Objective ambulatory pH monitoring and subjective symptom assessment of gastroesophageal reflux disease show type of carbohydrate and type of fat matter.

Background: Rising prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in US Veterans is concurrent with increasing excess body weight. Objective: The objective of this cross-sectional study is to examine relationships between dietary macronutrients, gastrointestinal hormones, and GERD status. Methods: Ninety-eight veterans with overweight/obesity and empiric proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment were enrolled from the Tennessee Valley Healthcare System. Subjects had esophageal manometry and 24-h pH monitoring. Subjective symptoms were assessed with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GERDQ) and Symptom Assessment Scale (GSAS). The primary outcomes, total acid exposure time (AET) and number of reflux episodes, enabled categorizing subjects as either pathologic GERD or inconclusive GERD. Data analysis included independent T-tests, Spearman Rho correlations, and multivariable linear regression modeling. Results: Higher intake of sugar-sweetened beverages (sugar-sweetened tea, soda, and fruit juice) associated with higher AET. Higher saturated-to-unsaturated fat intake is associated with higher AET and number of reflux episodes. Overall, sugar-sweetened beverage intake, saturated-to-unsaturated fat ratio, tomato-based food items, glucagon-like polypeptide 1 (GLP-1) level, time of first meal, and education status accounted for a significant amount of the variability in AET. Pathologic GERD subjects reported more heartburn (p = 0.006), regurgitation (p = 0.01), acid taste (0.001), and nausea severity (p = 0.04). GERDQ score associated with AET (r = 0.31, p = 0.005), but GSAS did not (r = 0.12, p = 0.28). Conclusion: Of the many foods and nutrients tested, the type (not amount) of carbohydrate (simple sugars) and the type (not amount) of fat (saturated vs unsaturated fat) consumed associated with objective and/or subjective GERD testing. These novel findings contribute to the evidence base guiding specific dietary recommendations in the clinical management of GERD.

Esophageal Motility Disorders: Current Approach to Diagnostics and Therapeutics.

Dysphagia is a common symptom with significant impact on quality of life. Our diagnostic armamentarium was primarily limited to endoscopy and barium esophagram until the advent of manometric techniques in the 1970s, which provided the first reliable tool for assessment of esophageal motor function. Since that time, significant advances have been made over the last 3 decades in our understanding of various esophageal motility disorders due to improvement in diagnostics with high-resolution esophageal manometry. High-resolution esophageal manometry has improved the sensitivity for detecting achalasia and has also enhanced our understanding of spastic and hypomotility disorders of the esophageal body. In this review, we discuss the current approach to diagnosis and therapeutics of various esophageal motility disorders.

Normative Ambulatory Reflux Monitoring Metrics for Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: A Systematic Review of 720 Healthy Individuals.

OBJECTIVES: To review the normative data for acid, weakly acid, and nonacid proximal esophageal (PRE) and hypopharyngeal reflux (HRE) events in diagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) using ambulatory reflux monitoring. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. REVIEW METHODS: A literature search was conducted about the normative data for PRE and HRE on multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (MII-pH), hypopharyngeal-esophageal MII-pH (HEMII-pH), or oropharyngeal pH monitoring using PICOTS (population, intervention, comparison, outcome, timing, and setting) and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statements. Outcomes reviewed included device characteristics, impedance/pH sensor placements, study duration, number/average and percentiles of PRE or HRE occurrence, and the event characteristics (pH, composition, and position). RESULTS: Of 154 identified studies, 18 met criteria for analysis, including 720 healthy individuals. HEMII-pH, MII-pH, and oropharyngeal pH monitoring were used in 7, 6, and 5 studies, respectively. The definition and inclusion/exclusion criteria of healthy individuals varied substantially across studies, with 6 studies considering only digestive symptoms to exclude potential LPR patients. Substantial heterogeneity across studies was noted, including impedance/pH sensor placements/configurations and definitions of composition (liquid, gas, mixed) and type (acid, weakly acid, nonacid) of PRE/HRE. The 95th percentile thresholds were 10 to 73 events for PRE, 0 to 10 events for HRE on HEMII-pH, and 40 to 128 for events with pH <6.0 on oropharyngeal pH monitoring. Most HREs were nonacid and occurred upright. The mean HRE among healthy individuals was 1. CONCLUSION: The low number of studies and the heterogeneity in inclusion criteria, definitions, and characterization of PRE and HRE limit the establishment of consensual normative criteria for LPR on ambulatory reflux monitoring. Future large multicenter studies are needed.

Association between use of proton pump inhibitors and colorectal cancer: A nationwide population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) use is associated with hypergastrinemia and gut microbiota alteration. Concern over the risk that these factors may increase chances of colorectal cancer (CRC) has risen. To investigate the association between PPIs use and CRC using a large population-based cohort and examine whether the PPIs may differ regarding the risk of CRC. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide cohort study using a database from Taiwan National Health Insurance followed up longitudinally from 1999 through 2011. Patients with PPIs use were compared with non-use controls at a 1:1 ratio, for age, sex, comorbidities, and medications. We performed Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis to estimate the association between PPIs use and the development of CRC. RESULTS: Among the 45382 eligible PPIs users, 172 (0.4%) developed CRC during a median follow-up of 5.4 years. PPIs use was associated with a higher risk of CRC with an adjusted HR of 2.03 (95% CI 1.56-2.63, P<0.001). The risk increased with more frequent use of PPIs (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.19-2.14; 2.59, 95% CI 1.84-3.65 and 4.33, 95% CI 2.75-6.80 for ≤30 cDDD per year, 30-90 cDDD per year, and ≥90 cDDD per year, respectively). There was also a statistically significant trend toward an increased risk with long-term PPIs use for more than one year. All PPIs, except pantoprazole and rabeprazole, were associated with an increased risk of CRC. CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that PPIs use might increase the risk of CRC in a dose-dependent manner.

State of Evidence in Minimally Invasive Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux: Findings of a Scoping Review.

BACKGROUNDS & AIMS: Endoscopic management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is being employed increasingly. The aim of this scoping review was to assess the volume of available evidence on the benefits of endoscopic and minimally invasive surgical therapies for GERD. METHODS: criteria were used to perform an extensive literature search of data regarding the reported benefit of endoscopic therapies in GERD. Randomized controlled studies were utilized when available; however, data from observational studies were also reviewed. RESULTS: A formal review of evidence was performed in 22 studies. Inclusion and exclusion criteria and study duration were noted and tabulated. Assessment of outcomes was based on symptoms and objective criteria reported by investigators. Reported outcomes for the interventions were tabulated under the heading of subjective (symptom scores, quality of life metrics, and change in proton pump inhibitor use) and objective metrics (pH parameters, endoscopic signs, and lower esophageal sphincter pressure changes). Adverse events were noted and tabulated. The majority of studies showed symptomatic and objective improvement of GERD with the device therapies. Adverse events were minimal. However, normalization of acid exposure occurred in about 50% of patients and, for some modalities, long-term durability is uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review revealed that the endoluminal and minimally invasive surgical devices for GERD therapy are a promising alternative to proton pump inhibitor therapy. Their place in the treatment algorithm for GERD will be better defined when important clinical parameters, especially durability of effect, are better understood.

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and Atypical Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Laryngopharyngeal reflux and atypical manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease have a high economic and social burden in the United States. There is increasing research supporting the reflex theory and hypersensitivity syndrome underlying this disease pathophysiology. Novel diagnostic biomarkers have gained more traction in the search for a more reliable diagnostic tool, but further research is needed. Current standard-of-care treatment relies on proton pump inhibitor therapy. Antireflux surgery is usually not recommended. Neuromodulators and treatments targeting specific neuronal receptors are discussed. A diagnostic algorithm is proposed for the evaluation of laryngeal symptoms suspected to be related to extraesophageal reflux disease.

Treatment of Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common disorder that is treated with lifestyle modification, weight loss, and medications, such as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). An empiric course of PPI therapy is an effective and cost-effective strategy for the management of GERD. However, in some patients, PPI therapy and lifestyle changes are inadequate to control symptoms. When there is persistence of symptoms despite empiric therapy, patients are labeled as having refractory GERD. This label underestimates the wide differential diagnosis of foregut pathology that can mimic symptoms of GERD. A careful history of symptoms, response to PPI therapy, adherence, compliance, and timing helps elucidate if medication has been helping. When patients are refractory, alternative etiologies of GERD must be considered. Many of these alternatives can be determined on an upper endoscopy or with complementary testing, such as high-resolution esophageal manometry or gastric emptying testing as symptoms dictate. When an alternative cause is not found and index endoscopy is normal, additional testing with either traditional pH or impedance testing can be completed based on prior examination results and response to therapy. Further therapy, including medical, endoscopic, or surgical, can then be targeted at the etiology.

Evaluation and Management of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease: State of the Art Review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the current literature about the epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. METHODS: A comprehensive review of the literature on LPR epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment was conducted. Using the PRISMA statement, 3 authors selected relevant publications to provide a critical analysis of the literature. CONCLUSIONS: The important heterogeneity across studies in LPR diagnosis continues to make it difficult to summarize a single body of thought. Controversies persist concerning epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment. No recent epidemiologic study exists regarding prevalence and incidence with the use of objective diagnostic tools. There is no survey that evaluates the prevalence of symptoms and signs on a large number of patients with confirmed LPR. Regarding diagnosis, an increasing number of authors used multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring, although there is no consensus regarding standardization of the diagnostic criteria. The efficiency of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy remains poorly demonstrated and misevaluated by incomplete clinical tools that do not take into consideration many symptoms and extralaryngeal findings. Despite the recent advances in knowledge about nonacid LPR, treatment protocols based on PPIs do not seem to have evolved. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The development of multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring and pepsin and bile salt detection should be considered for the establishment of a multiparameter diagnostic approach. LPR treatment should evolve to a more personalized regimen, including diet, PPIs, alginate, and magaldrate according to individual patient characteristics. Multicenter international studies with a standardized protocol could improve scientific knowledge about LPR.

Development and Validation of a Mucosal Impedance Contour Analysis System to Distinguish Esophageal Disorders.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Diagnostic testing for chronic esophageal disorders relies on histopathology analysis of biopsies or uncomfortable transnasal catheters or wireless pH monitoring, which capture abnormal intraluminal refluxate. We therefore developed a balloon mucosal impedance (MI) catheter system that instantly detects changes in esophageal mucosal integrity during endoscopy over a long segment of the esophagus. We performed a prospective study to evaluate the ability of a balloon-incorporated MI catheter to detect and evaluate esophageal disorders, including gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 69 patients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy with or without wireless pH monitoring. Patients were classified as having GERD (erosive esophagitis or abnormal pH; n = 24), EoE (confirmed with pathology analysis of tissues from both distal and proximal esophagus; n = 21), or non-GERD (normal results from esophagogastroduodenoscopy and pH tests; n = 24). Receiver operating characteristic curves and area under the operating characteristic curve (AUC) were used to compare the accuracy of balloon MI in diagnosis. Probabilities of assignment to each group (GERD, non-GERD, or EoE) were estimated using multinomial logistic regression. Association between MI patterns and diagnoses were validated using data from patients seen at 3 separate institutions. RESULTS: MI pattern along the esophageal axis differed significantly (P < .01) among patients with GERD, EoE, and non-GERD. Patients with non-GERD had higher MI values along all measured segments. The MI pattern for GERD was easily distinguished from that of EoE: in patients with GERD, MI values were low in the distal esophagus and normalized along the proximal esophagus, whereas in patients with EoE, measurements were low in all segments of the esophagus. Intercept and rate of rise of MI value (slope) as distance increased from the squamocolumnar junction identified patients with GERD with an AUC = 0.67, patients with EoE with an AUC = 0.84, and patients with non-GERD with an AUC = 0.83 in the development cohort. One patient had an adverse event (reported mild chest pain after the procedure) and was discharged from the hospital without further events. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a balloon MI catheter system that instantly detects changes in esophageal mucosal integrity during endoscopy and found it to be safe and able to identify patients with GERD, EoE, or non-GERD. We validated our findings in a separate cohort for patients. ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03103789.

Advances in the Diagnosis and Treatment of GERD: New Tricks for an Old Disease.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common diagnosis encountered by both primary care providers and specialists, but despite its prevalence, there are limitations in the current diagnostic tests for GERD. Once an accurate diagnosis is made, treatment options can be offered, and this field continues to burgeon with options. In this review, we seek to review the recent advances in GERD diagnostics and subsequent treatment options. RECENT FINDINGS: Novel impedance markers and novel techniques (mucosal impedance testing, salivary pepsin, high-resolution manometry, and narrow-band imaging) have shown promise in diagnosing GERD. Advances in medical therapy, including potassium-competitive acid blockers and bile acid sequestrants, along with advances in invasive therapy (transoral incisionless fundoplication, endoscopic radiofrequency, electrical stimulation of the LES, and magnetic sphincter augmentation) have provided additional options for therapy for GERD beyond PPI and anti-reflux surgery. Novel impedance markers and techniques will provide further clarity on mucosal integrity and the barrier function allowing improved diagnostic accuracy of GERD. Improvements in medical and invasive therapy will expand GERD therapy.

Comparison of mucosal impedance measurements throughout the esophagus and mucosal eosinophil counts in endoscopic biopsy specimens in eosinophilic esophagitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Assessing eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) activity from limited esophageal mucosal biopsy samples has been questioned. Here our aim was to compare mucosal impedance (MI) throughout the esophagus and eosinophil counts in endoscopic biopsy samples in EoE. METHODS: We compared 20-site MI using a balloon catheter in the esophagus and eosinophils per high-power field (eos/HPF) in esophageal mucosal biopsy samples. Data are summarized as median (interquartile range) comparing control subjects and EoE using Mann-Whitney rank sum test and between endoscopic reference score and MI (minimal and average) using rank Spearman correlation. RESULTS: Ten adult control patients (ages 38-70) and 23 EoE patients (ages 21-80, 18 active) were studied. The mean (range) pan-esophageal MI in control subjects was significantly higher (6435 ohms [4546-7301]) compared with EoE patients (2004 ohms [1437-2546], P < .001). In control patients 172 of 180 (95.6%) individual impedance measurements (18 per patient) were normal when compared with 126 of 432 (29.2%) measurements in EoE. No EoE patient had uniformly normal MI. MI varied widely, with 19 of 23 patients having values above and below 2300 ohms (normal) regardless of EoE activity. Correlation of maximim eos/HPF with minimum and average MI per patient was r = -.243, P = .072 and r = -.358, P = .086, respectively. Of 5 patients with inactive EoE, 3 had >50% abnormal MI segments. Correlation coefficients of the endoscopic reference score with minimum and average MI were r = -.154, P = .47 and r = -.27, P = .20, respectively. The procedure was <5 minutes without adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: MI is lower in the esophagus of EoE patients compared with control subjects with poor correlation between peak esophageal eosinophil counts, EoE activity, and MI. Segmental esophageal MI provides a unique marker of esophageal dysfunction in EoE. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02995395.).

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and Functional Laryngeal Disorder: Perspective and Common Practice of the General Gastroenterologist.

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is an extraesophageal variant of gastroesophageal reflux disease that is associated with chronic cough, hoarseness, dysphonia, recurrent throat clearing, and globus pharyngeus. Due to nonspecific symptoms, laryngoscopy is often performed to rule out malignancy, and the diagnosis of LPR is considered with any signs of laryngeal inflammation. However, laryngoscopic findings have high interobserver variability, and, thus, most patients are tried on an empiric course of acid-suppressive therapy to see whether symptoms resolve. In this article, which focuses on the perspective and common practice of the general gastroenterologist, we review our understanding of the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of LPR based on important clinical articles in the gastroenterology literature. We also propose new diagnostic criteria for functional laryngeal disorder and review laryngeal hypersensitivity and treatment options for general gastroenterologists.

Mucosal Impedance: a New Approach to Diagnosing Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this review, we discuss current diagnostic testing modalities for both gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and then introduce mucosal impedance (MI), a novel technology that measures epithelial integrity in real time during endoscopy. We describe the advantages and disadvantages of MI as compared with traditional diagnostic testing. RECENT FINDINGS: We review studies that demonstrate that GERD and EoE have distinct MI patterns, and that physicians can accurately diagnose and distinguish the two during endoscopy with minimal time added to the procedure. We also review studies showing that MI has the capability to assess treatment response in both GERD and EoE and that it can be used to diagnose GERD in patients with extraesophageal reflux symptoms. Mucosal impedance testing is a major advancement in the diagnosis of GERD and EoE. Future studies are planned to assess whether MI can be used as a treatment endpoint in EoE and whether it can be used to predict response to anti-reflux surgery.

Preliminary esophageal microbiome studies prompt important scientific questions.

Analysis of the esophageal microbiome remains a new field of research. Two hypothesis-generating papers published in the current issue of the Journal go beyond characterizing the esophageal microbiome in Barrett's esophagus or eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Snider et al. suggest that the salivary microbiome can be used as a screening tool for Barrett's esophagus, and Arias et al. demonstrates abnormal expression of Toll-like receptors and innate immune effector proteins in patients with active EoE. We discuss these findings, raise fundamental questions about microbiome studies, and offer ideas for future studies.

Management options for patients with GERD and persistent symptoms on proton pump inhibitors: recommendations from an expert panel.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess expert gastroenterologists' opinion on treatment for distinct gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) profiles characterized by proton pump inhibitor (PPI) unresponsive symptoms. METHODS: Fourteen esophagologists applied the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to hypothetical scenarios with previously demonstrated GERD (positive pH-metry or endoscopy) and persistent symptoms despite double-dose PPI therapy undergoing pH-impedance monitoring on therapy. A priori thresholds included: esophageal acid exposure (EAE) time >6.0%; symptom-reflux association: symptom index >50% and symptom association probability >95%; >80 reflux events; large hiatal hernia: >3 cm. Primary outcomes were appropriateness of four invasive procedures (laparoscopic fundoplication, magnetic sphincter augmentation, transoral incisionless fundoplication, radiofrequency energy delivery) and preference for pharmacologic/behavioral therapy. RESULTS: Laparoscopic fundoplication was deemed appropriate for elevated EAE, and moderately appropriate for positive symptom-reflux association for regurgitation and a large hiatal hernia with normal EAE. Magnetic sphincter augmentation was deemed moderately appropriate for elevated EAE without a large hiatal hernia. Transoral incisionless fundoplication and radiofrequency energy delivery were not judged appropriate in any scenario. Preference for non-invasive options was as follows: H2RA for elevated EAE, transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation inhibitors for elevated reflux episodes, and neuromodulation/behavioral therapy for positive symptom-reflux association. CONCLUSION: For treatment of PPI unresponsive symptoms in proven GERD, expert esophagologists recommend invasive therapy only in the presence of abnormal reflux burden, with or without hiatal hernia, or regurgitation with positive symptom-reflux association and a large hiatus hernia. Non-invasive pharmacologic or behavioral therapies are preferred for all other scenarios.

Mucosal Impedance Measurements Differentiate Pediatric Patients With Active Versus Inactive Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic disorder in children that requires continued assessment of disease activity, involving repeated sedation, endoscopy, and biopsy analysis. We investigated whether mucosal impedance measurements can be used to monitor disease activity in pediatric patients with EoE. METHODS: We measured mucosal impedance at 3 locations in the esophagus in pediatric patients (1-18 years old; 32 with active EoE, 10 with inactive EoE, 32 with nonerosive reflux disease [NERD]) and 53 children with symptoms but normal findings from histologic analyses (controls) undergoing routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy at the Vanderbilt Pediatric Gastroenterology Clinic. Pathologists reviewed biopsies per routine protocol, determined eosinophilic density, and graded spongiosis on an ordinal visual scale. Mucosal impedance measurements were compared within patient groups. The primary outcome was correlation of mucosal impedance measurements with disease activity, based on severity of spongiosis and eosinophil counts. RESULTS: Mucosal impedance measurements were significantly lower in patients with active EoE at 2, 5, and 10 cm above the squamo-columnar junction (median values of 1069, 1368, and 1707, respectively) compared to patients with inactive EoE (median values of 3663, 3657, and 4494, respectively), NERD (median values of 2754, 3243, and 4387), and controls (median values of 3091, 3760, and 4509) (P < 0.001 for all comparisons to patients with active EoE). We found inverse correlations between mucosal impedance measurements and eosinophil count (P < 0.001), and spongiosis severity (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mucosal impedance measurements may provide immediate information about mucosal inflammation in children. Patients with active EoE have significantly lower mucosal impedance values than patients with inactive EoE, NERD, or controls; mucosal impedance measurements correlate inversely with eosinophil counts and spongiosis severity. Mucosal impedance is a promising rapid and less-invasive method to monitor EoE activity in pediatric patients with EoE; it could reduce costs and risks of disease monitoring.

Extraesophageal Symptoms and Diseases Attributed to GERD: Where is the Pendulum Swinging Now?

The purpose of this review is to outline the recent developments in the field of extraesophageal reflux disease and provide clinically relevant recommendations. The recommendations outlined in this review are based on expert opinion and on relevant publications from PubMed and EMbase. The Clinical Practice Updates Committee of the American Gastroenterological Association proposes the following recommendations: Best Practice Advice 1: The role of a gastroenterologist in patients referred for evaluation of suspected extra esophageal symptom is to assess for gastroesophageal etiologies that could contribute to the presenting symptoms. Best Practice Advice 2: Non-GI evaluations by ENT, pulmonary and/or allergy are essential and often should be performed initially in most patients as the cause of the extraesophageal symptom is commonly multifactorial or not esophageal in origin. Best Practice Advice 3: Empiric therapy with aggressive acid suppression for 6-8 weeks with special focus on response of the extraesophageal symptoms can help in assessing association between reflux and extraesophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 4: No single testing methodology exists to definitively identify reflux as the etiology for the suspected extra esophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 5: Constellation of patient presentation, diagnostic test results and response to therapy should be employed in the determination of reflux as a possible etiology in extra esophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 6: Testing may need to be off or on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy depending on patients' presenting demographics and symptoms in assessing the likelihood of abnormal gastroesophageal reflux. A. On therapy testing may be considered in those with high probability of baseline reflux (those with previous esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus or abnormal pH). B. Off therapy testing may be considered in those with low probability of baseline reflux with the goal of identifying moderate to severe reflux at baseline. Best Practice Advice 7: Lack of response to aggressive acid suppressive therapy combined with normal pH testing off therapy or impedance-pH testing on therapy significantly reduces the likelihood that reflux is a contributing etiology in presenting extraesophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 8: Surgical fundoplication is discouraged in those with extra esophageal reflux symptoms unresponsive to aggressive PPI therapy. Best Practice Advice 9: Fundoplication should only be considered in those with a mechanical defect (e.g., hiatal hernia), moderate to severe reflux at baseline off PPI therapy who have continued reflux despite PPI therapy and have failed more conservative non-GI treatments.

Management of Esophageal Food Impaction Varies Among Gastroenterologists and Affects Identification of Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Esophageal food impaction (EFI) is a gastrointestinal emergency requiring immediate evaluation in the emergency room (ER) and an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for disimpaction. EFI is also a distinct presenting feature of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). This study aimed at understanding the management of EFI among gastroenterologists (GIs) and estimated its impact on identification of EoE in USA. METHODS: GIs associated with three major gastroenterology societies based in USA were invited to participate in a web-based survey. Information on the resources available and utilized, and the clinical decision-making process related to management of EFI cases was collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Of 428 responses, 49% were from pediatric GIs, 86% practiced in the USA, and 78% practiced in an academic setting. Compared to the pediatric GIs, adult GIs were more likely to perform EGD in the emergency room [OR 87.96 (25.43-304.16)] and advance the food bolus into stomach [5.58 (3.08-10.12)]. Only 34% of respondents obtained esophageal biopsies during EGD, and pediatric GIs were more likely to obtain esophageal biopsies [3.49 (1.12-10.84)] compared to adult GIs. In USA, by our conservative estimates, 10,494 patients presenting to ER with EFI and at risk of EoE are likely being missed each year. CONCLUSIONS: EFI management varies substantially among GIs associated with three major gastroenterology societies in USA. Based on their practice patterns, the GIs in USA are likely to miss numerous EoE patients presenting to ER with EFI. Our findings highlight the need for developing and disseminating evidence-based EFI management practice guidelines.