Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a complex condition with diverse clinical presentations, ranging from typical heartburn and regurgitation symptoms to extraesophageal manifestations and alarm symptoms. Determining which patients should be tested first versus those who should receive empirical treatment remains a key clinical challenge. If not recently performed, initial patient testing, commonly involving upper endoscopy, is recommended for patients presenting with alarm or refractory symptoms and for those at high risk for Barrett’s esophagus. Additionally, testing should be prioritized for patients with underlying comorbidities, such as scleroderma, increased body mass index, or a suspected large hiatal hernia. Older patients with atypical symptom presentations and those with extraesophageal symptoms or signs, especially in the absence of typical GERD symptoms, should also be referred for endoscopy if recent endoscopic results are not available. In contrast, patients with typical GERD symptoms in the absence of alarm features and those with extraesophageal symptoms accompanied by typical GERD symptoms could begin empirical treatment with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or potassium competitive acid blocker (PCAB). For individuals without alarm symptoms who do not respond to once-daily PPI therapy, escalation to twice-daily PPI therapy or switching to a PCAB, without further testing, is appropriate. Overall, an individualized approach is recommended, with patient presentation guiding the decision to test or treat first.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a complex condition with diverse clinical presentations, ranging from typical heartburn and regurgitation symptoms to extraesophageal manifestations and alarm symptoms. Determining which patients should be tested first versus those who should receive empirical treatment remains a key clinical challenge. If not recently performed, initial patient testing, commonly involving upper endoscopy, is recommended for patients presenting with alarm or refractory symptoms and for those at high risk for Barrett’s esophagus. Additionally, testing should be prioritized for patients with underlying comorbidities, such as scleroderma, increased body mass index, or a suspected large hiatal hernia. Older patients with atypical symptom presentations and those with extraesophageal symptoms or signs, especially in the absence of typical GERD symptoms, should also be referred for endoscopy if recent endoscopic results are not available. In contrast, patients with typical GERD symptoms in the absence of alarm features and those with extraesophageal symptoms accompanied by typical GERD symptoms could begin empirical treatment with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or potassium competitive acid blocker (PCAB). For individuals without alarm symptoms who do not respond to once-daily PPI therapy, escalation to twice-daily PPI therapy or switching to a PCAB, without further testing, is appropriate. Overall, an individualized approach is recommended, with patient presentation guiding the decision to test or treat first.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a complex condition with diverse clinical presentations, ranging from typical heartburn and regurgitation symptoms to extraesophageal manifestations and alarm symptoms. Determining which patients should be tested first versus those who should receive empirical treatment remains a key clinical challenge. If not recently performed, initial patient testing, commonly involving upper endoscopy, is recommended for patients presenting with alarm or refractory symptoms and for those at high risk for Barrett’s esophagus. Additionally, testing should be prioritized for patients with underlying comorbidities, such as scleroderma, increased body mass index, or a suspected large hiatal hernia. Older patients with atypical symptom presentations and those with extraesophageal symptoms or signs, especially in the absence of typical GERD symptoms, should also be referred for endoscopy if recent endoscopic results are not available. In contrast, patients with typical GERD symptoms in the absence of alarm features and those with extraesophageal symptoms accompanied by typical GERD symptoms could begin empirical treatment with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or potassium competitive acid blocker (PCAB). For individuals without alarm symptoms who do not respond to once-daily PPI therapy, escalation to twice-daily PPI therapy or switching to a PCAB, without further testing, is appropriate. Overall, an individualized approach is recommended, with patient presentation guiding the decision to test or treat first.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a complex condition with diverse clinical presentations, ranging from typical heartburn and regurgitation symptoms to extraesophageal manifestations and alarm symptoms. Determining which patients should be tested first versus those who should receive empirical treatment remains a key clinical challenge. If not recently performed, initial patient testing, commonly involving upper endoscopy, is recommended for patients presenting with alarm or refractory symptoms and for those at high risk for Barrett’s esophagus. Additionally, testing should be prioritized for patients with underlying comorbidities, such as scleroderma, increased body mass index, or a suspected large hiatal hernia. Older patients with atypical symptom presentations and those with extraesophageal symptoms or signs, especially in the absence of typical GERD symptoms, should also be referred for endoscopy if recent endoscopic results are not available. In contrast, patients with typical GERD symptoms in the absence of alarm features and those with extraesophageal symptoms accompanied by typical GERD symptoms could begin empirical treatment with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or potassium competitive acid blocker (PCAB). For individuals without alarm symptoms who do not respond to once-daily PPI therapy, escalation to twice-daily PPI therapy or switching to a PCAB, without further testing, is appropriate. Overall, an individualized approach is recommended, with patient presentation guiding the decision to test or treat first.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a complex condition with diverse clinical presentations, ranging from typical heartburn and regurgitation symptoms to extraesophageal manifestations and alarm symptoms. Determining which patients should be tested first versus those who should receive empirical treatment remains a key clinical challenge. If not recently performed, initial patient testing, commonly involving upper endoscopy, is recommended for patients presenting with alarm or refractory symptoms and for those at high risk for Barrett’s esophagus. Additionally, testing should be prioritized for patients with underlying comorbidities, such as scleroderma, increased body mass index, or a suspected large hiatal hernia. Older patients with atypical symptom presentations and those with extraesophageal symptoms or signs, especially in the absence of typical GERD symptoms, should also be referred for endoscopy if recent endoscopic results are not available. In contrast, patients with typical GERD symptoms in the absence of alarm features and those with extraesophageal symptoms accompanied by typical GERD symptoms could begin empirical treatment with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or potassium competitive acid blocker (PCAB). For individuals without alarm symptoms who do not respond to once-daily PPI therapy, escalation to twice-daily PPI therapy or switching to a PCAB, without further testing, is appropriate. Overall, an individualized approach is recommended, with patient presentation guiding the decision to test or treat first.

Background/Aims: Diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is sometimes challenging because the performance of available tests is not entirely satisfactory. This study aims to directly measure the esophageal mucosal impedance during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for the diagnosis of GERD. Methods: Sixty participants with typical symptoms of GERD underwent high-resolution esophageal manometry, 24-hour multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, and mucosal impedance measurement. Mucosal impedance measurement was performed at 2, 5, 10, and 18 cm above the esophagogastric junction during gastrointestinal endoscopy using a specific catheter developed based on devices described in the literature over the last decade. The patients were divided into groups A(acid exposure time < 4%) and B (acid exposure time ≥ 4%). Results: The mucosal impedance was significantly lower in group B at 2 cm (2264.4 Ω ± 1099.0 vs 4575.0 Ω ± 1407.6 [group A]) and 5 cm above the esophagogastric junction (4221.2 Ω ± 2623.7 vs 5888.2 Ω ± 2529.4 [group A]). There was no significant difference in the mucosal impedance between the 2 groups at 10 cm and 18 cm above the esophagogastric junction. Mucosal impedance value at 2 cm > 2970 Ω resulted in a sensitivity of 96.4% and a specificity of 87.5% to exclude GERD. Conclusions Direct measurement of mucosal impedance during endoscopy is a simple and promising method for diagnosing GERD. Individuals with an abnormal acid exposure time have lower mucosal impedance measurements than those with a normal acid exposure time.