Literature DB >> 7117784

Esophageal potential difference measurements in esophageal disease.

R C Orlando, D W Powell, J C Bryson, H B Kinard, C N Carney, J D Jones, E M Bozymski.   

Abstract

To determine if esophageal transmural electrical potential difference measurements are of use for evaluating esophageal disease, we recorded potential difference in 129 patients with one or more of the following: heartburn, dysphagia, and chest pain. All potential difference studies were performed at the time of esophageal manometry using a Ringer-perfused catheter technique which yields accurate and reproducible results in healthy subjects. In 103 of the 129 patients, esophageal potential difference measurements could be correlated with findings at manometry, endoscopy, and biopsy. The remaining 26 patients had primary esophageal motor disease and were not biopsied. The results of this investigation showed: (a) that 94% of patients with gross endoscopic lesions have an abnormal esophageal potential difference, (b) that an abnormal esophageal potential difference (found in only 1 of 24 patients with normal mucosa) is highly specific for the presence of esophageal mucosal disease, (c) that the type of potential difference abnormality may suggest the nature of the mucosal abnormality, for example high potential difference with Barrett's esophagus and low potential difference with esophagitis or invasive carcinoma, and (d) that while an abnormal esophageal potential difference is highly sensitive for detecting gross esophagitis (38 of 40 patients), it is less sensitive for diagnosing microscopic esophagitis (8 of 16 patients). Based on these findings we conclude that the measurement of esophageal potential difference at the time of manometry can provide additional valuable information about the state of the esophageal mucosa.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1982        PMID: 7117784

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterology        ISSN: 0016-5085            Impact factor:   22.682


  9 in total

1.  Effect of acid perfusion on passive electrophysiological properties of rabbit esophagus in vivo.

Authors:  Ingemar Jacobson; Nadereh Poorkhalkali; Ann-Cathrine Jönsson-Rylander; Roy C Orlando
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Role of E-cadherin in the pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Authors:  Biljana Jovov; Jianwen Que; Nelia A Tobey; Zorka Djukic; Brigid L M Hogan; Roy C Orlando
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-03-29       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Stimulation of pyloric motility by intraduodenal dextrose in normal subjects.

Authors:  R Heddle; D Fone; J Dent; M Horowitz
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 4.  Management of refractory and complicated reflux esophagitis.

Authors:  B I Hirschowitz
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  1996 May-Jun

5.  Structural and functional evolution of jejunal allograft rejection in rats and the ameliorating effects of cyclosporine therapy.

Authors:  J L Madara; R L Kirkman
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  1985-02       Impact factor: 14.808

6.  Continuous recording of pyloric sphincter pressure in dogs. Relationship to migratory motor complex.

Authors:  C C Defilippi; E Gomez
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 3.199

7.  Relationship between antropyloric and intestinal motility and duodenogastric reflux in fasting dogs.

Authors:  C Defilippi; N Mamani; E Gomez
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 3.199

8.  [Barrett syndrome: clinical and practical consequences].

Authors:  G Lepsien
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Chir       Date:  1987

9.  Endoscopic measurement of oesophageal transmucosal potential difference in reflux oesophagitis.

Authors:  B J Collins; R J McFarland; J M Sloan; A H Love
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 23.059

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.