No abstract available.
Esophageal pH Monitoring* ; Gastroesophageal Reflux*

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Impedance-pH monitoring allows detailed characterization of gastroesophageal reflux and esophageal activity associated with reflux. We assessed the characteristics of nocturnal reflux and esophageal activity preceding and following reflux. METHODS: Impedance-pH tracings from 11 healthy subjects and 76 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease off acid-suppressive therapy were analyzed. Characteristics of nocturnal supine reflux, time distribution and esophageal activity seen on impedance at 2 minute intervals preceding and following reflux were described. RESULTS: Patients had more nocturnal reflux events than healthy subjects (8 [4-12] vs 2 [1-5], P = 0.002), with lower proportion of weakly acidic reflux (57% [35-78] vs 80% [60-100], P = 0.044). Nocturnal reflux was mainly liquid (80%) and reached the proximal esophagus more often in patients (6% vs 0%, P = 0.047). Acid reflux predominated in the first 2 hours (66%) and weakly acidic reflux in the last 3 hours (70%) of the night. Most nocturnal reflux was preceded by aboral flows and cleared by short lasting volume clearance. In patients, prolonged chemical clearance was associated with less esophageal activity. CONCLUSIONS: Nocturnal weakly acidic reflux is as common as acid reflux in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease, and predominates later in the night. Impedance-pH can predict prolonged chemical clearance after nocturnal acid reflux.
Electric Impedance ; Esophageal pH Monitoring ; Esophagus ; Gastroesophageal Reflux ; Humans

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Twenty-four-hour ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring is considered the gold standard for diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease. The aim of this study was to quantify normal distal esophageal acid parameters in healthy Koreans. METHODS: Thirty healthy adults who were not on medication and were free from gastrointestinal symptoms were analyzed. Ambulatory esophageal acid (pH <4) exposure parameters were recorded at 5 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter. RESULTS: The 95th percentiles for reflux parameters assessed in the distal esophagus were as follows: percentage of total time with pH <4, 5.10%; percentage of upright time with pH <4, 7.88%; percentage of supine time with pH <4, 4.00%; number of reflux episodes, 62.7; number of reflux episodes with pH <4 for >5 minutes, 5.3; and the longest single acid-exposure episode, 21.3 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Physiological gastroesophageal reflux occurs frequently in healthy Koreans. These data provide a reference range that could be utilized in studies involving Korean subjects.
Adult ; Esophageal pH Monitoring ; Esophageal Sphincter, Lower ; Esophagus ; Gastroesophageal Reflux ; Humans ; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration ; Reference Values

BACKGROUND: Failed or hypotensive peristalsis, two of the diagnostic criteria for NEMD, correlates with impaired anterograde propulsion and retrograde escape of esophageal contents. The aim of this study was to evaluate esophageal acid clearance (EAC) in patients with ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). METHODS: Of 252 patients performing esophageal manometry and ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring, 51 patients with normal motility and acid reflux and 40 patients with IEM and acid reflux were included. RESULTS: The amplitude of peristaltic waves in the proximal and distal esophagus and lower esophageal sphincter pressure was lower significantly in patients with IEM than those with normal motility. Percentage of time of pH<4 in total, upright, and supine period and number of reflux episodes was not different in both. Supine EAC was significantly increased in patients with IEM when compared to those with normal motility. Upright EAC was not different in both. CONCLUSION: We concluded supine EAC is increased in patients with IEM. Since IEM is frequently associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), a more intensive therapy must be needed. We propose IEM can be as a specific entity of primary esophageal motility disorder, especially in patients with GERD.
Esophageal Motility Disorders ; Esophageal pH Monitoring ; Esophageal Sphincter, Lower ; Esophagus ; Gastroesophageal Reflux ; Humans ; Manometry ; Peristalsis ; United Nations

Newer developing techniques for esophageal functional testing such as wireless pH capsule monitoring and esophageal impedance testing are currently available. However, ambulatory 24 hr esophageal pH monitoring is still widely used and provides quantitative data on esophageal acid exposure and the ability to correlate symptoms with acid exposure events. To properly analyze the result of pH monitoring, it is recommended to interpret in the order presented: visual inspection, computer calculation and symptom correlation.
Electric Impedance ; Esophageal pH Monitoring ; Gastroesophageal Reflux ; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration ; Reference Values

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the significance of pH monitoring at two levels, hypopharynx and esophagus in gastroesophageal reflux. METHODS: 29 patients with pathological gastroesophageal reflux were classified into two groups: Group I had recurrent respiratory symptoms and Group II had not recurrent respiratory symptoms. The ambulatory pH monitoring was performed at the hypopharynx and the esophagus simultaneously with two channel catheter for 18~24 hr. The pathological reflux was defined when the percent of time that pH was below 4.0 exceeding the 95th percentile of normal value. Hypopharyngeal reflux was defined as the pharyngeal pH drops below 4. RESULTS: 39 patients were performed pH monitoring at the level of hypopharynx and esophagus for 24 hours. Among 7 patients with chronic respiratory symptom, 6 patients (85.7%) have pathological esophageal reflux. Among 32 patients without chronic respiratory symptom, 23 patients (71.8%) have pathological esophageal reflux. Thus 29 out of 39 patients (74%) have pathological esophageal reflux. In the Group I, all parameters except the longest episode showed significant differences between hypopharyngeal and esophageal pH monitoring. None of parameters showed significant differences between group I and II in the pharyngeal pH monitoring. CONCLUSION: Regardless of presence of respiratory symptoms, the pH monitoring at the pharyngeal level in patients with gastroesophageal reflux did not showed any differences compared with the esophageal pH monitoring. Therefore we may reconsider the usefulness of hypopharyngeal pH monitoring in patients with chronic respiratory symptoms.
Catheters ; Esophageal pH Monitoring ; Esophagus ; Gastroesophageal Reflux* ; Humans ; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration* ; Hypopharynx ; Reference Values

The exact incidence of esophagitis in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains poorly understood in Korea. To determine incidence of esophagitis in GERD, from August 1988 to July 1993, endoscopy, esophageal manometry with Bernstein test, and ambulatory 24 hour esophageal pH monitoring were carried out in a group of 349 patients with symptoms of heartburn or noncardiac chest pain. Based on these studies, 151(40%) patients had some degree of GERD and pstients were categorized as having: pathologic reflux, 98 patients; symptomatic reflux, 42 patients; and sensitive mucosal reflux, 11 patients. Among 151 patients with GERD, 27 patients(18%) had some degree of esophagitis. In conclusion, 40% of patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD have GERD. GERD is divided into subgroups; pathologic reflux, symptomatic reflux, and mucosal sensitive reflux. Less than 20% of GERD have esophagitis or esophageal mucosal injury and these low incidence of mucosal injury in Korean may be due to increased esophageal mucosal resistance.
Chest Pain ; Endoscopy ; Esophageal pH Monitoring ; Esophagitis* ; Esophagitis, Peptic ; Gastroesophageal Reflux* ; Heartburn ; Humans ; Incidence* ; Korea ; Manometry

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Since the development of ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring test to diagnose gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), several parameters have been introduced. The aim of this study was to assess whether using the symptom index (SI), symptom sensitivity index (SSI), and symptom association probability (SAP), in addition to the DeMeester score (DS), would be useful for interpreting the Bravo pH monitoring test. METHODS: A retrospective study, which included 68 patients with reflux symptoms refractory to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy who underwent a Bravo capsule pH test between October 2006 and May 2015, was carried out. Acid reflux parameters and symptom reflux association parameters were analyzed. RESULTS: The median percent time of total pH<4 and DS were 2.90% (interquartile range [IQR] 1.13–6.03%) and 11.10 (IQR 4.90–22.80), respectively. According to the analysis of the day-to-day variation in percent time of total pH<4 (r=0.724) and DS (r=0.537), there was a significant correlation between Day 1 and Day 2. The positive rate of Bravo test according to DS was 27 (39.7%). Although thirty patients experienced symptoms during the test, there were no significant differences of reflux parameters compared with other patients. In the symptom group, 7 patients (23.3%) were identified as having negative DS and an abnormal symptom-related index. There were no significant test-related complications. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the analysis of traditional acid parameters of the Bravo capsule pH test, diagnosis of GERD, including reflux hypersensitivity, can be improved by performing an analysis of the symptom-reflux association and of the day-to-day variation.
Diagnosis* ; Esophageal pH Monitoring ; Gastroesophageal Reflux* ; Humans ; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration* ; Hypersensitivity ; Proton Pumps ; Retrospective Studies

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine clinical significance of dual-probe esophageal pH monitoring and to compare four pH monitoring parameters between proximal and distal esophagus in pathological gastroesophageal reflux disease with recurrent respiratory symptoms. METHODS: Among the thirty-four patients who were performed 24 hr pH monitoring, seventeen patients with pathological distal reflux were classified into two groups: Group I (n:12) had recurrent respiratory symptoms and Group II (n:5) hadn't recurrent respiratory symptoms. The ambulatory dual-probe esophageal pH monitoring was performed for 18~24 hr. A pathologic GER was defined when reflux index (percent of the investigation time a pH<4) exceeded the 95th percentile of normal value. RESULTS: Among the sixteen patients with recurrent respiratory symptoms, twelve patients (75%) have pathological distal reflux. Whereas among the eighteen patients without recurrent respiratory symptom, five patients (28%) have pathological distal reflux. In the Group I, the significant differences between proximal and distal esophageal pH recordings persisted for all parameters, but didn't persist in group II except for longest episode. Comparing esophageal pH four parameters between group I and group II at the proximal esophageal site, all parameters didn't show statistically significant differences. CONCLUSION: Regardless of respiratory symptoms, patients with pathological distal reflux didn't show statistically significant differences in the all parameters at the proximal esophageal site. Therefore we may reconsider usefulness of dual probe pH meter in patients with recurrent respiratory symptoms.
Esophageal pH Monitoring* ; Esophagus ; Gastroesophageal Reflux* ; Humans ; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration ; Reference Values

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a disease predominantly seen in the West but there is a rising trend in Asia. Ambulatory 24-hour catheter-based pH monitoring has been the de facto gold standard test for GERD that correlates symptoms with acid reflux episodes. However, drawbacks such as patients' discomfort, and catheter displacement render the test as cumbersome and error-prone. The Bravo pH wireless system is designed to be user-friendly and has an added advantage of prolonged pH monitoring. The system is comparable to the catheter-based pH monitoring system in terms of diagnostic yield and symptom-reflux association. Indications include evaluation of patients with refractory GERD symptoms and prior to anti-reflux surgery. Bravo utilizes a wireless pH-sensing capsule with a complete prepackaged system, and a data processing software. The capsule may be positioned indirectly using endoscopic or manometric landmarks or under direct endoscopic guidance. Optimal threshold cut-off values are yet to be standardized but based on available studies, for the Asian population, it may be recommended for total % time pH < 4 of 5.8 over 48 hours. Cost is a limitation but capsule placement is relatively safe although technical failures may be seen in small percentage of cases.
Asia ; Asian Continental Ancestry Group ; Catheters ; Esophageal pH Monitoring ; Gastroesophageal Reflux* ; Humans ; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration*