Chronic constipation is one of the most common digestive diseases encountered in clinical practice. Constipation manifests as a variety of symptoms, such as infrequent bowel movements, hard stools, feeling of incomplete evacuation, straining at defecation, a sense of anorectal blockage during defecation, and use of digital maneuvers to assist defecation. During the diagnosis of chronic constipation, the Bristol Stool Form Scale, colonoscopy, and a digital rectal examination are useful for objective symptom evaluation and differential diagnosis of secondary constipation. Physiological tests for functional constipation have complementary roles and are recommended for patients who have failed to respond to treatment with available laxatives and those who are strongly suspected of having a defecatory disorder. As new evidence on the diagnosis and management of functional constipation emerged, the need to revise the previous guideline was suggested. Therefore, these evidence-based guidelines have proposed recommendations developed using a systematic review and meta-analysis of the treatment options available for functional constipation. The benefits and cautions of new pharmacological agents (such as lubiprostone and linaclotide) and conventional laxatives have been described through a meta-analysis. The guidelines consist of 34 recommendations, including 3 concerning the definition and epidemiology of functional constipation, 9 regarding diagnoses, and 22 regarding managements. Clinicians (including primary physicians, general health professionals, medical students, residents, and other healthcare professionals) and patients can refer to these guidelines to make informed decisions regarding the management of functional constipation.

Background/Aims: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common chronic gastrointestinal disorder that typically requires long-term maintenance therapy. However, little is known about patient preferences and satisfaction and real-world prescription patterns regarding maintenance therapy for GERD. Methods: This observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study involved patients from 18 referral hospitals in Korea. We surveyed patients who had been prescribed proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for GERD for at least 90 days with a minimum follow-up duration of 1 year. The main outcome was overall patient satisfaction with different maintenance therapy modalities. Results: A total of 197 patients were enrolled. Overall patient satisfaction, patient preferences, and GERD health-related quality of life scores did not significantly differ among the maintenance therapy modality groups. However, the on-demand therapy group experienced a significantly longer disease duration than the continuous therapy group. The continuous therapy group demonstrated a lower level of awareness of potential adverse effects associated with PPIs than the on-demand therapy group but received higher doses of PPIs than the on-demand therapy group. The prescribed doses of PPIs also varied based on the phenotype of GERD, with higher doses prescribed for non-erosive reflux disease than erosive reflux disease. Conclusion Although overall patient satisfaction did not significantly differ among the different PPI maintenance therapy modality groups, awareness of potential adverse effects was significantly different between the on-demand and continuous therapy groups.

Background/Aims: It remains unclear which maintenance treatment modality is most appropriate for mild gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).We aimed to compare on-demand treatment with continuous treatment using a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) in the maintenance treatment for patients with non-erosive GERD or mild erosive esophagitis. Methods: Patients whose GERD symptoms improved after 4 weeks of standard dose PPI treatment were prospectively enrolled at 25 hospitals.Subsequently, the enrolled patients were randomly assigned to either an on-demand or a continuous maintenance treatment group, and followed in an 8-week interval for up to 24 weeks. Results: A total of 304 patients were randomized to maintenance treatment (continuous, n = 151 vs on-demand, n = 153). The primary outcome, the overall proportion of unwillingness to continue the assigned maintenance treatment modality, failed to confirm the noninferiority of on-demand treatment (45.9%) compared to continuous treatment (36.1%). Compared with the on-demand group, the GERD symptom and health-related quality of life scores significantly more improved and the overall satisfaction score was significantly higher in the continuous treatment group, particularly at week 8 and week 16 of maintenance treatment. Work impairment scores were not different in the 2 groups, but the prescription cost was less in the on-demand group. Serum gastrin levels significantly elevated in the continuous treatment group, but not in the on-demand group. Conclusions Continuous treatment seems to be more appropriate for the initial maintenance treatment of non-erosive GERD or mild erosive esophagitis than on-demand treatment. Stepping down to on-demand treatment needs to be considered after a sufficient period of continuous treatment.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition in which gastric contents regurgitate into the esophagus or beyond, resulting in either troublesome symptoms or complications. GERD is heterogeneous in terms of varied manifestations, test findings, and treatment responsiveness. GERD diagnosis can be established with symptomatology, pathology, or physiology. Recently the Lyon consensus defined the “proven GERD” with concrete evidence for reflux, including advanced grade erosive esophagitis (Los Angeles classification grades C and or D esophagitis), long-segment Barrett’s mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal esophageal acid exposure time > 6% on 24-hour ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring. However, some Asian researchers have different opinions on whether the same standards should be applied to the Asian population. The prevalence of GERD is increasing in Asia. The present evidence-based guidelines were developed using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. In GERD with typical symptoms, a proton pump inhibitor test can be recommended as a sensitive, cost-effective, and practical test for GERD diagnosis. Based on a meta-analysis of 19 estimated acid-exposure time values in Asians, the reference range upper limit for esophageal acid exposure time was 3.2% (95% confidence interval 2.7-3.9%) in the Asian countries. Esophageal manometry and novel impedance measurements, including mucosal impedance and a post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave, are promising in discrimination of GERD among different reflux phenotypes, thus increasing its diagnostic yield. We also propose a long-term strategy of evidence-based GERD treatment with proton pump inhibitors and other drugs.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition in which gastric contents regurgitate into the esophagus or beyond, resulting in either troublesome symptoms or complications. GERD is heterogeneous in terms of varied manifestations, test findings, and treatment responsiveness. GERD diagnosis can be established with symptomatology, pathology, or physiology. Recently the Lyon consensus defined the “proven GERD” with concrete evidence for reflux, including advanced grade erosive esophagitis (Los Angeles classification grades C and or D esophagitis), long-segment Barrett’s mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal esophageal acid exposure time > 6% on 24-hour ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring. However, some Asian researchers have different opinions on whether the same standards should be applied to the Asian population. The prevalence of GERD is increasing in Asia. The present evidence-based guidelines were developed using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. In GERD with typical symptoms, a proton pump inhibitor test can be recommended as a sensitive, cost-effective, and practical test for GERD diagnosis.Based on a meta-analysis of 19 estimated acid-exposure time values in Asians, the reference range upper limit for esophageal acid exposure time was 3.2% (95% confidence interval, 2.7-3.9%) in the Asian countries. Esophageal manometry and novel impedance measurements, including mucosal impedance and a post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave, are promising in discrimination of GERD among different reflux phenotypes, thus increasing its diagnostic yield. We also propose a long-term strategy of evidence-based GERD treatment with proton pump inhibitors and other drugs.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition in which gastric contents regurgitate into the esophagus or beyond, resulting in either troublesome symptoms or complications. GERD is heterogeneous in terms of varied manifestations, test findings, and treatment responsiveness. GERD diagnosis can be established with symptomatology, pathology, or physiology. Recently the Lyon consensus defined the “proven GERD” with concrete evidence for reflux, including advanced grade erosive esophagitis (Los Angeles classification grades C and or D esophagitis), long-segment Barrett’s mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal esophageal acid exposure time > 6% on 24-hour ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring. However, some Asian researchers have different opinions on whether the same standards should be applied to the Asian population. The prevalence of GERD is increasing in Asia. The present evidence-based guidelines were developed using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. In GERD with typical symptoms, a proton pump inhibitor test can be recommended as a sensitive, cost-effective, and practical test for GERD diagnosis.Based on a meta-analysis of 19 estimated acid-exposure time values in Asians, the reference range upper limit for esophageal acid exposure time was 3.2% (95% confidence interval, 2.7-3.9%) in the Asian countries. Esophageal manometry and novel impedance measurements, including mucosal impedance and a post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave, are promising in discrimination of GERD among different reflux phenotypes, thus increasing its diagnostic yield. We also propose a long-term strategy of evidence-based GERD treatment with proton pump inhibitors and other drugs.

Background/Aims: In serological tests for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori), an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (GENEDIA®) and a solid-phase, two-step chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (IMMULITE®), which are easy to perform, inexpensive, and widely available, are commonly used. However, local validation of the test performance of IMMULITE® is required. This study aimed to examine the performance of IMMULITE® in comparison with that of GENEDIA® in a Korean health checkup population. Materials and Methods: The sera of 300 subjects among those who underwent health checkup were analyzed using IMMULITE®, and results were compared with those of GENEDIA®. The two serological tests were compared for their ability to predict atrophic gastritis (AG) or intestinal metaplasia (IM) on endoscopy. Results: We found significant correlation (Pearson correlation coefficient=0.903, P<0.0001) and an almost perfect agreement (Cohen’s Kappa coefficient=0.987, P<0.0001) between the results of GENEDIA® and IMMULITE®. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) for AG using GENEDIA® and IMMULITE® were 0.590 and 0.604, respectively, and showed no statistically significant difference in predictive ability for AG (Z-statistics=-0.517, P=0.605). The AUC for IM by GENEDIA® and IMMULITE® were 0.578 and 0.593, respectively, with no statistically significant difference in predictive ability for IM between the two values (Z-statistics=-0.398, P=0.691). Conclusions No statistically significant difference in diagnostic value for H. pylori infection was found between GENEDIA® and IMMULITE®.

Esophageal achalasia is a primary motility disorder characterized by insufficient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation and loss of esophageal peristalsis. Achalasia is a chronic disease that causes progressive irreversible loss of esophageal motor function. The recent development of high-resolution manometry has facilitated the diagnosis of achalasia, and determining the achalasia subtypes based on high-resolution manometry can be important when deciding on treatment methods. Peroral endoscopic myotomy is less invasive than surgery with comparable efficacy. The present guidelines (the “2019 Seoul Consensus on Esophageal Achalasia Guidelines”) were developed based on evidence-based medicine; the Asian Neurogastroenterology and Motility Association and Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility served as the operating and development committees, respectively. The development of the guidelines began in June 2018, and a draft consensus based on the Delphi process was achieved in April 2019. The guidelines consist of 18 recommendations: 2 pertaining to the definition and epidemiology of achalasia, 6 pertaining to diagnoses, and 10 pertaining to treatments. The endoscopic treatment section is based on the latest evidence from meta-analyses. Clinicians (including gastroenterologists, upper gastrointestinal tract surgeons, general physicians, nurses, and other hospital workers) and patients could use these guidelines to make an informed decision on the management of achalasia.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of this study was to analyze the trend of the prevalences of atrophic gastritis (AG) and intestinal metaplasia (IM) from 2011 to 2016~2017 in Korea. And, the risk factors of AG and IM were compared between 2011 and 2016~2017. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 4,023 subjects in 2011 and 2,506 subjects in 2016~2017 were enrolled. AG and IM were diagnosed on the basis of endoscopic findings. Multivariate analysis was performed for risk factors of AG and IM. Seventeen factors were analyzed. RESULTS: The seroprevalence of Helicobacter pylori decreased from 2011 (59.8%; 2,407/4,023) to 2016~2017 (51.6%; 1,293/2,506; P < 0.001). The prevalence of AG decreased from 2011 to 2016~2017 (P=0.018), but that of IM increased (P < 0.001). The risk factors of AG in 2011 were male sex, old age, H. pylori immuoglobulin G (IgG) positivity, family history of gastric cancer (GC), and high-salt diet. For IM in 2011, the risk factors were male sex, old age, H. pylori IgG positivity, and family history of GC. Risk factors of AG in 2016~2017 were old age, H. pylori IgG positivity, and country of residence. For IM in 2016~2017, the risk factors were male sex, old age, family history of GC, high fasting glucose level (≥126 mg/dL), H. pylori IgG positivity, and low income level. CONCLUSIONS: The difference in prevalence trends of AG and IM between 2016~2017 and 2011 could be the result of the different risk factors of AG and IM, such as decreased prevalence of H. pylori infection.
Diet ; Fasting ; Gastritis, Atrophic ; Glucose ; Helicobacter pylori ; Humans ; Immunoglobulin G ; Korea ; Male ; Metaplasia ; Multivariate Analysis ; Prevalence ; Risk Factors ; Seroepidemiologic Studies ; Stomach Neoplasms

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The predictive factors of functional dyspepsia (FD) remain controversial. Therefore, we sought to investigate symptom responses in FD patients after Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication and used predictive factor analysis to identify significant factors of FD resolution at one-year after commencing eradication therapy. METHODS: This prospective, multi-center clinical trial was performed on 65 FD patients that met Rome III criteria and had H. pylori infection. Symptom responses and factors that predicted poor response were determined by analysis one year after commencing H. pylori eradication therapy. RESULTS: A total of 63 patients completed the one-year follow-up. When an eradication success group (n=60) and an eradication failure group (n=3) were compared with respect to FD response rate at one year, results were as follows; complete response 73.3% and 0.0%, satisfactory response 1.7% and 0.0%, partial response 10.0% and 33.3%, and refractory response 15.0% and 66.7%, respectively (p=0.013). Univariate analysis showed persistent H. pylori infection (p=0.021), female gender (p=0.025), and medication for FD during the study period (p=0.013) were associated with poor FD response at one year. However, age, smoking, alcohol consumption, and underlying disease were not found to affect response. Finally, multivariate analysis showed that female gender (OR, 4.70; 95% CI, 1.17-18.88) was the sole independent risk factor of poor FD response at one year after commencing H. pylori eradication therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Female gender was found to predict poor response in FD patients despite H. pylori eradication. Furthermore, successful H. pylori eradication appears to be associated with FD improvement, but the number of non-eradicated patients was too small to conclude.
Alcohol Drinking ; Dyspepsia* ; Female* ; Follow-Up Studies ; Helicobacter pylori* ; Helicobacter* ; Humans ; Multivariate Analysis ; Prospective Studies* ; Risk Factors ; Smoke ; Smoking ; Symptom Assessment