Identification of Different Phenotypes of Esophageal Reflux Hypersensitivity and Implications for Treatment.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Reflux hypersensitivity (RH), a functional esophageal disorder, is detected in 14%-20% of patients who present with typical esophageal symptoms. As many as 40% of patients with RH do not respond to treatment with pain modulators or proton pump inhibitors (PPIs); behavior disorders might contribute to lack of treatment efficacy. We aimed to assess the prevalence of behavioral disorders and their effects on typical reflux symptoms in patients with RH. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 542 patients with PPI-refractory esophageal symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation, or chest pain) or with symptoms that responded to PPI therapy, evaluated for anti-reflux surgery from January 2016 through August 2019 at a single center in London, United Kingdom. We collected data on symptoms, motility, and impedance-pH monitoring and assigned patients to categories of RH (n = 116), functional heartburn (n = 126), or non-erosive reflux disease (n = 300). RESULTS: Of the 116 patients with a diagnosis of RH, 59 had only hypersensitivity, whereas 57 patients (49.2%) had either excessive supragastric belching (SGB, 39.7%), based on 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring, or rumination (9.5%), based on postprandial manometry combined with impedance. The prevalence of SGB and rumination in patients with RH was significantly higher than in patients with functional heartburn (22%; P < .001). Patients with RH and rumination were significantly younger (P = .005) and had the largest number of non-acid reflux episodes (P = .023). In patients with RH with SGB, SGB episodes were associated with 40.6% of marked reflux symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation, or chest pain), based on impedance-pH monitoring. In patients with RH and rumination, 40% of reflux-related symptoms (mostly regurgitation) were due to possible rumination episodes. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of patients with a diagnosis of RH have behavior disorders, including excessive SGB or rumination. Episodes of SGB or rumination are associated with typical reflux symptoms. Segregation of patients with diagnosis of RH into those with vs without behavioral disorders might have important therapeutic implications.

Patients with dyspepsia have impaired mucosal integrity both in the duodenum and jejunum: in vivo assessment of small bowel mucosal integrity using baseline impedance.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies reported that impaired proximal duodenal mucosa, assessed by duodenal biopsy, could play an important role in the development of dyspeptic symptoms. The aims of this study were (a) to develop a method to measure "in vivo" duodenal and jejunal baseline impedance (BI) and (b) to assess small bowel mucosal integrity in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD) and healthy controls (HC). METHODS: We recruited 16 patients with FD and 15 HC. All subjects underwent ambulatory duodeno-jejunal manometry combined with impedance (HRM/Z), BI were determined by measuring impedance immediately after the passage of nocturnal migrating motor complex (MMC) phase IIIs. RESULTS: The number of MMC phase IIIs in FD was significantly lower than that in HC (2.6 ± 1.4 vs 4.8 ± 1.7, p < 0.001). The BI in patients was significantly lower than that in HC in D1(164.2 ± 59.8 Ω in FD and 243.1 ± 40.5 Ω in HC, p = 0.0061), D2 (191.2 ± 34.1 and 256.5 ± 91.4 Ω, p = 0.01), D3 (214.0 ± 76.9 and 278.1 ± 45.3 Ω, p = 0.009), D4 (270.8 ± 54.2 and 351.8 ± 50.2 Ω, p < 0.001), and J1 (312.2 ± 55.4 and 379.3 ± 38.3 Ω, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study reporting the duodenal and jejunal BI in vivo. The results have shown significantly lowered BI in the proximal small intestine in patients with FD compared to HC. Furthermore it suggests that measurements of small bowel BI could be used as a biomarker for diagnosis and follow up of patients with FD.

Investigation of Dysphagia After Antireflux Surgery by High-resolution Manometry: Impact of Multiple Water Swallows and a Solid Test Meal on Diagnosis, Management, and Clinical Outcome.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Management of patients with dysphagia, regurgitation, and related symptoms after antireflux surgery is challenging. This prospective, case-control study tested the hypothesis that compared with standard high-resolution manometry (HRM) with single water swallows (SWS), adding multiple water swallows (MWS) and a solid test meal increases diagnostic yield and clinical impact of physiological investigations. METHODS: Fifty-seven symptomatic and 12 asymptomatic patients underwent HRM with SWS, MWS, and a solid test meal. Dysphagia and reflux were assessed by validated questionnaires. Diagnostic yield of standard and full HRM studies with 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring was compared. Pneumatic dilatation was performed for outlet obstruction on HRM studies. Clinical outcome was assessed by questionnaires and an analogue scale with "satisfactory" defined as at least 40% symptom improvement requiring no further treatment. RESULTS: Postoperative esophagogastric junction pressure was similar in all groups. Abnormal esophagogastric junction morphology (double high pressure band) was more common in symptomatic than in control patients (13 of 57 vs 0 of 12, P = .004). Diagnostic yield of HRM was 11 (19%), 11 (19%), and 33 of 57 (58%), with SWS, MWS, and solids, respectively (P < .001); it was greatest for solids in patients with dysphagia (19 of 27, 70%). Outlet obstruction was present in 4 (7%), 11 (19%), and 15 of 57 patients (26%) with SWS, MWS, and solids, respectively (P < .009). No asymptomatic control had clinically relevant dysfunction on solid swallows. Dilatation was performed in 12 of 15 patients with outlet obstruction during the test meal. Symptom response was satisfactory, good, or excellent in 7 of 12 (58%) with no serious complications. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of MWS and a solid test meal increases the diagnostic yield of HRM studies in patients with symptoms after fundoplication and identifies additional patients with outlet obstruction who benefit from endoscopic dilatation.

Objective detection of esophagopharyngeal reflux in patients with hoarseness and endoscopic signs of laryngeal inflammation.

GOALS: We aimed to quantify pharyngeal exposure to gastric contents in patients diagnosed with reflux-related hoarseness and healthy controls using new diagnostic techniques. BACKGROUND: Hoarseness with typical signs on laryngoscopy is commonly thought to be caused by esophagopharyngeal reflux. New methods are proposed to assess pharyngeal exposure to gastric contents. They are suggested to measure: (1) liquid or mixed gas-liquid acid and nonacid reflux with impedance pH, (2) aerosolized acid reflux (Dx-pH measuring system), and (3) pepsin in the saliva. STUDY: Twenty-one patients with hoarseness and positive laryngoscopy and 10 controls underwent simultaneous impedance pH, Dx-pH monitoring, and saliva pepsin sampling (5 samples in 24 h). RESULTS: Of the 21 patients, 10 had impedance pH-detected reflux plus at least 1 other test positive. These patients were more likely to have symptomatic relief after proton pump inhibitor therapy. Three of the 21 patients had all 3 tests positive and 4 had all tests negative. None of the controls had impedance pH-detected reflux. Two controls had a positive Dx-pH "RYAN score" and 1 control had >1 saliva sample positive for pepsin. Only 11% of Dx-pH drops to pH<4, 15% pH drops to pH<5, and 10% of pH drops to pH<5.5 coincided with impedance pH-detected reflux in the esophageal body. Positive pepsin saliva samples were preceded by more reflux events [3 (range, 0 to 10)] in the previous 60 minutes than negative samples [0 (range, 0 to 7)] (P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: A subgroup of patients with hoarseness (10/21) had objective detection of the esophagopharyngeal reflux. We propose that these patients are more likely to benefit from further intense antireflux therapy. Detection of pepsin in the saliva may be a useful screening tool in these patients.

In vivo evaluation of acid-induced changes in oesophageal mucosa integrity and sensitivity in non-erosive reflux disease.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) have impaired oesophageal mucosal integrity (dilated intercellular spaces). Oesophageal mucosal integrity reflects the balance between repeated reflux damage and mucosal recovery. The relationship between mucosal integrity and acid sensitivity is unclear. Oesophageal impedance may be used for in vivo mucosal integrity measurement. We studied acid-induced changes in oesophageal mucosal integrity and acid perception in patients with heartburn. DESIGN: 50 patients with heartburn whithout oesophagitis underwent impedance monitoring before, during and after 10 min oesophageal perfusion with neutral (pH 6.5) and acid solutions (pH 1). Symptoms and impedance were recorded during perfusion. Impedance recovery was assessed for 2 h post-perfusion in ambulatory conditions followed by 24-h impedance-pH study. RESULTS: Reflux monitoring discriminated 20 NERD and 30 functional heartburn (FH) patients. Neutral perfusion caused impedance fall that recovered within 10 min. Acid perfusion caused impedance fall with slow recovery: 6.5 Ω/min (IQR 3.3-12.0 Ω/min). Patients with slow recovery (< 25th percentile) had lower baseline impedance (1273 Ω ± 208 Ω vs. 3220 Ω ± 275 Ω ±, p < 0.01) and more frequent acid sensitivity (10/12 vs. 4/12, p = 0.04) than those with fast (> 75th percentile) recovery. Patients with NERD had lower baseline impedance (1669 ± 182 Ω vs. 2384 ± 211 Ω, p = 0.02) and slower impedance recovery (6.0 ± 0.9 Ω/min vs. 10.7 ± 1.6 Ω/min, p = 0.03) than patients with FH. CONCLUSION: Impaired mucosal integrity might be the consequence of repeated reflux episodes with slow recovery. Mucosal integrity, recovery capacity and symptom perception are linked. Low basal impedance and slow recovery after acid challenge are associated with increased acid sensitivity.

Transgastric gastropexy and hiatal hernia repair for GERD under EUS control: a porcine model.

BACKGROUND: Endoluminal operations for gastroesophageal reflux currently are limited by the inability to visualize and manipulate structures outside the wall of the gut. This may be possible by using EUS. The aims of this study were the following: to define the EUS anatomy of structures outside the gut that influence reflux, to place stitches in the median arcuate ligament, to perform posterior gastropexy, and to test the feasibility of crural repair under EUS control in pigs. METHODS: In survival experiments in 22 pigs, by using a linear-array echoendoscope, the median arcuate ligament and part of the right crus were identified and punctured with a needle, which served as a carrier for a tag and thread. These were anchored into the muscle. An endoscopic sewing device was used, allowing stitches to be placed through a 2.8-mm accessory channel to any predetermined depth. New methods allowed knot tying and thread cutting through the 2.8-mm channel of the echoendoscope. RESULTS: Stitches were placed through the gastric wall into the median arcuate ligament, and one stitch was placed just beyond the wall of the lower esophageal sphincter. The stitches were tied together and locked against the gastric wall. Median lower esophageal sphincter pressure, determined manometrically, was 11 mm Hg before surgery and 21 mm Hg after stitch placement (p=0.0002). The length of the lower esophageal sphincter increased from a median of 2.8 cm before the procedure to 3.5 cm after the procedure. At the postmortem, the median force required to pull the tags out of the median arcuate ligament was 2.8 kg. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that transgastric gastroesophageal reflux surgery, by using stitching under EUS control, can significantly increase lower esophageal sphincter pressure in pigs.