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.

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 effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) in Asian functional dyspepsia (FD) patients has not been well established as in Western countries. DA-9701, a novel prokinetic agent, stimulates gastric emptying and modulates visceral hypersensitivity in vivo and in human studies. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of DA-9701 with a conventional PPI in mono or combination therapy in patients with FD. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, non-inferiority trial, 389 patients diagnosed with FD using Rome III criteria were allocated among 3 groups: 30-mg DA-9701 t.i.d (means 3 times a day), 40-mg pantoprazole, and 30-mg DA-9701 t.i.d + 40-mg pantoprazole. The primary efficacy end-point was a global assessment of the patient binary response or response on a 5-Likert scale after 4 weeks. RESULTS: The global symptomatic improvement was 60.5% in the DA-9701 group, 65.6% in the pantoprazole group, and 63.5% in the DA-9701 + pantoprazole group using a 5-Likert scale at week 4 with no significant difference among 3 groups (P = 0.685). Symptom improvement measured by binary outcome was significantly achieved in each of the 3 groups, but not different among groups. Patients in all treatment groups reported significant improvement in the response rate and symptoms according to FD subtypes and dyspepsia-related quality of life (P < 0.001), but there were no significant differences among the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: DA-9701 improves global and individual symptoms and increases dyspepsia-specific quality of life in patients with FD. The efficacy of DA-9701 monotherapy is comparable with pantoprazole and there is no additive effect with combination of DA-9701 and pantoprazole in patients with FD.
Asian Continental Ancestry Group ; Dyspepsia* ; Gastric Emptying ; Humans ; Hypersensitivity ; Proton Pump Inhibitors ; Quality of Life

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Carnitine and vitamin complex (Godex(R)) is widely used in patients with chronic liver disease who show elevated liver enzyme in South Korea. The purpose of this study is to identify the efficacy and safety of carnitine from entecavir combination therapy in Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevated Chronic Hepatitis B (CHB) patients. METHODS: 130 treatment-naive patients with CHB were enrolled from 13 sites. The patients were randomly selected to the entecavir and the complex of entecavir and carnitine. The primary endpoint of the study is ALT normalization level after 12 months. RESULTS: Among the 130 patients, 119 patients completed the study treatment. The ALT normalization at 3 months was 58.9% for the monotherapy and 95.2% for the combination therapy (P<0.0001). ALT normalization rate at 12 months was 85.7% for the monotherapy and 100% for the combination group (P=0.0019). The rate of less than HBV DNA 300 copies/mL at 12 months was not statistically significant (P=0.5318) 75.9% for the monotherapy, 70.7% for the combination and it was. Quantification of HBsAg level was not different from the monotherapy to combination at 12 months. Changes of ELISPOT value to evaluate the INF-gamma secretion by HBsAg showed the increasing trend of combination therapy compare to mono-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: ALT normalization rate was higher in carnitine complex combination group than entecavir group in CHB. Combination group was faster than entecavir mono-treatment group on ALT normalization rate. HBV DNA normalization rate and the serum HBV-DNA level were not changed by carnitine complex treatment.
Adult ; Alanine Transaminase/blood ; Antiviral Agents/*therapeutic use ; Carnitine/*therapeutic use ; DNA, Viral/analysis ; Drug Therapy, Combination ; Enzyme-Linked Immunospot Assay ; Female ; Guanine/*analogs & derivatives/therapeutic use ; Hepatitis B Surface Antigens/blood ; Hepatitis B e Antigens/blood ; Hepatitis B virus/genetics ; Hepatitis B, Chronic/*drug therapy ; Humans ; Interferon-gamma/metabolism ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Mitochondria/physiology ; Treatment Outcome ; Vitamin B Complex/*therapeutic use

Mycoplasma pneumoniae is a common cause of respiratory tract infections and typically causes mild disease. Extrapulmonary manifestations of M. pneumoniae infection are also common, but rhabdomyolysis is a rare complication. Here, we describe the case of a previously healthy 23-year-old male who displayed the simultaneous onset of rhabdomyolysis and severe pneumonia requiring mechanical ventilation. Both conditions were resolved by a 10-day course of antimicrobial treatment and the patient was discharged without complication.
Humans ; Male ; Mycoplasma ; Mycoplasma pneumoniae ; Pneumonia ; Pneumonia, Mycoplasma ; Respiration, Artificial ; Respiratory Tract Infections ; Rhabdomyolysis ; Young Adult

About 80~90% of ingested foreign bodies usually pass through the gastrointestinal tract spontaneously without any specific symptoms or gastrointestinal injury. Most of the foreign bodies in the stomach are passed along by gastrointestinal movement, and they are usually evacuated once they pass over the pylorus, Treitz ligament, the ileocecal valve and the rectosigmoid junction. Yet those foreign bodies that are sharp and/or pointed have a high risk of perforation, bleeding and abscess formation. We report here on two cases of a nail in the stomach and toothpicks in the sigmoid colon, and both cases were complicated by perforation. Both patients didn't know that they swallowed the foreign bodies. These patients were treated by surgery and antibiotics. As seen in our cases, we should keep in mind that a sharp, pointed foreign body in the gastrointestinal tract could induce severe complications such as perforation or abscess formation.
Abscess ; Anti-Bacterial Agents ; Colon, Sigmoid ; Foreign Bodies* ; Gastrointestinal Tract ; Hemorrhage ; Humans ; Ileocecal Valve ; Ligaments ; Pylorus ; Stomach

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This randomized, double-blind, phase III, multicenter trial was carried out to compare the efficacy and safety of revaprazan, a novel acid pump antagonist, with that of omeprazole in patients with more than one of gastric ulcers. METHODS: Two hundred and ninety two subjects were randomized to 4~8 weeks of treatment with either revaprazan 200 mg or omeprazole 20 mg. The primary efficacy parameter was the cumulative healing rate determined by endoscopy after 4 and 8 weeks of treatment, and the secondary efficacy parameter was an improvement rate of pain. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat analysis revealed revaprazan and omeprazole to have similar cumulative healing rates (93.0% and 89.6%, respectively; p=0.3038). The per-protocol analysis revealed revaprazan and omeprazole to also have similar cumulative healing rates (99.1% and 100%, respectively; p= 0.3229). In both analyses, there were no significant differences in an improvement rate of pain between the two groups. Both drugs were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Revaprazan has similar efficacy to omeprazole in the treatment of patients with gastric ulcer with a once a day application of revaprazan 200 mg or omeprazole 20 mg over a 4 to 8-week period. In terms of safety, revaprazan was well tolerated.
Endoscopy ; Humans ; Omeprazole ; Stomach Ulcer*

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of revaprazan, a novel acid pump antagonist, versus omeprazole in patients with duodenal ulcer, we performed a randomized, double-blind, phase III, multicenter trial. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty eight patients were randomized to 4 weeks of treatment with either revaprazan 200 mg or omeprazole 20 mg once daily. Primary efficacy parameter was complete ulcer healing by endoscopy, and secondary parameter was the improvement in the severity of daytime and nighttime pain. RESULTS: Healing rates at 4 weeks (intention-to-treat analysis) were 91.7% with revaprazan 200 mg and 91.3% with omeprazole 20 mg; there were no significant differences between two groups (p=0.9228). In per-protocol analysis, healing rates of revaprazan 200 mg and omeprazole 20 mg were 94.4% and 92.3%, respectively. There was no significant difference in healing rate between two groups (p=0.5666). There was no significant difference between two groups in improvement rates of daytime and nighttime pain. Both drugs were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Revaprazan 200 mg was equivalent to omeprazole 20 mg for both ulcer healing and symptom relief, and was well tolerated in patients with duodenal ulcer.
Duodenal Ulcer* ; Endoscopy ; Humans ; Omeprazole ; Ulcer