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: Efficacy of proton pump inhibitors is limited in patients with nonerosive reflux disease (NERD). The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of esomeprazole with sodium bicarbonate and esomeprazole alone. Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, noninferiority comparative study. A total of 379 patients with NERD were randomly allocated to receive either EsoduoⓇ/sup> (esomeprazole 20 mg with sodium bicarbonate 800 mg) or NexiumⓇ/sup> (esomeprazole 20 mg) once daily for 4 weeks from January 2019 to December 2019. The patients had a history of heartburn for at least 2 days in the week before randomization as well as in the last 3 months and no esophageal mucosal breaks on endoscopy. The primary endpoint was a complete cure of heartburn at week 4. The secondary and exploratory endpoints as well as the safety profiles were compared in the groups at weeks 2 and 4. Results: A total of 355 patients completed the study (180 in the EsoduoⓇ/sup> group and 175 in the NexiumⓇ/sup> group). The proportions of patients without heartburn in the entire 4th week of treatment were not different between the two groups (33.33% in the EsoduoⓇ/sup> group and 35% in the NexiumⓇ/sup> group, p=0.737). There were no significant differences in most of the secondary and exploratory endpoints as well as the safety profiles. Conclusions EsoduoⓇ/sup> is as effective and safe as NexiumⓇ/sup> for managing typical symptoms in patients with NERD (ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT03928470).

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

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Colonoscopic surveillance is currently recommended after polypectomy owing to the risk of newly developed colonic neoplasia. However, few studies have investigated colonoscopy surveillance in Asia. This multicenter and prospective study was undertaken to assess the incidence of advanced adenoma based on baseline adenoma findings at 3 years after colonoscopic polypectomy. METHODS: A total of 1,323 patients undergoing colonoscopic polypectomy were prospectively assigned to 3-year colonoscopy surveillance at 11 tertiary endoscopic centers. Relative risks for advanced adenoma after 3 years were calculated according to baseline adenoma characteristics. RESULTS: Among 1,323 patients enrolled, 387 patients (29.3%) were followed up, and the mean follow-up interval was 31.0±9.8 months. The percentage of patients with advanced adenoma on baseline colonoscopy was higher in the surveillance group compared to the non-surveillance group (34.4% vs. 25.7%). Advanced adenoma recurrence was observed in 17 patients (4.4%) at follow-up. The risk of advanced adenoma recurrence was 2 times greater in patients with baseline advanced adenoma than in those with baseline non-advanced adenoma, though the difference was not statistically significant (6.8% [9/133] vs. 3.1% [8/254], P=0.09). Advanced adenoma recurrence was observed only in males and in subjects aged ≥50 years. In contrast, adenoma recurrence was observed in 187 patients (48.3%) at follow-up. Male sex, older age (≥50 years), and multiple adenomas (≥3) at baseline were independent risk factors for adenoma recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: A colonoscopy surveillance interval of 3 years in patients with baseline advanced adenoma can be considered appropriate.
Adenoma ; Asia ; Colon ; Colonic Polyps ; Colonoscopy ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Incidence ; Korea ; Male ; Prospective Studies ; Recurrence ; Risk Factors