Marco G Patti1, Fernando Augusto Mardiros Herbella2. 1. Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 2. Departmento de Cirurgia, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo - UNIFESP, Sao Paulo, Brasil.
Abstract
METHODS: Gastroesophageal reflux disease is usually associated with esophageal or typical symptoms such as heartburn, regurgitation, and dysphagia. However, there is today mounting evidence that gastroesophageal reflux can also cause extra-esophageal or atypical problems such as cough, aspiration pneumonia, and pulmonary fibrosis. AIM: The aim of this study was to discuss the pathophysiology of extra-esophageal symptoms, the diagnostic evaluation, complications, and the outcome of video laparoscopic antireflux surgery. This study analyzes the recent literature review. RESULTS: It is important to separate patients with respiratory symptoms into two different groups: group I: patients having typical symptoms such as heartburn and respiratory symptoms, and group II: patients having respiratory symptoms only, in whom reflux is otherwise silent. CONCLUSIONS: Gastroesophageal reflux can cause respiratory symptoms in addition to esophageal typical symptoms. High index of suspicion should be present, and a complete workup was done to diagnose whether pathologic reflux is present and whether it extends to the proximal esophagus or pharynx. Antireflux surgery in these patients should be considered, as it is safe and effective.
METHODS: Gastroesophageal reflux disease is usually associated with esophageal or typical symptoms such as heartburn, regurgitation, and dysphagia. However, there is today mounting evidence that gastroesophageal reflux can also cause extra-esophageal or atypical problems such as cough, aspiration pneumonia, and pulmonary fibrosis. AIM: The aim of this study was to discuss the pathophysiology of extra-esophageal symptoms, the diagnostic evaluation, complications, and the outcome of video laparoscopic antireflux surgery. This study analyzes the recent literature review. RESULTS: It is important to separate patients with respiratory symptoms into two different groups: group I: patients having typical symptoms such as heartburn and respiratory symptoms, and group II: patients having respiratory symptoms only, in whom reflux is otherwise silent. CONCLUSIONS: Gastroesophageal reflux can cause respiratory symptoms in addition to esophageal typical symptoms. High index of suspicion should be present, and a complete workup was done to diagnose whether pathologic reflux is present and whether it extends to the proximal esophagus or pharynx. Antireflux surgery in these patients should be considered, as it is safe and effective.
Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is usually associated with esophageal or
typical symptoms such as heartburn, regurgitation, and dysphagia. However, there is
today mounting evidence that gastroesophageal reflux can also cause extra-esophageal
or atypical problems, particularly respiratory complications such as cough, and
aspiration pneumonia. Recent evidence also suggests that GERD might be
implicated-either alone or in combination with other factors-in the genesis of
idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF).The key for successful treatment is a clear understanding of the pathophysiology of
reflux, a thorough workup, and the execution of an effective fundoplication.
METHODS
Pathophysiology
There are two accepted theories to explain how reflux can cause respiratory
symptoms: the reflex theory and the reflux theory.According to the reflex theory, esophageal mucosa stimulation
can lead to triggering of the vagus nerves. The vagal stimulation in turn would
cause bronchoconstriction and patients would experience cough or asthma.According to the reflux theory, acid can reach the upper
esophagus, and eventually microaspiration can cause respiratory symptoms and
lung damage.In 1993, we first described High Gastroesophageal Reflux (H-GER)
and characterized its clinical and functional aspects
. After esophageal manometry, patients underwent ambulatory pH
monitoring, using a special catheter with two antimony sensors located 5 and 20
cm above the upper border of the manometrically determined lower esophageal
sphincter (LES).Clinically, laryngitis, pulmonary aspiration, and hoarseness
were present in patients with H-GER. Interestingly, heartburn was not present in
many of these patients.Pathophysiologically, these patients had often a pan-esophageal
motor disorder involving the LES, the peristalsis, and the upper esophageal
sphincter (UES). The LES was weaker and shorter, the amplitude of peristalsis
was lower in both the distal and proximal esophagus with a higher incidence of
simultaneous waves, and the UES resting pressure was lower.Sweet et al. studied that 109 patients awaited for lung transplantation by
esophageal manometry and pH monitoring
and found that patients with pathologic reflux had a high prevalence of
a hypotensive LES (55%) and impaired esophageal peristalsis (47%). Distal reflux
was present in 68% of patients, and proximal reflux was present in 37% of
patients, suggesting the possibility of microaspiration.It is known that reflux determines mucosal damage, from esophagitis to Barrett’s
esophagus, therefore creating a vicious cycle as it can promote ineffective
esophageal motility (IEM) and worsen esophageal acid exposure. Diener et al.
reviewed the findings of esophageal manometry among 1006 consecutive patients
with pathologic reflux as shown in ambulatory pH monitoring
. Peristalsis was normal in 56% of patients, IEM (amplitude of
peristalsis <30 mmHg or >30% simultaneous waves) was present in 21%, and a
nonspecific esophageal motility disorder was present in 25% of patients.
Compared with the two other groups, patients with IEM had more severe reflux,
slower acid clearance, worse mucosal injury, and more frequent respiratory
symptoms.Other factors play a role in the pathogenesis of GERD. Schlottmann et al. showed
that the presence and size of a hiatal hernia determine weaker peristalsis and
worse acid reflux and that patients with a hiatal hernia > 5 cm more often
experience respiratory symptoms
. Obesity also plays an important role as it determines an increase in
the transdiaphragmatic pressure gradient, which may overcome the resistance
posed by the LES
. Herbella et al. showed that in case of patients with morbid obesity for
every 5-point increase in the body mass index, there was a 3-point increase in
the reflux score
.Finally, it is very important from a therapeutic point of view to remember that
both acid and bile are present in the gastric refluxate but the medications
available today can only decrease or block the acid component so that they only
affect the pH of the refluxate (from acidic to weakly acidic or alkaline), but
not the total number of reflux episodes
.
Diagnostic workup
A complete workup is necessary for the diagnosis of GERD
,
. Symptoms and endoscopy (in the absence of Barrett’s esophagus), in
fact, have been shown to have low sensitivity and specificity. For instance,
Patti et al. studied that by esophageal manometry and pH monitoring (esophageal
function tests [EFTs]), 822 patients thought to have GERD based on the
symptomatic evaluation and endoscopic assessment (patients with biopsy-proven
Barrett’s esophagus were excluded)
. Notably, 30% of patients (247 patients) were found to have a normal
esophageal acid exposure (GERD negative). This study emphasized that (1)
symptoms were unreliable in the diagnosis of GERD; (2) low-grade esophagitis
(grades I and II) was diagnostically nonspecific; and (3) only pH monitoring
identified patients with GERD. Similarly, Bello et al. performed EFT in 136
patients referred for antireflux surgery
. After excluding two patients who were discovered to have achalasia,
pathologic reflux was found in only 78 (58%) patients.In 2013, an Esophageal Diagnostic Advisory Panel composed by both
gastroenterologists and surgeons clearly defined the ideal preoperative workup
before antireflux surgery
. It was recognized that a barium swallow is not useful
for the diagnosis of GERD but rather to define the anatomy (i.e., presence,
size, and type of hiatal hernia and stricture). An upper
endoscopy is important to rule out other pathologies such as
gastritis or eosinophilic esophagitis and to determine the presence and degree
of mucosal injury. However, 50-60% of patients with pathologic reflux shown by
pH monitoring do not have esophagitis. Only the presence of biopsy-proven
Barrett’s esophagus is diagnostic of GERD.Esophageal manometry is not diagnostic, but it is important to
rule out a primary motility disorder, such as achalasia, to determine the
position of the LES for the pH monitoring and to characterize peristalsis,
allowing the choice of the proper antireflux operation
,
.Ambulatory pH monitoring (off medications) is of key
importance. This test defines whether pathologic reflux is present and whether
the symptoms experienced by the patients are due to reflux. The temporal
correlation between symptoms and episodes of reflux can be established by either
the symptom index or the symptom-associated probability. This test is
particularly important in patients with respiratory symptoms as they often have
silent reflux and do not experience heartburn. Esophageal pH
monitoring can be combined with impedance to detect reflux
independently from the pH (acidic, weakly acidic, alkaline)
.The definitive proof that aspiration of gastric contents is occurring is provided
by the determination of pepsin in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid
. As pepsin (pepsinogen is released by the gastric chief cells and
converted to pepsin by the hydrochloric acid released by the parietal cells) is
normally absent in the esophagus and trachea, it is a very sensitive marker for
aspiration.
RESULTS
It is important to separate patients with respiratory symptoms into two different
groups: group I, patients having typical symptoms such as heartburn
and respiratory symptoms, and group II, patients having respiratory
symptoms only, in whom reflux is otherwise silent.
DISCUSSION
Antireflux surgery
Group I. Laparoscopic fundoplication controls heartburn and
regurgitation in about 90% of patients, but the effect on the respiratory
symptoms is less predictable. The uncertainty stems from the difficulty to
determine preoperatively whether cough or wheezing is caused by reflux when
reflux is shown by pH monitoring. Many studies have shown that EFTs are of key
importance.Patti et al. studied the effect of laparoscopic fundoplication on GERD-induced
respiratory symptoms
. Each patient was studied preoperatively by esophageal manometry and a
dual-probe pH monitoring and the correlation between cough and episodes of
reflux in the lower and upper esophagus was established (cough was considered
due to reflux when it occurred during or within 3 min from an episode of
reflux). Overall, heartburn resolved in 91% of patients, regurgitation in 90% of
patients, cough in 74% of patients, and wheezing in 64% of patients.
Interestingly, cough resolved in 57% of patients when no temporal correlation
was found, in 77% of patients when a correlation was found between cough and
reflux in the distal esophagus, and in 90% of patients when cough correlated
with reflux in the distal and proximal esophagus. These results clearly
illustrated the value of pH monitoring in establishing a correlation between
cough and reflux and in predicting the outcome of therapy.Hoppo et al. studied the effect of antireflux surgery in patients with chronic
cough and abnormal proximal exposure as measured by hypopharyngeal multichannel
intraluminal impedance in 49 patients with chronic cough
. Abnormal proximal acid exposure was discovered in 36 (73%) of 49
patients. At a median follow-up of 4.6 months, 13 (81%) of 16 patients who
underwent antireflux surgery had resolution of cough, and 3 (19%) patients had a
significant improvement. The authors concluded that hypopharyngeal multichannel
intraluminal impedance improves the sensitivity of laryngopharyngeal reflux
diagnosis and helps predict which patients will respond to antireflux surgery.
These results have been confirmed by other studies and clearly show that once a
cause-and-effect relationship between reflux and respiratory symptoms has been
established, antireflux surgery should be the primary form of treatment.Group II. In the study of patients awaiting lung
transplantation, Sweet et al. found that symptoms such as heartburn,
regurgitation, or dysphagia did not distinguish patients with and without reflux
and that about one-third of patients eventually found to have reflux were
asymptomatic
. As there is evidence that GERD plays a role, either alone or in
combination with other factors, in the genesis of IPF, every patient with this
diagnosis, regardless of symptoms, should be screened with EFTs and treatment
should be started if the patients are found to have pathologic reflux
,
,
. As discussed, the gastric refluxate is a mixture of acid and bile and
the current acid-reducing medications just change the pH of the refluxate but do
not block reflux as the number of episodes is unchanged. Based on these
considerations, and until medications that can restore the competence of the
gastroesophageal junction are available, antireflux surgery should be the
primary form of treatment for patients with IPF who can have general
anesthesia.A study from the University of California San Francisco and the Mayo Clinic by
Lee et al. showed that GERD therapy was associated with longer survival in
patients with IPF
. Specifically, they showed that acid-reducing medications were
associated with a lower radiologic fibrosis score and longer survival as
compared with patients not taking medications and that the longest survival was
seen in patients after a Nissen fundoplication. These findings clearly supported
the hypothesis that GERD and microaspiration may play a role in the pathogenesis
of IPF.Based on these data, a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial was started in
six academic centers in the United States in June 2014
. Over the following 2 years, 58 patients with IPF were randomized to
either a no-surgery group (29 patients) or a surgery group (29 patients). The
primary end point was the evaluation of the forced vital capacity (FVC) at 48
months, which was done in 20 patients in no-surgery group and 27 patients in
surgery group, respectively. The results showed that there was no effect on the
FVC by treatment, but acute exacerbations, respiratory-related hospitalizations,
and death were less common in the surgery group.Overall, antireflux surgery was safe and well tolerated. Even though the primary
end point of change in FVC failed to reach statistical significance, it is noted
that this study was severely underpowered as 400 patients, rather than 58, were
required to achieve 90% power.
CONCLUSIONS
Gastroesophageal reflux can cause respiratory symptoms in addition to more typical
symptoms. As symptoms such as heartburn and regurgitation have low sensitivity and
specificity for the diagnosis of GERD and reflux may be silent in many patients, a
high index of suspicion should be present, and a complete workup was done to
diagnose whether pathologic reflux is present and whether it extends to the proximal
esophagus or pharynx. Therefore, antireflux surgery should be considered in these
patients as it is safe and effective.
Authors: Ganesh Raghu; Carlos A Pellegrini; Eric Yow; Kevin R Flaherty; Keith Meyer; Imre Noth; Mary Beth Scholand; John Cello; Lawrence A Ho; Sudhakar Pipavath; Joyce S Lee; Jules Lin; James Maloney; Fernando J Martinez; Ellen Morrow; Marco G Patti; Stan Rogers; Paul J Wolters; Robert Yates; Kevin J Anstrom; Harold R Collard Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2018-08-09 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Brian Bello; Marco Zoccali; Roberto Gullo; Marco E Allaix; Fernando A Herbella; Arunas Gasparaitis; Marco G Patti Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2012-10-23 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Blair A Jobe; Joel E Richter; Toshitaka Hoppo; Jeffrey H Peters; Reginald Bell; William C Dengler; Kenneth DeVault; Ronnie Fass; C Prakash Gyawali; Peter J Kahrilas; Brian E Lacy; John E Pandolfino; Marco G Patti; Lee L Swanstrom; Ashwin A Kurian; Marcelo F Vela; Michael Vaezi; Tom R DeMeester Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2013-08-21 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Fernando A M Herbella; Matthew P Sweet; Pietro Tedesco; Ian Nipomnick; Marco G Patti Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 3.267