Literature DB >> 8420269

Normal and abnormal proximal esophageal acid exposure: results of ambulatory dual-probe pH monitoring.

R Dobhan1, D O Castell.   

Abstract

Ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring was performed in 26 normal volunteers, 20 patients with normal distal acid exposure, and 23 patients with abnormal distal acid exposure in an attempt to define normal values for proximal esophageal acid exposure using a standardized technique. We used a dual pH sensor with antimony electrodes spaced at 15 cm. The distal electrode was placed manometrically at 5 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter. Proximal electrode thus was located below the upper esophageal sphincter in the esophageal inlet. The patients underwent 24-h ambulatory pH monitoring and were told to pursue normal daily activities. The percentage of acid exposure time and number of episodes per 24 h at both pH < 4.0 and 5.0 were measured for the total, upright, and supine periods. Since the pH values were not normally distributed, the medians and 95th percentiles were used to define normal values. Minimal acid exposure occurred in the proximal esophagus (< 1% total; 0% supine) in volunteers and patients with normal distal reflux. Patients with abnormal distal acid exposure had significantly greater proximal reflux.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8420269

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  45 in total

1.  Gastroesophageal reflux disease after lung transplantation: pathophysiology and implications for treatment.

Authors:  Christopher S Davis; Vidya Shankaran; Elizabeth J Kovacs; James Gagermeier; Daniel Dilling; Charles G Alex; Robert B Love; James Sinacore; P Marco Fisichella
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2010-08-21       Impact factor: 3.982

2.  Pathophysiology of Gastroesophageal Reflux in Patients with Chronic Pulmonary Obstructive Disease Is Linked to an Increased Transdiaphragmatic Pressure Gradient and not to a Defective Esophagogastric Barrier.

Authors:  Leonardo M Del Grande; Fernando A M Herbella; Amilcar M Bigatao; Henrique Abrao; Jose R Jardim; Marco G Patti
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Scintigraphy in laryngopharyngeal and gastroesophageal reflux disease: a definitive diagnostic test?

Authors:  Gregory L Falk; John Beattie; Alvin Ing; S E Falk; Michael Magee; Leticia Burton; Hans Van der Wall
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-03-28       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Utility of ambulatory pH monitoring and videofluoroscopy for the evaluation of patients with globus pharyngeus.

Authors:  Chien-Lin Chen; Chen-Chi Tsai; Andy Shau-Bin Chou; Jin-Hwei Chiou
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2006-10-06       Impact factor: 3.438

5.  The prevalence and extent of gastroesophageal reflux disease correlates to the type of lung transplantation.

Authors:  Piero Marco Fisichella; Christopher S Davis; Vidya Shankaran; James Gagermeier; Daniel Dilling; Charles G Alex; Elizabeth J Kovacs; Raymond J Joehl; Robert B Love
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 1.719

6.  Laparoscopic antireflux surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease after lung transplantation.

Authors:  P Marco Fisichella; Christopher S Davis; James Gagermeier; Daniel Dilling; Charles G Alex; Jennifer A Dorfmeister; Elizabeth J Kovacs; Robert B Love; Richard L Gamelli
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2011-06-22       Impact factor: 2.192

7.  Reflux-associated oxygen desaturations: usefulness in diagnosing reflux-related respiratory symptoms.

Authors:  Candice L Wilshire; Renato Salvador; Boris Sepesi; Stefan Niebisch; Thomas J Watson; Virginia R Litle; Christian G Peyre; Carolyn E Jones; Jeffrey H Peters
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-11-10       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Gastroesophageal flap valve is associated with gastroesophageal and gastropharyngeal reflux.

Authors:  Gwang Ha Kim; Dae Hwan Kang; Geun Am Song; Tae Oh Kim; Jeong Heo; Mong Cho; Jin Seon Kim; Byung Joo Lee; Soo Geun Wang
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 7.527

9.  Proximal sensor data from routine dual-sensor esophageal pH monitoring is often inaccurate.

Authors:  Matt McCollough; Abdul Jabbar; Robert Cacchione; Jeff W Allen; Steve Harrell; John M Wo
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.199

10.  Importance of esophageal manometry and pH monitoring for the evaluation of otorhinolaryngologic (ENT) manifestations of GERD. A multicenter study.

Authors:  Fernando A M Herbella; Ciro Andolfi; Yalini Vigneswaran; Marco G Patti; Bruno R Pinna
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 3.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.