Comparison of etiological and physiological characteristics of fecal incontinence in men and women.

Fecal incontinence (FI) is often underreported and underestimated in men. Our aims were to clarify the causes and the physiological characteristics of FI in men and to underline the differences between etiological and physiological factors in men and women diagnosed with FI. The study cohort encompassed 200 men and 200 women who underwent anatomical and physiological evaluation for FI in a tertiary referral center specializing in pelvic floor disorders. All patients underwent endoanal ultrasound and anorectal manometry. Evacuation proctography was performed in some patients. Demographic, medical, anatomical, and physiological parameters were compared between the two study groups. Urge incontinence was the most frequent type of FI in both genders. In men, anal fistula, history of anal surgeries, rectal tumors, and pelvic radiotherapy were common etiologic factors, whereas history of pelvic surgeries was more common in women. Associated urinary incontinence was reported more frequently by women. External anal sphincter defects, usually anterior, were more common in women (M: 1.5%, F: 24%, P < 0.0001), whereas internal anal sphincter defect prevalence was similar in men and women (M: 6%, F: 12%, P = 0.19). Decreased resting and squeeze pressures were less common in men (M: 29%, F: 46%, P < 0.0001: M: 44%, F: 66%, P < 0.0001). The incidence of rectal hyposensitivity was higher in men (M: 11.1%, F: 2.8%, P < 0.0001), whereas rectal hypersensitivity was higher in women (M: 5.8%, F: 10.8%, P < 0.0001). Anorectal dyssynergia was more common in men (M: 66%, F: 37%, P < 0.0001). Significantly different etiological factors and physiological characteristics for FI were found in men. Acknowledging these differences is significant and may yield better treatment options.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Fecal incontinence (FI) in men has different etiological factors when compared with women. The prevalence of internal anal sphincter defect among men with FI was similar to women. Different manometric measurements were found among men with FI: decreased anal pressures were less common among men, whereas rectal hyposensitivity and anorectal dyssynergia were more common among men.

Barrett's esophagus patients are becoming younger: analysis of a large United States dataset.

BACKGROUND: Barrett's esophagus (BE), a complication of long-term gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), has been reported to affect 6-8% of those with heartburn. Most patients are males, Caucasians and middle aged. However, there are no recent demographic studies that evaluated the proportion trends of BE. We aimed to assess proportion trends of BE over an 11-year period, using a very large national dataset. METHODS: This was a population-based analysis of the national Explorys dataset. Explorys is an aggregate of electronic medical record database representing over 54 million patients. Proportions of BE's variables such as age, gender, race, BMI, and treatment with PPI were recorded during an 11-year period. BE patients were classified into seven age groups (15-19, 20-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, ≥ 70 years old). Secular trends of the proportion of BE were assessed over time for each age group. RESULTS: The majority of patients diagnosed with BE were ≥ 70 years old across all calendar years. However, the proportion of BE patients who were ≥ 70 years old has significantly decreased between 2006 and 2016 (- 19.9%, p < 0.001). The proportion of patients with BE increased in all age groups but most prominently in the age groups, 30-39: 2.07%, 40-49: 3.64%, 50-59: 6.89%, 60-69: 6.18%, p < 0.001. BE was significantly more common in those who were Caucasian and male. PPI usage fell significantly in those who were ≥ 70 years old (- 20.8%, p < 0.001), but increased in the other remaining age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of BE patients who are 70 years and older has significantly dropped. Younger patients' groups have demonstrated the highest increase in the proportion of BE patients, especially those in the age group of 30-39 years old.

Identifying Minimal Changes in Nonerosive Reflux Disease: Is the Pay Worth the Labor?

Gastroesophageal reflux disease has a variable presentation on upper endoscopy. Gastroesophageal reflux disease can be divided into 3 endoscopic categories: Barrett's esophagus, erosive esophagitis, and normal mucosa/nonerosive reflux disease (NERD). Each of these phenotypes behave in a distinct manner, in regards to symptom response to treatment, and risk of development of complications such as esophageal adenocarcinoma. Recently, it has been proposed to further differentiate NERD into 2 categories: those with and those without "minimal changes." These minimal changes include endoscopic abnormalities, such as villous mucosal surface, mucosal islands, microerosions, and increased vascularity at the squamocolumnar junction. Although some studies have shown that patients with minimal changes may have higher rates of esophageal acid exposure compared with those without minimal changes, it is currently unclear if these patients behave differently than those currently categorized as having NERD. The clinical utility of identifying these lesions should be weighed against the cost of the requisite equipment and the additional time required for diagnosis, compared with conventional white light endoscopy.

The Effect of Ramelteon on Heartburn Symptoms of Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Chronic Insomnia: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: There is a bidirectional relationship between gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and sleep. It has been demonstrated that antireflux treatment can improve sleep quality in GERD patients with nighttime reflux. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with heartburn and/or regurgitation ≥3 times/week and insomnia for ≥3 months were included. Patients were assessed at baseline with the demographic, GERD symptom assessment scale, Epworth sleepiness scale, Berlin sleep apnea, Pittsburgh sleep quality index, and the Insomnia severity index questionnaires. Subjects underwent an upper endoscopy followed by pH testing. Subsequently, subjects were randomized, in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, to receive either ramelteon 8 mg or placebo before bedtime for 4 weeks. During the last week of treatment, subjects completed a daily GERD symptom and sleep diary and underwent actigraphy. RESULTS: Sixteen patients completed the study, 8 in each arm (mean age and M/F were 48.5 vs. 57.8 y, and 8/0 vs. 6/2, respectively). Patients who received ramelteon demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in symptom score as compared with those who received placebo for daytime heartburn (-42% vs. -29%), nighttime heartburn (-42% vs. 78%), 24-hour heartburn (-42% vs. -3%), and 24-hour acid regurgitation (-26% vs. 19%) (all P<0.05). Insomnia severity index score was significantly reduced in patients receiving ramelteon as compared with placebo (-46% vs. -5%, P<0.05). Ramelteon group also demonstrated a significant improvement in sleep efficiency and sleep latency, as compared with placebo, P<0.05). No significant adverse events were observed with ramelteon. CONCLUSIONS: Ramelteon significantly improved symptoms in patients with GERD. In addition, ramelteon significantly improved patients' sleep experience. Further studies are needed in the future (NCT01128582).

Naps are associated more commonly with gastroesophageal reflux, compared with nocturnal sleep.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Acid reflux during nighttime sleep has been associated with more severe gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Napping is common, especially after lunch time, in many cultures. We aimed to compare reflux characteristics between nighttime sleep and naps in patients with GERD. METHODS: We performed a study of 15 patients (mean age, 58.5 ± 18.4 y; 10 men) with heartburn and/or regurgitation at least 3 times/week for the past 3 months, who experienced a nap in addition to regular nighttime sleep. All were evaluated using the demographics and GERD Symptoms Checklist questionnaires. Patients underwent pH testing concomitantly with actigraphy when they were not receiving antireflux treatment; only patients with abnormal results from pH tests were included in the study. Raw data from actigraphy analyses were superimposed over those collected from pH monitoring, matched by time. Integrative software was used to determine recumbent-awake, recumbent-asleep, and naps alongside pH monitoring data. RESULTS: The mean duration of nocturnal sleep time and nap time were 446.0 ± 100.7 minutes and 61.9 ± 51.8 minutes, respectively. The mean number of reflux events per hour was significantly greater during nap than nocturnal sleep time (40.1 ± 69.9/h vs 3.5 ± 4.2/h; P < .05). The mean duration of reflux events was longer during nap than nocturnal sleep time (1.9 ± 2.8 min vs 1.5 ± 2.7 min). The percentage of time spent at a pH less than 4 was significantly greater during naptime than nocturnal sleep time (36.2% ± 38.8% vs 8.9% ± 11.6%; P < .05). Arousals from naps were rare, compared with nocturnal sleep (mean, 0.7 ± 1.1 vs 4.2 ± 2.9; P < .05). Patients also experienced more acid reflux associated with symptoms during nap than nocturnal sleep (mean, 8.08% vs 0.45%; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: We associated naps with significantly greater numbers of, and duration of, esophageal acid exposure and symptoms, compared with nocturnal sleep. Naps therefore might have important effects on disease severity.

Nonmedical therapeutic strategies for nonerosive reflux disease.

There has been a marked decline over the last several years in drug development for gastroesophageal reflux disease and specifically for nonerosive reflux disease (NERD), despite there being many areas of unmet need. In contrast, we have seen a proliferation, during the same period of time, in development of novel, nonmedical therapeutic strategies for NERD using cutting-edge technology. Presently, compliance and lifestyle modifications are readily available noninvasive therapeutic interventions for NERD. Other nonmedical therapies include, the Stretta procedure, transoral incisionless fundoplication, and the magnetic sphincter augmentation device (LINX). Antireflux surgery, in experienced hands, has been repeatedly shown to be efficacious in resolving NERD-related symptoms. Psychological therapeutic interventions and alternative medicine techniques, such as acupuncture, continue to show promise, especially in NERD patients who failed antireflux treatment.

New therapies for non-cardiac chest pain.

After excluding a cardiac cause, potent anti-reflux therapy should be administered to patients with non-cardiac chest pain since gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is the most common underlying mechanism of this disorder. If GERD is an unlikely cause of patient's symptoms, an esophageal motor disorder should be excluded. Spastic motility disorders can be treated with a smooth muscle relaxant (such as calcium channel blocker, nitrate, or phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors). Alternatively, spastic motility disorders may respond to anti-spasmodics, pain modulators, botulinum toxin injection into the distal esophagus, and/or surgery. Patients with functional chest pain have recently seen an expanded treatment armamentarium including medications such as trazadone, tricyclic anti-depressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, pregabalin, and/or ramelteon.

Clinical outcomes with of the Contix Faecal Incontinence Management System: preliminary results.

Fecal incontinence (FI) has a significant long-term impact on patient quality of life for which there is a range of medical and surgical management alternatives. We report the preliminary outcome using the ForConti Contix Faecal Incontinence Management System (FIMS) in FI patients who had failed conservative therapy and who were recruited at 2 tertiary institutions between September 2018 and September 2020. Comparative assessments were made before and after 2 week periods of treatment using bowel diaries and subjective Wexner and Faecal Incontinence Quality of Life scores. Of 17 patients enrolled, 11 completed an 8-week assessment with a significant fall in the average percentage of FI days reported from 84% before treatment to 16.8% at the first posttreatment assessment and down to 13.2% by the second assessment period. This finding correlated with a similar reduction in the total weekly number of episodes of frank FI, minor soiling, and fecal urgency reported by patients along with concomitant improvements in the Wexner scores. For those using the device, there was less concern about accidental bowel leakage, high rates of satisfaction, and minimal problems with the device. Initial results are encouraging warranting further study.

Corrigendum.

The original version of this article contains one mistake. The term "protein pump inhibitor" in the Abstract should have been written as "proton pump inhibitor."

Unmet Needs in the Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a highly prevalent gastrointestinal disorder. Proton pump inhibitors have profoundly revolutionized the treatment of GERD. However, several areas of unmet need persist despite marked improvements in the ther-apeutic management of GERD. These include the advanced grades of erosive esophagitis, nonerosive reflux disease, main-tenance treatment of erosive esophagitis, refractory GERD, postprandial heartburn, atypical and extraesophageal manifestations of GERD, Barrett's esophagus, chronic protein pump inhibitor treatment, and post-bariatric surgery GERD. Consequently, any fu-ture development of novel therapeutic modalities for GERD (medical, endoscopic, or surgical), would likely focus on the afore-mentioned areas of unmet need.

New and future drug development for gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Medical therapy remains the most popular treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Whilst interest in drug development for GERD has declined over the last few years primarily due to the conversion of most proton pump inhibitor (PPI)'s to generic and over the counter compounds, there are still numerous areas of unmet needs in GERD. Drug development has been focused on potent histamine type 2 receptor antagonist's, extended release PPI's, PPI combination, potassium-competitive acid blockers, transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation reducers, prokinetics, mucosal protectants and esophageal pain modulators. It is likely that the aforementioned compounds will be niched for specific areas of unmet need in GERD, rather than compete with the presently available anti-reflux therapies.

Treatment of esophageal motility disorders based on the chicago classification.

OPINION STATEMENT: The Chicago Classification divides esophageal motor disorders based on the recorded value of the integrated relaxation pressure (IRP). The first group includes those with an elevated mean IRP that is associated with peristaltic abnormalities such as achalasia and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction. The second group includes those with a normal mean IRP that is associated with esophageal hypermotility disorders such as distal esophageal spasm, hypercontractile esophagus (jackhammer esophagus), and hypertensive peristalsis (nutcracker esophagus). The third group includes those with a normal mean IRP that is associated with esophageal hypomotility peristaltic abnormalities such as absent peristalsis, weak peristalsis with small or large breaks, and frequent failed peristalsis. The therapeutic options vary greatly between the different groups of esophageal motor disorders. In achalasia patients, potential treatment strategies comprise medical therapy (calcium channel blockers, nitrates, and phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors), endoscopic procedures (botulinum toxin A injection, pneumatic dilation, or peroral endoscopic myotomy) or surgery (Heller myotomy). Patients with a normal IRP and esophageal hypermotility disorder are candidates for medical therapy (nitrates, calcium channel blockers, phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors, cimetropium/ipratropium bromide, proton pump inhibitors, benzodiazepines, tricyclic antidepressants, trazodone, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors), endoscopic procedures (botulinum toxin A injection and peroral endoscopic myotomy), or surgery (Heller myotomy). Lastly, in patients with a normal IRP and esophageal hypomotility disorder, treatment is primarily focused on controlling the presence of gastroesophageal reflux with proton pump inhibitors and lifestyle modifications (soft and liquid diet and eating in the upright position) to address patient's dysphagia.