Gastroesophageal reflux after sleeve gastrectomy. Fact or fiction?

BACKGROUND: One of the most controversial issues surrounding laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is the development of gastroesophageal reflux disease following surgery. The aim of the study was to evaluate the occurrence of gastroesophageal reflux disease after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and to analyze patients' weight loss, comorbidities, and quality of life after surgery. METHODS: The clinical records of 52 patients submitted to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy between January and November 2018, with 3 years of follow-up, were retrospectively reviewed. At the end of the follow-up period, the patients underwent screening endoscopy, and those with postoperative esophagitis were submitted to endoscopic biopsies and pH-impedance monitoring (MII-pH). The presence of gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms was assessed using the modified clinical DeMesteer score questionnaire. The Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System score and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey were used to assess the postoperative quality of life. RESULTS: In the preoperative work-up, only 7.6% of patients had signs of esophagitis at esophagogastroduodenoscopy, whilst at 3-year follow-up, 50% of them had endoscopic signs of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Twenty-one out of 26 patients with signs of esophagitis agreed to undergo MII-pH. The median DeMesteer score questionnaire was 4.5, with only 4 patients (19%) exhibiting a value greater than the pH cut-off value (14.72), indicative of gastroesophageal reflux disease. MII-pH data analysis showed the presence of gastroesophageal reflux disease in 5 patients. An excellent outcome on the Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System score was reported in 50% of patients, and all 8 domains from the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey improved significantly. CONCLUSION: This study showed an improvement in these patients' quality of life and the limited refluxogenic nature of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy at 3-year follow-up when diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease is based on the Lyon consensus.

Second-line Therapy for Helicobacter Pylori Eradication: State of the Art.

Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is a Gram negative spiraliform bacterium that colonizes the human stomach. It is the most common cause of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer, and gastric carcinoma. The eradication therapy is based on the combination of a proton pump inhibitor and several antibiotics such as amoxicillin, metronidazole, clarithromycin, levofloxacin or tetracycline. The most commonly used regimens for eradication in the first line are triple, sequential and concomitant therapy, despite the last European Guidelines suggesting a quadruple therapy already at the first attempt in areas with high resistance rates. However, the rise in antibiotic resistance is the main reason for a marked increase in first-line therapy failure. Clarithromycin resistancea, is especially acknowledged as the most important event resulting in failure. Up to 20% of patients are intended not to eradicate, therefore they will need a second line therapy. Currently, the most used rescue regimens are levofloxacin-based triple therapy and bismuth-containing quadruple therapy, despite guidelines suggesting to use a combination of antibiotics that have not been included in previous treatments. Nitazoxanide is a novel antibiotic with promising results. Additionally, an interesting field worth of investigation is the antibiotic susceptibility based approach, which could help choose antibiotics with confirmed effectiveness in vitro. Analysis of antibiotic resistance may be performed by both bacterial culture and molecular biology techniques, able to detect point mutations conferring resistance. This is a particularly interesting approach, since it may personalize the therapy, thus optimizing the regimen and maximizing the probability of success.

Esophageal Eosinophilia and Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Celiac Children: A Ten Year Prospective Observational Study.

The association between eosinophilic esophagitis and celiac disease is still controversial and its prevalence is highly variable. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of esophageal eosinophilia and eosinophilic esophagitis in a large group of children with celiac disease, prospectively followed over 11 years. METHODS: Prospective observational study performed between 2008 and 2019. Celiac disease diagnosis was based on ESPGHAN criteria. At least four esophageal biopsies were sampled in patients who underwent endoscopy. The presence of at least 15 eosinophils/HPF on esophageal biopsies was considered suggestive of esophageal eosinophilia; at the same time, eosinophilic esophagitis was diagnosed according to the International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for Eosinophilic Esophagitis. RESULTS: A total of 465 children (M 42% mean age 7.1 years (range: 1-16)) were diagnosed with celiac disease. Three hundred and seventy patients underwent endoscopy, and esophageal biopsies were available in 313. The prevalence of esophageal eosinophilia in children with celiac disease was 1.6% (95% CI: 0.54-2.9%). Only one child was diagnosed as eosinophilic esophagitis; we calculated a prevalence of 0.3% (95% CI: 0.2-0.5%). The odds ratio for an association between eosinophilic esophagitis and celiac disease was at least 6.5 times higher (95% CI: 0.89-47.7%; p = 0.06) than in the general population. CONCLUSION: The finding of an increased number of eosinophils (>15/HPF) in celiac patients does not have a clinical implication or warrant intervention, and therefore we do not recommend routine esophageal biopsies unless clinically indicated.