Literature DB >> 11837739

Symptom predictability of reflux-induced respiratory disease.

Tetsuya Tomonaga1, Ziad T Awad, Charles J Filipi, Ronald A Hinder, Mohamed Selima, Francisco Tercero, Robert E Marsh, Yutaka Shiino, Rebecca Welch.   

Abstract

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) often is associated with pulmonary problems such as asthma as well as recurrent and nocturnal cough. Dual-probe 24-hr pH monitoring may assist in establishing a correlation between these symptoms and GERD-related symptoms. To determine if any specific symptom was predictive of aspiration, this study was undertaken. Ambulatory dual-probe esophageal pH monitoring was performed on 133 patients who had upper airway and additional symptoms for GERD. All patients had esophageal manometric studies of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES), the upper esophageal sphincter (UES), and the esophageal body before dual-probe pH monitoring was performed. Using two assembled glass probes, the distal and the proximal sensors were placed 5 cm above the proximal border of the LES and 1 cm below the lower border of the UES, respectively. Patients were classified into three groups: proximal and distal probe positive (group I), proximal probe negative and distal probe positive (group II) and proximal and distal probe negative (Group III) Upper airway and additional symptoms plus manometry results of the LES, body and UES study were compared between groups. In addition, positive distal probe patients (groups I and II) were compared for distal fraction of time at pH < 4 and number of reflux episodes at each probe position. A positive distal probe result was defined as an abnormal DeMeester score (> 14.8). A proximal probe test result was considered positive if percent time pH < 4.0 was > 1.1 for total, 1.7 for upright, and 0.6 for supine positions. The ages of the subjects ranged from 18 to 83 years (mean age: 50.5 +/- 1.5 years). Groups I, II, and III included 16 patients, 38 patients, and 79 patients, respectively. Group I had a significantly higher incidence of nocturnal cough than the other two groups. (P < 0.05). The manometric data revealed between groups that LES pressure (LESP) for groups I and II was significantly lower than LESP for group III (P = 0.003). Cricoid pressure, pharyngeal pressure, length, and relaxation of UES were not different between groups. Fraction of reflux time for group I was significantly higher than for group II in the supine position and at mealtime (P < 0.05). The number of reflux episodes for group I was significantly higher at meal time (P < 0.01). In conclusion, nocturnal cough is strongly predictive of proximal esophageal reflux. Proximal reflux episodes are significantly more frequent in the supine position and correlate well with the high predictive value of nocturnal cough.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11837739     DOI: 10.1023/a:1013290715062

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis Sci        ISSN: 0163-2116            Impact factor:   3.199


  20 in total

1.  The aspiration of stomach contents into the lungs during obstetric anesthesia.

Authors:  C L MENDELSON
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1946-08       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Normal esophageal body function: a study using ambulatory esophageal manometry.

Authors:  R M Bremner; M Costantini; T R DeMeester; C G Bremner; S F Hoeft; P F Crookes; J H Peters; J A Hagen
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  A new intraluminal antigastroesophageal reflux procedure in baboons.

Authors:  R J Mason; C J Filipi; T R DeMeester; J H Peters; R J Lund; A W Flake; R A Hinder; T C Smyrk; C G Bremner; S Thompson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  Gastroesophageal reflux and pulmonary aspiration: incidence, functional abnormality, and results of surgical therapy.

Authors:  C A Pellegrini; T R DeMeester; L F Johnson; D B Skinner
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1979-07       Impact factor: 3.982

5.  Value of physiologic assessment of foregut symptoms in a surgical practice.

Authors:  M Costantini; P F Crookes; R M Bremner; S F Hoeft; A Ehsan; J H Peters; C G Bremner; T R DeMeester
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 3.982

6.  Omeprazole as a diagnostic tool in gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Authors:  B E Schenk; E J Kuipers; E C Klinkenberg-Knol; H P Festen; E H Jansen; H A Tuynman; M Schrijver; L A Dieleman; S G Meuwissen
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 10.864

7.  Technique, indications, and clinical use of 24 hour esophageal pH monitoring.

Authors:  T R DeMeester; C I Wang; J A Wernly; C A Pellegrini; A G Little; P Klementschitsch; G Bermudez; L F Johnson; D B Skinner
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  1980-05       Impact factor: 5.209

8.  Proximal esophageal pH-metry in patients with 'reflux laryngitis'.

Authors:  P Jacob; P J Kahrilas; G Herzon
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 9.  The otolaryngologic manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD): a clinical investigation of 225 patients using ambulatory 24-hour pH monitoring and an experimental investigation of the role of acid and pepsin in the development of laryngeal injury.

Authors:  J A Koufman
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  Frequency and site of gastroesophageal reflux in patients with chest symptoms. Studies using proximal and distal pH monitoring.

Authors:  O L Gastal; J A Castell; D O Castell
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 9.410

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Cough. 3: chronic cough and gastro-oesophageal reflux.

Authors:  G A Fontana; M Pistolesi
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 9.139

2.  Relevance of volume and proximal extent of reflux in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

Authors:  D Sifrim
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  Effects of asymptomatic proximal and distal gastroesophageal reflux on asthma severity.

Authors:  Emily DiMango; Janet T Holbrook; Erin Simpson; Joan Reibman; Joel Richter; Surinder Narula; Nancy Prusakowski; John G Mastronarde; Robert A Wise
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2009-08-06       Impact factor: 21.405

4.  Proximal sensor data from routine dual-sensor esophageal pH monitoring is often inaccurate.

Authors:  Matt McCollough; Abdul Jabbar; Robert Cacchione; Jeff W Allen; Steve Harrell; John M Wo
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Insight Into the Relationship Between Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Asthma.

Authors:  Fehmi Ates; Michael F Vaezi
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2014-11

6.  The effect of famotidine on gastroesophageal and duodeno-gastro-esophageal refluxes in critically ill patients.

Authors:  Ying Xin; Ning Dai; Lan Zhao; Jian-Guo Wang; Jian-Ming Si
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Epidemiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a general population-based study in Xi'an of Northwest China.

Authors:  Jin-Hai Wang; Jin-Yan Luo; Lei Dong; Jun Gong; Ming Tong
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-06-01       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Esophageal motility, vagal function and gastroesophageal reflux in a cohort of adult asthmatics.

Authors:  D Lakmali Amarasiri; Arunasalam Pathmeswaran; Anuradha S Dassanayake; Arjuna P de Silva; Channa D Ranasinha; H Janaka de Silva
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-10-12       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 9.  Role of gastroesophageal reflux disease in lung transplantation.

Authors:  Kelly E Hathorn; Walter W Chan; Wai-Kit Lo
Journal:  World J Transplant       Date:  2017-04-24
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.