Literature DB >> 20459441

Inter-observer agreement for multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH testing.

K Ravi1, K R DeVault, J A Murray, E P Bouras, D L Francis.   

Abstract

Twenty-four-hour ambulatory multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII)-pH detects both acid and nonacid reflux (NAR). A computer-based program (Autoscan™, Sandhill Scientific, Highlands Ranch, CO, USA) automates the detection of reflux episodes, increasing the ease of study interpretation. Inter-observer agreement between multiple reviewers and with Autoscan™ for the evaluation of significant NAR with MII-pH has not been studied in the adult population. Twenty MII-pH studies on patients taking a proton pump inhibitor twice daily were randomly selected. Autoscan™ analyzed all studies using the same pre-programmed parameters. Four reviewers interpreted the MII-pH studies, adding or deleting reflux episodes detected by Autoscan™. Positive studies for NAR and total reflux episodes were based on published criteria. Cohen's kappa statistic (κ) evaluated inter-observer agreement between reviewers and Autoscan™ analysis. The average κ for pathologic NAR between reviewers was 0.57 (0.47-0.70), and between reviewers and Autoscan™ was 0.56 (0.4-0.8). When using the total reflux episode number as a marker for pathologic reflux (acid and NAR), the κ score was 0.72 (0.61-0.89) between reviewers, and 0.74 (0.53-0.9) when evaluating total reflux episodes. Two reviewers agreed more often with each other and with Autoscan™ on the number of NAR episodes, while the other two reviewers agreed with each other, but did not agree with either Autoscan™ or the first two reviewers. Inter-observer agreement between reviewers and Autoscan™ for detecting pathologic NAR is moderate, with reviewers either excluding more of the Autoscan™-defined events or excluding fewer events and therefore agreeing with Autoscan™.
© 2010 Copyright the Authors. Journal compilation © 2010, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20459441     DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2050.2010.01060.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Esophagus        ISSN: 1120-8694            Impact factor:   3.429


  8 in total

1.  More art than science: impedance analysis prone to interpretation error.

Authors:  Thomas Ciecierega; Benjamin L Gordon; Anna Aronova; Carl V Crawford; Rasa Zarnegar
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 2.  Esophageal Impedance Monitoring: Clinical Pearls and Pitfalls.

Authors:  Karthik Ravi; David A Katzka
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 3.  Impedance-pH Monitoring for Diagnosis of Reflux Disease: New Perspectives.

Authors:  Marzio Frazzoni; Nicola de Bortoli; Leonardo Frazzoni; Salvatore Tolone; Vincenzo Savarino; Edoardo Savarino
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Pediatric Gastroesophageal Reflux Clinical Practice Guidelines: Joint Recommendations of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition and the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition.

Authors:  Rachel Rosen; Yvan Vandenplas; Maartje Singendonk; Michael Cabana; Carlo DiLorenzo; Frederic Gottrand; Sandeep Gupta; Miranda Langendam; Annamaria Staiano; Nikhil Thapar; Neelesh Tipnis; Merit Tabbers
Journal:  J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 2.839

5.  Impedance pH Monitoring: Intra-observer and Inter-observer Agreement and Usefulness of a Rapid Analysis of Symptom Reflux Association.

Authors:  Andrea Tenca; Pietro Campagnola; Ivana Bravi; Luigi Benini; Daniel Sifrim; Roberto Penagini
Journal:  J Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 4.924

6.  Discounting the duration of bolus exposure in impedance testing underestimates acid reflux.

Authors:  Namasivayam Vikneswaran; Joseph A Murray
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 3.067

7.  Superimposed Non-acid Reflux Event: An Example of When It May Be Important to Revisit the Impedance Analysis Guidelines.

Authors:  Frederick W Woodley
Journal:  J Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2022-01-30       Impact factor: 4.924

8.  Role of the Mean Nocturnal Baseline Impedance in Identifying Evidence Against Pathologic Reflux in Patients With Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Symptoms as Classified by the Lyon Consensus.

Authors:  Yanhong Wu; Zihao Guo; Chuan Zhang; Yutao Zhan
Journal:  J Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2022-01-30       Impact factor: 4.924

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.