Literature DB >> 30402679

Basal lower esophageal sphincter pressure in gastroesophageal reflux disease: An ignored metric in high-resolution esophageal manometry.

Mayank Jain1, M Srinivas2, Piyush Bawane2, Jayanthi Venkataraman2.   

Abstract

Manometry and 24-h pH interpretation have seldom been studied. Our aim was to study these parameters as gold standard in reflux disease and to identify predictors of pathological acid reflux. Retrospective case record review of all patients with reflux disease evaluated using endoscopy, manometry, and 24-h pH testing from 2010 to 2016. Patients were categorized using Johnson-DeMeester score into two groups-group I (score > 14.7, normal study) and group II (< 14.7, normal study). These groups were compared for the above-mentioned parameters. Appropriate statistical tests were applied. P-value < 0.05 was considered significant. The study group includes 94 patients (median age 44 years, 63.8% males). Sixty (63.8%) and 34 patients belonged to groups I and II, respectively, 76.6% patients had normal endoscopy while the remaining had mild esophagitis. Peristalsis was normal in 66%, followed by ineffective esophageal motility (19.1%) and fragmented peristalsis (14.9%). Demography, symptoms, endoscopy findings, and peristalsis characteristics were similar between the two groups. Group II patients had significantly lower basal lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure (11.9 vs. 16.6; p < 0.02), lower integrated relaxation pressure (5.7 vs. 7.4; p < 0.01), and larger separation between LES and crural diaphragm (1.7 vs. 1.4 cm; p < 0.003). Basal LES pressure < 10 mmHg had the highest likelihood ratio (2.2) to predict an abnormal pH study. Basal LES pressure, integrated relaxation pressure, and hiatus size correlated with pathological acid reflux. Hypotensive basal lower esophageal sphincter pressure was the best predictor of an abnormal pH study but with negative linear correlation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Esophagus; Gastroesophageal reflux disease; High-resolution esophageal manometry

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30402679     DOI: 10.1007/s12664-018-0898-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0254-8860


  18 in total

1.  Ineffective esophageal motility does not equate to GERD.

Authors:  Peter J Kahrilas; John E Pandolfino
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 10.864

2.  Ineffective esophageal motility in gastroesophageal erosive reflux disease and in nonerosive reflux disease: are they different?

Authors:  Eponina Maria de Oliveira Lemme; Luiz J Abrahão-Junior; Yolanda Manhães; Rosana Shechter; Beatriz Biccas Carvalho; Angela Alvariz
Journal:  J Clin Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.062

Review 3.  Esophageal motility abnormalities in gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Authors:  Irene Martinucci; Nicola de Bortoli; Maria Giacchino; Giorgia Bodini; Elisa Marabotto; Santino Marchi; Vincenzo Savarino; Edoardo Savarino
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2014-05-06

4.  Role of the lower esophageal sphincter on esophageal acid exposure - a review of over 2000 patients.

Authors:  Kazuto Tsuboi; Masato Hoshino; Abhishek Sundaram; Fumiaki Yano; Sumeet K Mittal
Journal:  Trop Gastroenterol       Date:  2012 Apr-Jun

5.  Epidemiology and symptom profile of gastroesophageal reflux in the Indian population: report of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology Task Force.

Authors:  Shobna J Bhatia; D Nageshwar Reddy; Uday C Ghoshal; V Jayanthi; Philip Abraham; Gourdas Choudhuri; S L Broor; Vineet Ahuja; Philip Augustine; V Balakrishnan; D K Bhasin; Naresh Bhat; Ashok Chacko; Sunil Dadhich; G K Dhali; Pankaj S Dhawan; Manisha Dwivedi; Mahesh K Goenka; Abraham Koshy; Ajay Kumar; Sri Prakash Misra; Shrikant Mukewar; E PedaVeer Raju; K T Shenoy; S P Singh; Ajit Sood; R Srinivasan
Journal:  Indian J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-07-27

6.  The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus.

Authors:  Nimish Vakil; Sander V van Zanten; Peter Kahrilas; John Dent; Roger Jones
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 10.864

7.  The Chicago Classification of esophageal motility disorders, v3.0.

Authors:  P J Kahrilas; A J Bredenoord; M Fox; C P Gyawali; S Roman; A J P M Smout; J E Pandolfino
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 3.598

8.  Different patterns of oesophageal acid exposure distinguish complicated reflux disease from either erosive reflux oesophagitis or non-erosive reflux disease.

Authors:  M Frazzoni; E De Micheli; V Savarino
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 8.171

9.  Non-erosive and erosive gastroesophageal reflux diseases: No difference with regard to reflux pattern and motility abnormalities.

Authors:  Jan Martínek; Marek Benes; Tomás Hucl; Pavel Drastich; Petr Stirand; Julius Spicák
Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.423

10.  Motility characteristics in the transition zone in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GORD) patients.

Authors:  Yu-Wen Li; Chen-Xi Xie; Kai-Ming Wu; Min-Hu Chen; Ying-Lian Xiao
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 3.067

View more
  3 in total

1.  Indian consensus on gastroesophageal reflux disease in adults: A position statement of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology.

Authors:  Shobna J Bhatia; Govind K Makharia; Philip Abraham; Naresh Bhat; Ajay Kumar; D Nageshwar Reddy; Uday C Ghoshal; Vineet Ahuja; G Venkat Rao; Krishnadas Devadas; Amit K Dutta; Abhinav Jain; Saurabh Kedia; Rohit Dama; Rakesh Kalapala; Jose Filipe Alvares; Sunil Dadhich; Vinod Kumar Dixit; Mahesh Kumar Goenka; B D Goswami; Sanjeev K Issar; Venkatakrishnan Leelakrishnan; Mohandas K Mallath; Philip Mathew; Praveen Mathew; Subhashchandra Nandwani; Cannanore Ganesh Pai; Lorance Peter; A V Siva Prasad; Devinder Singh; Jaswinder Singh Sodhi; Randhir Sud; Jayanthi Venkataraman; Vandana Midha; Amol Bapaye; Usha Dutta; Ajay K Jain; Rakesh Kochhar; Amarender S Puri; Shivram Prasad Singh; Lalit Shimpi; Ajit Sood; Rajkumar T Wadhwa
Journal:  Indian J Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-12-05

2.  Association between endoscopic pressure study integrated system (EPSIS) and high-resolution manometry.

Authors:  Yusuke Fujiyoshi; Haruhiro Inoue; Yuto Shimamura; Mary Raina Angeli Fujiyoshi; Enrique Rodriguez de Santiago; Yohei Nishikawa; Akiko Toshimori; Mayo Tanabe; Kazuya Sumi; Masashi Ono; Yugo Iwaya; Haruo Ikeda; Manabu Onimaru
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2022-06-10

3.  Mosapride Improves Lower Esophageal Sphincter and Esophageal Body Function in Patients With Minor Disorders of Esophageal Peristalsis.

Authors:  Sung Eun Kim; Moo In Park; Seun Ja Park; Won Moon; Jae Hyun Kim; Kyoungwon Jung; Hye Jung Kwon; Gyung Mi Kim; Hee Kyoung Joo
Journal:  J Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2020-04-30       Impact factor: 4.924

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.