Literature DB >> 16394871

Wireless esophageal pH monitoring: new technique means new questions.

Yasser M Bhat1, Kevin M McGrath, Klaus Bielefeldt.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The introduction of wireless pH monitoring has been touted as a significant advance in the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux and associated disorders. We prospectively enrolled patients in a research registry to assess the feasibility and safety in clinical use.
METHODS: All patients undergoing endoscopy with wireless pH studies (Medtronic Bravo pH system) for a 12-month period starting in April 2004 were prospectively enrolled. Probes were placed 6 cm above the endoscopically localized squamocolumnar junction. Successful completion was defined as at least 24 hours of pH recording. Safety data were obtained by review of patient diaries. All results are given as median with 25% to 75% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: A total of 217 studies with endoscopy and capsule placement were performed (65% women; median age, 51 years; range, 42-58 years) and included in the study; 1 patient refused participation in the registry and 5 studies were performed without preceding endoscopy and were excluded from this analysis. The pH study was successfully completed in 95.1%; early capsule detachment (1 hours; CI, 0-5 hours) or receiver malfunction occurred in 7 and 2 cases, respectively. There were no immediate adverse effects; 18 patients (9%) complained about significant chest discomfort, associated with odyno- or dysphagia, requiring removal of the capsule in 3 patients (1.5%). Of the completed studies, 56% were abnormal with 32.2% being abnormal on both days, whereas 16.1% and 6.9% only showed increased acid exposure on day 1 or 2, respectively. The higher likelihood of abnormal results for day 1 was associated with a significantly increased esophageal acid exposure during the first 6 hours after capsule insertion on day 1 (total time with pH < 4: 6.9%; CI, 3.2%-16.5%) compared with the corresponding time on day 2 (5.0%; CI, 0.9%-10.8%; P < 0.01), without differences esophageal acidification during the remaining time or differences in recorded activity.
CONCLUSIONS: Using a large registry of patients with suspected gastroesophageal reflux symptoms, our data show that wireless pH studies can be safely completed in more than 90% of patients. Whereas variability during prolonged recordings should be expected, the significantly higher likelihood of abnormal findings during the initial period of pH monitoring suggests a systematic influence of endoscopy and associated premedication, typically performed prior to capsule insertion, which needs to be considered when pH data are analyzed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16394871     DOI: 10.1097/01.mcg.0000196188.57543.75

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0192-0790            Impact factor:   3.062


  19 in total

1.  New method for long-term monitoring of intragastric pH.

Authors:  Shouko Ono; Mototsugu Kato; Yuji Ono; Masahiro Asaka
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 2.  Esophageal testing: What we have so far.

Authors:  Nicola de Bortoli; Irene Martinucci; Lorenzo Bertani; Salvatore Russo; Riccardo Franchi; Manuele Furnari; Salvatore Tolone; Giorgia Bodini; Valeria Bolognesi; Massimo Bellini; Vincenzo Savarino; Santino Marchi; Edoardo Vincenzo Savarino
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Pathophysiol       Date:  2016-02-15

3.  Emerging Technologies for Esophageal Manometry and pH Monitoring.

Authors:  Donald O Castell
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2008-06

4.  Technical problems produced by the Bravo pH test in nonerosive reflux disease patients.

Authors:  Andrés de Hoyos; Edgar Alain Esparza
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-07-07       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Does deep sedation impact the results of 48 hours catheterless pH testing?

Authors:  Vineet Korrapati; Jay P Babich; Anil Balani; James H Grendell; Kavita R Kongara
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-03-14       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Prolapse gastropathy syndrome may be a predictor of pathologic acid reflux.

Authors:  Jin-Soo Kim; Hyung-Keun Kim; Young-Seok Cho; Hiun-Suk Chae; Byung-Wook Kim; Jin-Il Kim; Sok-Won Han; Kyu-Yong Choi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-09-28       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Bravo capsule system optimizes intragastric pH monitoring over prolonged time: effects of ghrelin on gastric acid and hormone secretion in the rat.

Authors:  Tobias Rudholm; Per-Mikael Hellstrom; Elvar Theodorsson; Colin-Allan Campbell; Peter-Geoffrey McLean; Erik Naslund
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-10-28       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Endoscopic pH monitoring for patients with suspected or refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Authors:  B G Turner; J R Saltzman; L Hua; R Maurer; Natan Feldman; D L Carr-Locke; R Burakoff; J J Liu
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.522

9.  Esophagogastroduodenoscopy with conscious sedation does not interfere with catheter-based 24-h pH monitoring.

Authors:  Yung-Kuan Tsou; Jau-Min Lien; Chin-Kuo Chen; Cheng-Hui Lin; Hsing-Yu Chen; Mu-Shien Lee
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-03-21       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Effect of anesthesia on gastroesophageal reflux in children: a study using BRAVO wireless pH study measurements.

Authors:  L Rodriguez; A Morley-Fletcher; A Souza; L Rosengaus; S Nurko
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 3.598

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.