Background/Aims: Laryngeal symptoms are largely treated with empiric proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy if no apparent pathology shown on ear, nose, and throat evaluation and reflux-related etiologies are suspected. However, treatment response remains unsatisfactory. This study aimed to investigate the clinical and physiological characteristics of patients with PPI-refractory laryngeal symptoms. Methods: Patients with persistent laryngeal symptoms despite PPI treatment for ≥ 8 weeks were recruited. A multidisciplinary evaluationcomprising validated questionnaires for laryngeal symptoms (reflux symptom index [RSI]), gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms, psychological comorbidity (5-item brief symptom rating scale [BSRS-5]) and sleep disturbance (Pittsburgh sleep quality index [PSQI]), esophagogastroduodenoscopy, ambulatory impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed.Healthy asymptomatic individuals were also recruited for comparison of psychological morbidity and sleep disturbances. Results: Ninety-seven adult patients and 48 healthy volunteers were analyzed. The patients had markedly higher prevalence of psychological distress (52.6% vs 2.1%, P < 0.001) and sleep disturbance (82.5% vs 37.5%, P < 0.001) than the healthy volunteers. There were significant correlations between RSI and BSRS-5 scores, and between RSI and PSQI scores (r = 0.26, P = 0.010, and r = 0.29, P = 0.004, respectively). Fifty-eight patients had concurrent gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms. They had more prominent sleep disturbances (89.7% vs 71.8%, P < 0.001) than those with laryngeal symptoms alone but similar reflux profiles and esophageal motility. Conclusions PPI-refractory laryngeal symptoms are mostly associated with psychological comorbidities and sleep disturbances. Recognition of these psychosocial comorbidities may help optimize management in these patients.

Background/Aims: Anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) is a promising endoscopic intervention for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of ARMA on esophageal motility remains unclear. Methods: Twenty patients with PPI-dependent GERD receiving ARMA were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive self-report symptom questionnaires, endoscopy, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMA. Results: All ARMA procedures were performed successfully. Symptom scores, including GerdQ (11.16 ± 2.67 to 9.11 ± 2.64, P = 0.026) and reflux symptom index (11.63 ± 5.62 to 6.11 ± 3.86, P = 0.001), improved significantly, while 13 patients (65%) reported discontinuation of PPI. Total acid exposure time (5.84 ± 4.63% to 2.83 ± 3.41%, P = 0.024) and number of reflux episodes (73.05 ± 19.34 to 37.55 ± 22.71, P < 0.001) decreased significantly after ARMA. Improved esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier function, including increased lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (13.89 ± 10.78 mmHg to 21.68 ± 11.5 mmHg, P = 0.034), 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (5.75 ± 6.42 mmHg to 9.99 ± 5.89 mmHg, P = 0.020), and EGJ-contractile integral(16.42 ± 16.93 mmHg · cm to 31.95 ± 21.25 mmHg · cm, P = 0.016), were observed. Esophageal body contractility also increased significantly (distal contractile integral, 966.85 ± 845.84 mmHg · s · cm to 1198.8 ± 811.74 mmHg · s · cm, P = 0.023). Patients with symptom improvement had better pre-AMRA esophageal body contractility. Conclusions ARMA effectively improves symptoms and reflux burden, EGJ barrier function, and esophageal body contractility in patients with PPIdependent GERD during short-term evaluation. Longer follow-up to clarify the sustainability of ARMA is needed.

Background/Aims: Anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) is a promising endoscopic intervention for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of ARMA on esophageal motility remains unclear. Methods: Twenty patients with PPI-dependent GERD receiving ARMA were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive self-report symptom questionnaires, endoscopy, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMA. Results: All ARMA procedures were performed successfully. Symptom scores, including GerdQ (11.16 ± 2.67 to 9.11 ± 2.64, P = 0.026) and reflux symptom index (11.63 ± 5.62 to 6.11 ± 3.86, P = 0.001), improved significantly, while 13 patients (65%) reported discontinuation of PPI. Total acid exposure time (5.84 ± 4.63% to 2.83 ± 3.41%, P = 0.024) and number of reflux episodes (73.05 ± 19.34 to 37.55 ± 22.71, P < 0.001) decreased significantly after ARMA. Improved esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier function, including increased lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (13.89 ± 10.78 mmHg to 21.68 ± 11.5 mmHg, P = 0.034), 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (5.75 ± 6.42 mmHg to 9.99 ± 5.89 mmHg, P = 0.020), and EGJ-contractile integral(16.42 ± 16.93 mmHg · cm to 31.95 ± 21.25 mmHg · cm, P = 0.016), were observed. Esophageal body contractility also increased significantly (distal contractile integral, 966.85 ± 845.84 mmHg · s · cm to 1198.8 ± 811.74 mmHg · s · cm, P = 0.023). Patients with symptom improvement had better pre-AMRA esophageal body contractility. Conclusions ARMA effectively improves symptoms and reflux burden, EGJ barrier function, and esophageal body contractility in patients with PPIdependent GERD during short-term evaluation. Longer follow-up to clarify the sustainability of ARMA is needed.

Background/Aims: Anti-reflux mucosal ablation (ARMA) is a promising endoscopic intervention for proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-dependent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the effect of ARMA on esophageal motility remains unclear. Methods: Twenty patients with PPI-dependent GERD receiving ARMA were prospectively enrolled. Comprehensive self-report symptom questionnaires, endoscopy, 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, and high-resolution impedance manometry were performed and analyzed before and 3 months after ARMA. Results: All ARMA procedures were performed successfully. Symptom scores, including GerdQ (11.16 ± 2.67 to 9.11 ± 2.64, P = 0.026) and reflux symptom index (11.63 ± 5.62 to 6.11 ± 3.86, P = 0.001), improved significantly, while 13 patients (65%) reported discontinuation of PPI. Total acid exposure time (5.84 ± 4.63% to 2.83 ± 3.41%, P = 0.024) and number of reflux episodes (73.05 ± 19.34 to 37.55 ± 22.71, P < 0.001) decreased significantly after ARMA. Improved esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier function, including increased lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure (13.89 ± 10.78 mmHg to 21.68 ± 11.5 mmHg, P = 0.034), 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (5.75 ± 6.42 mmHg to 9.99 ± 5.89 mmHg, P = 0.020), and EGJ-contractile integral(16.42 ± 16.93 mmHg · cm to 31.95 ± 21.25 mmHg · cm, P = 0.016), were observed. Esophageal body contractility also increased significantly (distal contractile integral, 966.85 ± 845.84 mmHg · s · cm to 1198.8 ± 811.74 mmHg · s · cm, P = 0.023). Patients with symptom improvement had better pre-AMRA esophageal body contractility. Conclusions ARMA effectively improves symptoms and reflux burden, EGJ barrier function, and esophageal body contractility in patients with PPIdependent GERD during short-term evaluation. Longer follow-up to clarify the sustainability of ARMA is needed.

During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, practices of gastrointestinal procedures within the digestive tract require special precautions due to the risk of contraction of severe acute respiratoy syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Many procedures in the gastrointestinal motility laboratory may be considered moderate to high-risk for viral transmission. Healthcare staff working in gastrointestinal motility laboratories are frequently exposed to splashes, air droplets, mucus, or saliva during the procedures. Moreover, some are aerosol-generating and thus have a high risk of viral transmission. There are multiple guidelines on the practices of gastrointestinal endoscopy during this pandemic. However, such guidelines are still lacking and urgently needed for the practice of gastrointestinal motility laboratories. Hence, the Asian Neurogastroenterology and Motility Association had organized a group of gastrointestinal motility experts and infectious disease specialists to produce a position statement paper based-on current available evidence and consensus opinion with aims to provide a clear guidance on the practices of gastrointestinal motility laboratories during the COVID-19 pandemic. This guideline covers a wide range of topics on gastrointestinal motility activities from scheduling a motility test, the precautions at different steps of the procedure to disinfection for the safety and well-being of the patients and the healthcare workers. These practices may vary in different countries depending on the stages of the pandemic, local or institutional policy, and the availability of healthcare resources. This guideline is useful when the transmission rate of SARS-CoV-2 is high. It may change rapidly depending on the situation of the epidemic and when new evidence becomes available.