非糜烂性胃食管反流病患者的反流事件研究

[目的]研究非糜烂性胃食管反流病(NERD)患者的胃食管反流事件,为进一步探讨NERD发病机制和有效治疗提供临床依据。[方法]68例NERD患者进行食管阻抗-pH监测,根据监测结果、症状指数,分为病理性酸反流(PAR)组、功能性烧心(FH)组、高敏性食管(HE)组,比较3组间反流事件的差异,研究反流与症状之间的相关性。[结果]PAR组总反流次数、酸反流次数、混合反流次数均高于FH组、HE组;HE组总反流次数、弱酸反流次数、混合反流次数、非酸反流次数均高于FH组;各组近段反流次数比较差异无统计学意义。68例中35例(51.5%)SI和(或)SAP呈阳性,其中50%的症状与弱酸反流相关,40%的症状与酸反流相关,少部分症状与非酸反流相关。[结论]PAR、FH、HE患者的食管阻抗-pH监测结果存在差异,可为临床鉴别诊断和治疗提供一定的依据。     

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、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。     

Barrett's食管、糜烂性食管炎及非糜烂性反流病发生机制的比较

目的:比较糜烂性食管炎(EE)、非糜烂性反流病(NERD)及Barrett's食管(BE)患者反流发生特点,探讨不同类型GERD的可能发病机制.方法:105例GERD患者根据胃镜及病理情况分为:EE组(35例)、BE组(34例)及NERD组(36例),对照组30例为健康志愿者.比较4组受检者食管测压与24 h食管pHT及胆汁反流同步监测结果的差异.结果:与对照组相比,GERD各组LES静息压均有不同程度减低,以EE组最明显(P<0.05).EE与BE组患者远段食管收缩波幅及有效蠕动百分比明显低于NERD组与对照组(均P<0.05).DeMeester评分等酸反流指标在EE组最高.BE组Abs>0.14时间百分比等长时间胆汁反流指标最高.NERD患者中仅52.8%存在病理性反流.各组中混合反流类型占各组病理性反流总人数的比例分别为68.57%(EE组)、84.38%(BE组)及63.15%(NERD组).结论:胃酸与胆汁的混合反流是GERD患者中最常见病理性反流类型,且对食管黏膜的损害较单纯酸或胆汁反流为重,胆汁反流在BE的发病机制中占有重要地位.     

非糜烂性胃食管反流病发病机制探讨

一、定义 有关非糜烂性胃食管反流病(non-erosive gastroe-sophageal refhlx disease NERD)的定义尚有争议,目前认为NERD有典型的胃食管反流病症状如反酸、烧心等,症状是由食管腔内酸导致的,但在胃镜下无阳性发现。这个定义提示反流症状的产生需要酸,但并不仅仅与酸暴露的严重程度和频度有关,还与食管对酸的感知有关。对于有反流症状并且胃镜下无阳性发现     

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。     

老年胃食管反流病的特征

胃食管反流病(GERD)是指过多胃、十二指肠内容物反流-入食管引起烧心、胸痛等症状,并可导致食管炎和咽、喉、气道等食管以外的组织损害.GERD分为内镜检查未发现病理损害但有明显反流症状并影响患者生活质量的非糜烂性胃食管反流病(NERD),在GERD中最多见;内镜检查有病理损害的糜烂性食管炎(EE)或称反流性食管炎(RE)则次之,EE可以合并食管狭窄、食管溃疡和上消化道出血;还有较少见的Barrett食管(BE),是指在食管粘膜修复过程中,鳞状上皮被柱状上皮取代,BE是食管腺癌的主要癌前病变,但很少变为食管腺癌.     

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.     

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。     

胃酸和十二指肠胃食管反流在非糜烂性反流病中的作用

背景:胃酸和十二指肠胃食管反流(DGER)在我国非糜烂性反流病(NERD)患者发病中的作用尚不清楚。目的:探讨胃酸和DGER在NERD发病中的作用。方法:选取在消化专科门诊连续就诊的具有烧心和(或)反酸等反流症状的所有患者为研究对象,所有入选者填写一份问卷后,依顺序行胃镜检查、24h食管pH监测和24h食管胆汁联合监测。结果:共有82例NERD患者入选,平均年龄为42.7岁±11.7岁。其中,24例(29.3%)24h食管pH监测阳性[NERDpH(+)],58例(70.7%)24h食管pH监测阴性[NERDpH(-)];43例(52.4%)为DGER阳性,39例(47.6%)为DGER阴性。联合监测结果为,82例患者中15例(18.3%)病理性酸反流与DGER并存,9例(11.0%)存在单一的病理性酸反流,28例(34.1%)存在单一的DGER,30例(36.6%)则无病理性酸反流,且DGER阴性。采用24h食管pH监测组对NERD的诊断率为29.3%,而联合24h食管胆汁监测,则NERD的诊断率升高到63.4%。24例NERDpH(+)者中,15例(62.5%)存在DGER;58例NERDpH(-)者中,28例(48.3%)存在DGER;NERDpH(+)组与NERDpH(-)组DGER发生率无显著性差异(χ2=1.377,P=0.241)。结论:NERD的病理性酸反流比例相对较低,联合24h食管pH和胆汁监测可明显提高NERD的诊断率,DGER在NERD中的作用地位不容忽视。     

Reflux profile of Chinese gastroesophageal reflux disease patients with combined multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring

Background and Aims:  To investigate the reflux profile of Chinese gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients with the aid of combined multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) monitoring technique.
Methods:  Consecutive patients presented with GERD symptoms were enrolled to erosive esophagitis (EE) group, non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) group and functional heartburn (FH) group after upper endoscopy, combined MII-pH monitoring and rabeprazole test. Another 20 healthy controls (HC) were recruited.
Results:  Sixty-four GERD patients (EE:20, NERD:22, FH:22, HC:20) were enrolled. There were more episodes of liquid reflux and proximal reflux in EE and NERD groups than that in FH and HC groups ( P  < 0.05). Patients in FH and HC groups had higher proportion of mixed reflux ( P  = 0.000). The percentage of acid reflux in EE and NERD was much higher, while there was a higher percentage of weakly acidic reflux in FH and HC ( P  = 0.000). No significant difference was found in MII-pH parameters between groups with and without response to rabeprazole test except recumbent percentage time of esophageal pH value below 4 and episodes of proximal reflux.
Conclusion:  Erosive esophagitis and NERD patients had more liquid and proximal reflux episodes than FH patients and healthy controls. Acid and liquid reflux was predominant in the former two groups, while weakly acidic and mixed reflux was predominant in the latter two groups.     

Stratification and symptom characteristics of non-erosive reflux disease based on acid and duodenogastroesophageal reflux

Background and Aim: The subgroups and symptom characteristics of non‐erosive reflux disease (NERD) based on acid and duodenogastroesophageal reflux may be different in Chinese patients to Western patients. This study aimed to explore the stratification and symptom characteristics of patients with NERD. Methods: Patients with typical heartburn and/or acid regurgitation symptoms were enrolled. Each patient filled out a questionnaire. An upper gastrointestingal endoscopy was performed for each patient followed by simultaneous ambulatory 24‐h esophageal pH and Bilitec (bilirubin) monitoring. A symptom index (SI) of ≥50% was considered to be positive. Results: Eighty‐two consecutive NERD patients were evaluated. Abnormal (NERD pH+) and normal (NERD pH–) 24‐h pH tests were found in 24 (29.3%) and 58 (70.7%) patients, respectively. Among 42 NERD pH– patients who reported heartburn symptoms during monitoring, SI was positive in 19 (45.2%) patients (NE‐SI+) and negative in 23 (54.8%) patients (NE‐SI–). Pathological duodenogastroesophageal reflux (DGER) was found in 43 (52.4%) patients. No significant differences were noted regarding the prevalence of other upper gastrointestinal symptoms, except for acid regurgitation in NERD pH+ and NERD pH– groups. Additionally, no significant differences were seen in the prevalence of other symptoms, except for chest pain, in groups with pathological and normal DGER. Conclusion: The proportion of NERD patients with pathological acid reflux was somewhat lower than that reported in Western countries. The role of DGER in NERD may be important. It is difficult to differentiate whether NERD patients have pathological acid or bile reflux according to symptoms.     

Heartburn and regurgitation have different impacts on life quality of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease

AIM: To investigate the impact of heartburn and regurgitation on the quality of life among patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).METHODS: Data from patients with GERD, who were diagnosed according to the Montreal definition, were collected between January 2009 and July 2010. The enrolled patients were assigned to a heartburn or a regurgitation group, and further assigned to an erosive esophagitis (EE) or a non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) subgroup, depending on the predominant symptoms and endoscopic findings, respectively. The general demographic data, the scores of the modified Chinese version of the GERDQ and the Short-form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire scores of these groups of patients were compared.RESULTS: About 108 patients were classified in the heartburn group and 124 in the regurgitation group. The basic characteristics of the two groups were similar, except for male predominance in the regurgitation group. Patients in the heartburn group had more sleep interruptions (22.3% daily vs 4.8% daily, P = 0.021), more eating or drinking problems (27.8% daily vs 9.7% daily, P = 0.008), more work interferences (11.2% daily vs none, P = 0.011), and lower SF-36 scores (57.68 vs 64.69, P = 0.042), than patients in the regurgitation group did. Individuals with NERD in the regurgitation group had more impaired daily activities than those with EE did.CONCLUSION: GERD patients with heartburn or regurgitation predominant had similar demographics, but those with heartburn predominant had more severely impaired daily activities and lower general health scores. The NERD cases had more severely impaired daily activity and lower scores than the EE ones did.     

联合食管多通道腔内阻抗-pH监测在诊断胃食管反流病中的价值

目的 了解联合食管多通道腔内阻抗pH(MII-pH)监测诊断胃食管反流病(GERD)的价值.方法 纳入具有烧心症状且食管黏膜无损伤患者44例,首先行MII-pH监测,然后行14 d的雷贝拉唑试验(试验结束时烧心症状完全消失定义为雷贝拉唑试验阳性).70名健康志愿者行MII-pH监测的结果作为正常值进行参照.结果 根据食管pH监测存在异常食管酸暴露或酸反流症状指数(SI)阳性者20例(45.4%).MII-pH监测提示弱酸反流SI阳性者2例,据此检查诊断烧心患者GERD的比例增至50%(22/44).雷贝拉唑试验阳性4例,据此则将烧心患者诊断为GERD的比例增至54.5%(24/44).结论 联合食管MII-pH监测可增加GERD检出率.     

Extraesophageal gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms are not more frequently associated with proximal esophageal reflux than typical GERD symptoms

Extraesophageal (EE) symptoms such as cough and throat clearing are common in patients referred for reflux testing, but are less commonly associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Patients with reflux associated EE symptoms often lack typical GERD symptoms of heartburn and regurgitation. Our aim was to compare the frequency of proximal esophageal reflux between esophageal (typical) symptoms and EE (atypical) symptoms. Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance‐pH (MII‐pH) tracings were blinded by an investigator so that symptom markers were relabeled with a number without disclosure of symptom type. We selected 40 patients with at least five reflux‐related symptom events for one of four symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation, cough, or throat clearing). A blinded investigator analyzed all 200 reflux episodes, reporting the proximal esophageal extent of the reflux for all symptoms. The percentage of symptom‐related reflux extending proximally to 17 cm above the LES was similar among all four symptom types. At least 50% of all symptoms were associated with proximal esophageal reflux to 17 cm, with regurgitation having the highest frequency at 60%. Our data indicate that EE symptoms are not more frequently associated with proximal esophageal reflux than typical esophageal symptoms.     

��������θʳ�ܷ������������Ƶ��о�

目的探讨非糜烂性胃食管反流病不同于反流性食管炎的发病机制。方法选择1996～2004年北京大学人民医院因反酸、胃灼热感等反流症状确诊为胃食管反流病患者57例,按照内镜下食管黏膜有无破损分为非糜烂性胃食管反流病组和反流性食管炎组,比较两组的一般情况、反流症状、是否合并H.pylori(Hp)感染,以及食管动力测定和食管胃24hpH监测结果。结果两组患者年龄、性别、烟酒嗜好等一般情况及合并Hp感染情况比较差异无显著性。非糜烂性胃食管反流病组不典型反流症状(胸骨后痛)的发生率明显高于反流性食管炎组。两组患者都存在病理性酸反流,但两组患者之间酸和(或)碱反流比较无差异。非糜烂性胃食管反流病患者的食管体部各段蠕动波峰值明显高于反流性食管炎患者。非糜烂性胃食管反流病患者卧位胃酸分泌高于反流性食管炎患者。结论非糜烂性胃食管反流病的不典型反流症状发生率更高。在两组发病机制异同上,反流的强弱并非主要因素,重要的是食管防御机制的差别。     

胃食管反流病的症状评分及内镜下表现的对照研究

目的探讨用胃食管反流病（GERD）的症状评分及内镜下表现的对照研究来预测和评估是否有GERD及其程度。方法对500例有胃食管反流症状的患者按症状频率、病期与程度为评分标准进行症状评分，内镜检查是否有反流性食管炎（RE）并分级。比较症状评分与内镜分级的相关性，分析症状评分对GERD的评估价值。200例无症状体检者作为阴性对照。结果GERD症状评分与RE内镜分级呈正相关（r=0．560，P〈0．01）。RE组患者的症状评分高于非糜烂性反流病（NERD）组，RE组症状评分≥8分者有81．70％，NERD组为59．35％（P〈0．05）；RE患者烧心的程度及发作频率、反酸的发作频率与病期重于NERD。GERD组与无反流症状组内镜检查结果比较亦有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。结论症状评分是诊断GERD的一个良好的筛选项目。     

不同亚型胃食管反流病食管黏膜下层炎症因子变化特点研究

目的分析3种亚型胃食管反流病患者与对照组食管黏膜的组织变化和局部IL-4、IL- 6表达,探讨Th2型炎症因子在胃食管反流病发生发展中的作用。 方法选取2016年12月至2017年12月新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院69例患者临床资料,根据Gerd Q评分和内镜结果将所有入选研究者分为Barrett食管（BE）、糜烂性食管炎（EE）、非糜烂性反流病（NERD）和对照4组,利用食管24 h pH监测法评价胃食管反流病（GERD）患者食管酸暴露及反流特点;通过食管组织HE染色进行组织病理学评分,使用免疫组化法和酶联免疫吸附剂测定法检测食管局部及血清中IL-4、IL-6表达情况。 结果食管24 h pH监测结果中,3亚组间DeMeester指数、弱酸反流次数、反流总事件数比较,差异均无统计学意义（P均>0.05）,NERD组酸反流次数较其余2组低,差异有统计学意义（P均<0.05）;4组样本食管黏膜组织病理学评分中发现,BE组、EE组与其余2组相比均明显升高,差异有统计学意义（P均<0.05）,BE组与EE组评分之间亦有显著差异（P<0.05）,NERD组与对照组间差异不明显;IL-4在4组食管标本中均有不同程度表达,但4组间IL-4阳性率的比较并无显著差异（P均>0.05）;IL-6在NERD组和对照组表达量较低甚至不表达,EE组IL-6阳性率明显高于对照组（P<0.05 ）,但与NERD组间无显著差异,BE组阳性率与对照组和NERD组之间均有明显差异（P均<0.05 ）。 结论GERD食管黏膜上皮组织学炎症等级随食管炎的恶化而升高,其中NERD的食管组织学已出现炎性化趋势,但尚不足以与正常食管区别;IL-4在不同亚型GERD食管黏膜组织中的表达差异不及IL-6显著。     

How to differentiate non‐erosive reflux disease from functional heartburn

Heartburn is a common symptom in gastroesophageal reflux disease. Endoscopic examination can differentiate between reflux esophagitis and non‐erosive reflux disease (NERD), but not between NERD and functional heartburn. With the development of new techniques, more NERD patients could be identified among those previously diagnosed with functional heartburn. Most patients with NERD, however, could be identified based on their clinical characteristics and response to proton pump inhibitors and/or integrated anti‐gastroesophageal reflux therapy.