21 with mild and 19 with severe esophagitis) underwent quantitative 24-hr intraesophageal pH monitoring. Various reflux parameters during supine, interprandial, and postprandial periods were examined by binary logistic regression and by CART analysis to determine the sensitivity and specificity to separate the various groups of subjects and patients. The distinction was excellent between asymptomatic controls and patients with severe erosive esophagitis (sensitivity and specificity both 100% by logistic regression and 95% and 88%, respectively, by CART), but discrimination was poor when asymptomatic controls were compared to symptomatic patients without esophagitis (71% and 79% by logistic regression and 75% and 92% by CART), which is the most important indication for pH recording in clinical practice. A 3-hr postprandial pH recording was inadequate to distinguish the various groups. The acidity of the reflux episodes during the night appeared to be a crucial factor in the development of severe erosive esophagitis. The duration of esophageal acid exposure was another important factor in the development of reflux lesions.