Literature DB >> 16133955

Direct comparison of impedance, manometry, and pH Probe in detecting reflux before and after a meal.

Steven Shay1, Joel Richter.   

Abstract

Combining GERD tests allows strengths and weaknesses of each method to be identified in detecting and characterizing reflux (RE). Aim of this study was to compare two methods that measure bolus volume of a refluxant (impedance monitoring (Imp) and manometry (common cavity)) to pH monitoring which measures changes in acid concentration of a refluxant. Nineteen symptomatic GERD patients and 10 normal volunteers were studied before and after a meal. All had 2-hr simultaneous manometry, pH, and Imp (six sites: 3, 5, 7, 9, 15, 17 cm above LES). Reflux by pH was a fall in pH from above to below 4. There were 973 RE's in all subjects, but only 19% were detected simultaneously by all three methods. Imp detected more RE's (96%) than manometry (76%) or pH probe (28%). Imp was the only method to detect 15% (144/973) of RE's, while detection only by pH probe (2%) or manometry (2%) was rare. Most RE's detected by Imp were detected simultaneously by manometry (75%,720/937). Those not detected by manometry were usually in blind spots either in the vulnerable period 2-3 sec after a swallow, during a posture change, or during a Valsalva. Most RE's detected by Imp were not detected by the pH probe. Though most liquid RE's fasting were detected by pH, most liquid postprandial RE's were not, due primarily to weakly acidic rather than superimposed acid RE's. Bolus clearing time by Imp and manometry was nearly identical, while acid clearing was threefold longer than bolus clearing by Imp or manometry. In conclusion, impedance monitoring is better than manometry and pH monitoring in RE detection before and after a meal, and manometry in determining RE composition as liquid or gas. The pH probe measures RE acidity and acid clearing. Simultaneous impedance and pH combines the two methods strengths, and is a powerful tool for reflux detection and characterization.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16133955     DOI: 10.1007/s10620-005-2901-5

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


  11 in total

1.  Simultaneous intraesophageal impedance and pH measurement of acid and nonacid gastroesophageal reflux: effect of omeprazole.

Authors:  M F Vela; L Camacho-Lobato; R Srinivasan; R Tutuian; P O Katz; D O Castell
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 2.  Acid rereflux: a review, emphasizing detection by impedance, manometry, and scintigraphy, and the impact on acid clearing pathophysiology as well as interpreting the pH record.

Authors:  Steven S Shay; Lawrence F Johnson; Joel E Richter
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  Simultaneous esophageal pH monitoring and scintigraphy during the postprandial period in patients with severe reflux esophagitis.

Authors:  S S Shay; D Eggli; L F Johnson
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Patterns of gas and liquid reflux during transient lower oesophageal sphincter relaxation: a study using intraluminal electrical impedance.

Authors:  D Sifrim; J Silny; R H Holloway; J J Janssens
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 23.059

5.  Twenty-four-hour pH monitoring of the distal esophagus. A quantitative measure of gastroesophageal reflux.

Authors:  L F Johnson; T R Demeester
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1974-10       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  A test of gastroesophageal sphincter competence. The common cavity test.

Authors:  D G Butterfield; J E Struthers; J P Showalter
Journal:  Am J Dig Dis       Date:  1972-05

7.  Effect of esophageal emptying and saliva on clearance of acid from the esophagus.

Authors:  J F Helm; W J Dodds; L R Pelc; D W Palmer; W J Hogan; B C Teeter
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1984-02-02       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Importance of additional reflux events during esophageal acid clearing.

Authors:  S S Shay; J E Richter
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 3.199

9.  Multichannel intraluminal impedance accurately detects fasting, recumbent reflux events and their clearing.

Authors:  Steven S Shay; Steven Bomeli; Joel Richter
Journal:  Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 4.052

Review 10.  Gastro-oesophageal reflux monitoring: review and consensus report on detection and definitions of acid, non-acid, and gas reflux.

Authors:  D Sifrim; D Castell; J Dent; P J Kahrilas
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 23.059

View more
  11 in total

1.  Moderating the Enthusiasm of Sleeve Gastrectomy: Up to Fifty Percent of Reflux Symptoms After Ten Years in a Consecutive Series of One Hundred Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomies.

Authors:  Yannick Mandeville; Ruth Van Looveren; Peter-Jan Vancoillie; Xander Verbeke; Katrien Vandendriessche; Patrick Vuylsteke; Paul Pattyn; Bart Smet
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 4.129

2.  Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH monitoring assists the diagnosis of sliding hiatal hernia in children with gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Authors:  Jia-Feng Wu; Wei-Chung Hsu; Ping-Huei Tseng; Hsiu-Po Wang; Hong-Yuan Hsu; Mei-Hwei Chang; Yen-Hsuan Ni
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-02-09       Impact factor: 7.527

3.  Acid gastroesophageal reflux reports in infants: a comparison of esophageal pH monitoring and multichannel intraluminal impedance measurements.

Authors:  Frederick W Woodley; Hayat Mousa
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2006-10-20       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Mechanisms of Aerodigestive Symptoms in Infants with Varying Acid Reflux Index Determined by Esophageal Manometry.

Authors:  Carissa R Collins; Kathryn A Hasenstab; Saira Nawaz; Sudarshan R Jadcherla
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 4.406

5.  Is there a role for dynamic swallowing MRI in the assessment of gastroesophageal reflux disease and oesophageal motility disorders?

Authors:  Christiane Kulinna-Cosentini; W Schima; J Lenglinger; M Riegler; C Kölblinger; A Ba-Ssalamah; G Bischof; M Weber; P Kleinhansl; E P Cosentini
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-09-06       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  High-resolution manometry and impedance-pH/manometry: valuable tools in clinical and investigational esophagology.

Authors:  Peter J Kahrilas; Daniel Sifrim
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2008-07-17       Impact factor: 22.682

7.  Recurrent symptoms after fundoplication with a negative pH study--recurrent reflux or functional heartburn?

Authors:  Sarah K Thompson; Wang Cai; Glyn G Jamieson; Alison Y Zhang; Jennifer C Myers; Zoe E Parr; David I Watson; Jenny Persson; Gerald Holtmann; Peter G Devitt
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2008-08-20       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Discussing the influence of electrode location in the result of esophageal prolonged pH monitoring.

Authors:  Valter Nilton Felix; Ioshiaki Yogi; Daniel Senday; Fernando Tadeu Vannucci Coimbra; David Pares; Vinicius Garcia; Carlos Eduardo Garcia
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 3.067

9.  Screening and Identifying Erosive Esophagitis in Children with Non-cardiac Chest Pain.

Authors:  Hye Won Park; You Jin Choi; Su Jin Jeong
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 2.153

10.  Correlation between the different pH-metry scores in gastroesophageal reflux disease in children.

Authors:  Vasile Valeriu Lupu; Ancuţa Ignat; Gabriela Paduraru; Anamaria Ciubara; Mihaela Moscalu; Cristina Oana Marginean; Marin Burlea
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 1.889

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.