Updates to the modern diagnosis of GERD: Lyon consensus 2.0.

The Lyon Consensus provides conclusive criteria for and against the diagnosis of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and adjunctive metrics that consolidate or refute GERD diagnosis when primary criteria are borderline or inconclusive. An international core and working group was assembled to evaluate research since publication of the original Lyon Consensus, and to vote on statements collaboratively developed to update criteria. The Lyon Consensus 2.0 provides a modern definition of actionable GERD, where evidence from oesophageal testing supports revising, escalating or personalising GERD management for the symptomatic patient. Symptoms that have a high versus low likelihood of relationship to reflux episodes are described. Unproven versus proven GERD define diagnostic strategies and testing options. Patients with no prior GERD evidence (unproven GERD) are studied using prolonged wireless pH monitoring or catheter-based pH or pH-monitoring off antisecretory medication, while patients with conclusive GERD evidence (proven GERD) and persisting symptoms are evaluated using pH-impedance monitoring while on optimised antisecretory therapy. The major changes from the original Lyon Consensus criteria include establishment of Los Angeles grade B oesophagitis as conclusive GERD evidence, description of metrics and thresholds to be used with prolonged wireless pH monitoring, and inclusion of parameters useful in diagnosis of refractory GERD when testing is performed on antisecretory therapy in proven GERD. Criteria that have not performed well in the diagnosis of actionable GERD have been retired. Personalisation of investigation and management to each patient's unique presentation will optimise GERD diagnosis and management.

The Role of High-Resolution Manometry Prior to and Following Antireflux Surgery: The Padova Consensus.

BACKGROUND: In the last two decades the development of high-resolution manometry (HRM) has changed and revolutionized the diagnostic assessment of patients complain foregut symptoms. The role of HRM before and after antireflux procedure remains unclear, especially in surgical practice, where a clear understanding of esophageal physiology and hiatus anatomy is essential for optimal outcome of antireflux surgery (ARS). Surgeons and gastroenterologists (GIs) agree that assessing patients following antireflux procedures can be challenging. Although endoscopy and barium-swallow can reveal anatomic abnormalities, physiologic information on HRM allowing insight into the cause of eventually recurrent symptoms could be key to clinical decision making. METHOD: A multi-disciplinary international working group (14 surgeons and 15 GIs) collaborated to develop consensus on the role of HRM pre- and post- ARS, and to develop a postoperative classification to interpret HRM findings. The method utilized was detailed literature review to develop statements, and the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methodology (RAM) to assess agreement with the statements. Only statements with an approval rate >80% or a final ranking with a median score of 7 were accepted in the consensus. The working groups evaluated the role of HRM prior to ARS and the role of HRM following ARS. CONCLUSION: This international initiative developed by surgeons and GIs together, summarizes the state of our knowledge of the use of HRM pre- and post-ARS. The Padova Classification was developed to facilitate the interpretation of HRM studies of patients underwent ARS.

High Diagnostic Yield of Abnormal Endoscopic Findings in the Evaluation of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is recommended in patients with typical gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation, chest pain) in the setting of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) nonresponse. EGD evaluates for erosive disease, assesses antireflux barrier integrity, excludes non-GERD conditions, and, in the absence of erosive findings, is followed by reflux testing.1,2 The diagnostic utility of EGD is less clear in the evaluation for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), and the current reference standard is ambulatory reflux monitoring.1,3,4 This study of patients referred for evaluation of chronic laryngeal symptoms had the following aims: (1) to characterize endoscopic findings, (2) to discern whether findings differed between patients with or without concomitant esophageal reflux symptoms, and (3) to measure the association between endoscopic findings and objective GERD on ambulatory reflux monitoring.

Vonoprazan is Efficacious for Treatment of Heartburn in Non-erosive Reflux Disease: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Potassium-competitive acid blockers have documented efficacy for erosive esophagitis. We performed a randomized trial in United States subjects diagnosed with non-erosive reflux disease of vonoprazan vs placebo for 4 weeks, followed by a 20-week active-treatment extension. METHODS: Adult subjects with heartburn ≥4 days/week during screening without erosive esophagitis on endoscopy were randomized to placebo, vonoprazan 10 mg, or vonoprazan 20 mg. After 4 weeks, subjects on placebo were re-randomized to vonoprazan 10 mg or 20 mg, and those already on vonoprazan continued at the same dose for 20 weeks. Electronic diaries were completed twice daily. The primary endpoint was percentage of days without daytime or nighttime heartburn (24-hour heartburn-free days). RESULTS: Among 772 randomized subjects, the percentage of 24-hour heartburn-free days was 27.7% for placebo vs 44.8% for vonoprazan 10 mg (least squares mean difference, 17.1%; P < .0001) and 44.4% for vonoprazan 20 mg (least squares mean difference, 16.7%; P < .0001). Differences in percentage of subjects with a 24-hour heartburn-free day for vonoprazan 10 mg vs placebo and vonoprazan 20 mg vs placebo were 8.3% and 11.6% on day 1 and 18.1% and 23.2% on day 2. The mean/median percentages of 24-hour heartburn-free days over the extension period were similar across the 4 study arms: 61%-63%/76%-79%. CONCLUSIONS: Vonoprazan reduced heartburn symptoms in subjects diagnosed with non-erosive reflux disease, with the benefit appearing to begin as early as the first day of therapy. Treatment effect persisted after the initial 4-week placebo-controlled period throughout the 20-week extension period. The 2 vonoprazan doses (10 mg and 20 mg) were similar in efficacy. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05195528).

Validation of the Laryngeal Cognitive-Affective Tool.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Cognitive-affective processes, including hypervigilance and symptom-specific anxiety, may contribute to chronic laryngeal symptoms and are potentially modifiable; however, a validated instrument to assess these constructs is lacking. The aims of this study were to develop and validate the Laryngeal Cognitive-Affective Tool (LCAT) instrument. METHODS: This 2-phase single-center prospective study enrolled participants from November 2021 to June 2023. In the initial phase 1:1 patient cognitive interviews and multidisciplinary team consensus were conducted to develop the LCAT. In the second phase asymptomatic and symptomatic participants completed a series of questionnaires to examine psychometric properties of the LCAT. RESULTS: A total of 268 participants were included: 8 in the initial phase and 260 in the validation phase (56 asymptomatic; 204 symptomatic). A 15-item LCAT was developed. In the validation phase, mean total LCAT and hypervigilance/anxiety subscores were significantly higher in symptomatic versus asymptomatic participants (P < .01). The LCAT had excellent internal consistency (α = 0.942) and split-half reliability (Guttman = 0.853). Using a median split, a score of 33 or greater was defined as elevated. CONCLUSIONS: The 15-item LCAT evaluates laryngeal hypervigilance and symptom-specific anxiety among patients with laryngeal symptoms. It has excellent reliability and construct validity. The LCAT highlights burdensome cognitive-affective processes that can accordingly help tailor treatments.

Validated Clinical Score to Predict Gastroesophageal Reflux in Patients With Chronic Laryngeal Symptoms: COuGH RefluX.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Discerning whether laryngeal symptoms result from gastroesophageal reflux is clinically challenging and a reliable tool to stratify patients is needed. We aimed to develop and validate a model to predict the likelihood of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) among patients with chronic laryngeal symptoms. METHODS: This multicenter international study collected data from adults with chronic laryngeal symptoms who underwent objective testing (upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and/or ambulatory reflux monitoring) between March 2018 and May 2023. The training phase identified a model with optimal receiver operating characteristic curves, and ß coefficients informed a weighted model. The validation phase assessed performance characteristics of the weighted model. RESULTS: A total of 856 adults, 304 in the training cohort and 552 in the validation cohort, were included. In the training phase, the optimal predictive model (area under the curve, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.62-0.74), was the Cough, Overweight/obesity, Globus, Hiatal Hernia, Regurgitation, and male seX (COuGH RefluX) score, with a lower threshold of 2.5 and an upper threshold of 5.0 to predict proven GERD. In the validation phase, the COuGH RefluX score had an area under the curve of 0.67 (95% CI, 0.62-0.71), with 79% sensitivity and 81% specificity for proven GERD. CONCLUSIONS: The externally validated COuGH RefluX score is a clinically practical model to predict the likelihood of proven GERD. The score classifies most patients with chronic laryngeal symptoms as low/high likelihood of proven GERD, with only 38% remaining as indeterminate. Thus, the COuGH RefluX score can guide diagnostic strategies and reduce inappropriate proton pump inhibitor use or testing for patients referred for evaluation of chronic laryngeal symptoms.

Behavioral Therapy for Functional Heartburn: Recommendation Statements.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Brain-gut behavior therapies (BGBT) are increasingly recognized as effective therapeutic interventions for functional heartburn. However, recommendations regarding candidacy for treatment, initial treatment selection, and navigating treatment non-response have not been established for functional heartburn specifically. The aim of this study was to establish expert-based recommendations for behavioral treatment in patients with functional heartburn. METHODS: The validated RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method was applied to develop recommendations. A 15-member panel composed of 10 gastrointestinal psychologists and 5 esophageal specialists ranked the appropriateness of a series of statements on a 9-point interval scale over 2 ranking periods. Statements were within the following domains: pre-therapy evaluation, candidacy criteria for BGBT, selection of initial BGBT, role of additional therapy for initial non-response to BGBT, and role of pharmacologic neuromodulation. The primary outcome was appropriateness of each intervention based on the recommendation statements. RESULTS: Recommendations for psychosocial assessment (eg, hypervigilance, symptom-specific anxiety, health-related quality of life), candidacy criteria (eg, motivated for BGBT, acknowledges the role of stress in symptoms), and treatment were established. Gut-directed hypnotherapy or cognitive behavioral therapy were considered appropriate BGBT for functional heartburn. Neuromodulation and/or additional BGBT were considered appropriate in the context of non-response. CONCLUSIONS: Gut-directed hypnotherapy and/or cognitive behavioral therapy are recommended as appropriate behavioral interventions for heartburn symptoms, depending on clinical indication, specific gut-brain targets, and preferred treatment modality (pharmacologic vs non-pharmacologic). Pre-therapy evaluation of psychosocial processes and candidacy for BGBT are important to determine eligibility for referral to psychogastroenterology services.

Optimizing the Management Algorithm for Esophageal Dysphagia After Index Endoscopy: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Minimization Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Guidelines advise esophageal motility testing for dysphagia when structural disorders are ruled out, but cost concerns impede adoption. We evaluated cost-effective positioning of esophageal motility testing in the algorithm to evaluate esophageal dysphagia. METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model comparing 3 strategies: (i) esophageal manometry, (ii) screening impedance planimetry followed by esophageal manometry if needed, or (iii) nonalgorithmic usual care. Diagnostic test accuracy was adapted to expected rates of esophageal motility disorders in general gastroenterology populations. We modeled routine testing for all patients with nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia compared with selective testing with strong suspicion for achalasia. Cost outcomes were defined on national commercial and Medicare datasets stratified on age and sex. Health outcomes were modeled on populations with achalasia. The time horizon was 1 year. RESULTS: Motility testing was preferred over nonalgorithmic usual care due to cost savings rather than health gains. To commercial insurers, routine esophageal manometry for nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia would be cost-saving below a reimbursed cost of $2,415. Screening impedance planimetry would be cost saving below a reimbursed cost of $1,130. The limit for reimbursed costs would be lower for patients older than 65 years to achieve cost savings mainly due to insurance. Sex did not significantly influence cost-effectiveness. Patients and insurers preferred routine screening impedance planimetry before manometry when the index of suspicion for achalasia was below 6%. DISCUSSION: Aligning with practice guidelines, routine esophageal motility testing seems cost saving to patients and insurers compared with nonalgorithmic usual care to evaluate nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia. Choice of testing should be guided by index of suspicion.

Rapid Development of Achalasia After SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Polymerase Chain Reaction Analysis of Esophageal Muscle Tissue.

INTRODUCTION: Achalasia has been linked to viruses. We have observed cases of rapid-developing achalasia post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We aimed to prospectively evaluate esophageal muscle for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) from patients with rapid-onset achalasia post-COVID-19 and compare them with achalasia predating COVID-19 and achalasia with no COVID-19. RESULTS: Compared with long-standing achalasia predating COVID-19 and long-standing achalasia with no COVID-19, the subjects with achalasia post-COVID-19 had significantly higher levels of messenger RNA for the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) protein, which correlated with a significant increase in the inflammatory markers NOD-like receptor family pyrin domain-containing 3 and tumor necrosis factor. DISCUSSION: SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, is a possible trigger for achalasia.

Risk of Esophageal Cancer in Achalasia: A Matched Cohort Study Using the Nationwide Veterans Affairs Achalasia Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Achalasia is a postulated risk factor of esophageal cancer (EC); however, EC-associated risk in achalasia is understudied. We aimed to evaluate EC risk among individuals within the nationwide Veterans Affairs Achalasia Cohort. METHODS: We conducted a matched cohort study among US veterans aged 18 years or older from 1999 to 2019. Individuals with achalasia were age matched and sex matched 1:4 to individuals without achalasia. Follow-up continued from study entry until diagnosis with incident/fatal EC (primary outcome), death from non-EC-related causes, or end of the study follow-up (December 31, 2019). Association between achalasia and EC risk was examined using Cox regression models. RESULTS: We included 9,315 individuals in the analytic cohort (median age 55 years; 92% male): 1,863 with achalasia matched to 7,452 without achalasia. During a median 5.5 years of follow-up, 17 EC occurred (3 esophageal adenocarcinoma, 12 squamous cell carcinoma, and 2 unknown type) among individuals with achalasia, compared with 15 EC (11 esophageal adenocarcinoma, 1 squamous cell carcinoma, and 3 unknown type) among those without achalasia. EC incidence for those with achalasia was 1.4 per 1,000 person-years, and the median time from achalasia diagnosis to EC development was 3.0 years (Q1-Q3: 1.3-9.1). Individuals with achalasia had higher cumulative EC incidence at 5, 10, and 15 years of follow-up compared with individuals without achalasia, and EC risk was 5-fold higher (hazard ratio 4.6, 95% confidence interval: 2.3-9.2). DISCUSSION: Based on substantial EC risk, individuals with achalasia may benefit from a high index of suspicion and endoscopic surveillance for EC.

American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines: Management of Acute Pancreatitis.

Acute pancreatitis (AP), defined as acute inflammation of the pancreas, is one of the most common diseases of the gastrointestinal tract leading to hospital admission in the United States. It is important for clinicians to appreciate that AP is heterogenous, progressing differently among patients and is often unpredictable. While most patients experience symptoms lasting a few days, almost one-fifth of patients will go on to experience complications, including pancreatic necrosis and/or organ failure, at times requiring prolonged hospitalization, intensive care, and radiologic, surgical, and/or endoscopic intervention. Early management is essential to identify and treat patients with AP to prevent complications. Patients with biliary pancreatitis typically will require surgery to prevent recurrent disease and may need early endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography if the disease is complicated by cholangitis. Nutrition plays an important role in treating patients with AP. The safety of early refeeding and importance in preventing complications from AP are addressed. This guideline will provide an evidence-based practical approach to the management of patients with AP.

Laryngeal Recalibration Therapy Improves Laryngopharyngeal Symptoms in Patients With Suspected Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Laryngopharyngeal symptoms such as cough, throat clearing, voice change, paradoxic vocal fold movement, or laryngospasm are hyper-responsive behaviors resulting from local irritation (e.g., refluxate) and heightened sympathetic tone. Laryngeal recalibration therapy (LRT) guided by a speech-language pathologist (SLP) provides mechanical desensitization and cognitive recalibration to suppress hyper-responsive laryngeal patterns. The aim of this study was to assess symptom response to LRT among patients with chronic laryngopharyngeal symptoms undergoing evaluation of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: Adults with chronic laryngopharyngeal symptoms referred for evaluation of GERD to a single center were prospectively followed. Inclusion criteria included ≥2 SLP-directed LRT sessions. Data from endoscopy, ambulatory reflux monitoring, and patient-reported outcomes were collected when available. The primary outcome was symptom response. RESULTS: Sixty-five participants completed LRT: mean age 55.4 years (SD 17.2), 46 (71%) female, mean body mass index 25.6 kg/m 2 (6.8), and mean of 3.7 (1.9) LRT sessions. Overall, 55 participants (85%) met criteria for symptom response. Specifically, symptom response was similar between those with isolated laryngopharyngeal symptoms (13/15, 87%) and concomitant laryngopharyngeal/esophageal symptoms (42/50, 84%). Among participants who underwent reflux monitoring, symptom response was similar between those with proven, inconclusive for, and no GERD (18/21 [86%], 8/9 [89%], 10/13 [77%]). DISCUSSION: Eighty-five percent of patients with chronic laryngopharyngeal symptoms referred for GERD evaluation who underwent LRT-experienced laryngeal symptom response. Rates of symptom response were maintained across patients with or without proven GERD and patients with or without concomitant esophageal reflux symptoms. SLP-directed LRT is an effective approach to incorporate into multidisciplinary management of chronic laryngopharyngeal symptoms/laryngopharyngeal reflux disease.

Diagnostic Yield of Ambulatory Reflux Monitoring Systems for Evaluation of Chronic Laryngeal Symptoms.

INTRODUCTION: Among patients with chronic laryngeal symptoms, ambulatory reflux monitoring off acid suppression is recommended to evaluate for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). However, reflux monitoring systems are diverse in configuration and monitoring capabilities, which present a challenge in creating a diagnostic reference standard in these patients. This study aimed to compare diagnostic yield and performance between reflux monitoring systems in patients with chronic laryngeal symptoms. METHODS: This multicenter, international study of adult patients referred for evaluation of LPR over a 5-year period (March 2018-May 2023) assessed and compared diagnostic yield of pathologic gastroesophageal reflux (GER+) on ambulatory reflux monitoring off acid suppression. RESULTS: Of 813 patients, 296 (36%) underwent prolonged wireless pH, 532 (65%) underwent 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring, and 15 (2%) underwent both tests. Overall diagnostic yield for GER+ was 36% and greater for prolonged wireless pH compared with that for 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring (50% vs 27%; P < 0.01). Among 15 patients who underwent both prolonged wireless pH and 24-h pH-impedance monitoring, concordance between systems for GER+ was 40%. The most common source of discordance was strong evidence of GER+ across multiple days on prolonged wireless pH compared with no evidence of GER+ on pH-impedance. DISCUSSION: In this multicenter international study of patients with chronic laryngeal symptoms referred for LPR evaluation, diagnostic yield of ambulatory reflux monitoring off acid suppression was 36% and rose to 50% when using wireless pH monitoring. In patients referred for chronic laryngeal symptoms, 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring may risk a low negative predictive value in patients with unproven GER+ disease.

Development of American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy standards for training in advanced endoscopy within dedicated advanced endoscopy fellowship programs.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Training in interventional endoscopy is offered by nonaccredited advanced endoscopy fellowship programs (AEFPs). The number of these programs has increased dramatically with a concurrent increase in the breadth and complexity of interventional endoscopy procedures. Accreditation is governed by competency-based education, yet what constitutes a "high-quality" nonaccredited AEFP has not been defined. Using an evidence-based consensus process, we aimed to establish standards for AEFPs. METHODS: The RAND UCLA appropriateness method, a well-described modified Delphi process to develop quality indicators, was used. A task force established by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy drafted potential quality indicators (structure, process, and outcome) in 6 categories: activity preceding training; structure of AEFPs; training in ERCP, EUS, and EMR; and luminal stent placement. Three rounds of iterative feedback from 20 experts were conducted. Round 0 involved discussion of project details. In round 1, experts independently ranked proposed quality indicators on a 9-point interval scale ranging from highly inappropriate (1) to highly appropriate (9). Next, proposed quality indicators were discussed and reworded in a group meeting followed by round 2, in which experts independently reranked proposed quality indicators and provided benchmarks (when applicable). The median score for each quality indicator was calculated. Mean absolute deviation from the median was calculated, and appropriateness of potential quality indicators was assessed using the BIOMED concerted action on appropriateness definition, P value method, and interpercentile range adjusted for symmetry definition. A quality indicator was deemed appropriate if the median score was ≥7 and met criteria for appropriateness using all 3 defined statistical methods. RESULTS: Of 89 proposed quality indicators, 37 statements met criteria as appropriate for a quality indicator (activity preceding training, 2; structure of AEFPs, 10; training in ERCP, 7; training in EUS, 8; training in EMR, 7; luminal stent placement, 3). Minimum thresholds were defined for 19 relevant quality indicators for number of trainers, procedures during fellowship, and procedures before assessment of competence. Among the final appropriate quality indicators were that all trainees should undergo qualitative and quantitative competence assessments using validated tools at least quarterly with documented feedback throughout the training period and that trainees should track outcomes and relevant quality metrics for specific procedures. CONCLUSIONS: This consensus process using validated methodology established standards for an AEFP in an effort to ensure adequate training in the most commonly taught interventional endoscopic procedures (ERCP, EUS, EMR, and luminal stent placement) during fellowship. An important component of an AEFP is the use of competency-based assessments that are compliant with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's Next Accreditation System, with the goal of ensuring that trainees achieve specific milestones in their progression to achieving cognitive and technical competency.

Proton Pump Inhibitors: Rational Use and Use-Reduction - The Windsor Workshop.

BACKGROUND: Despite deprescribing initiatives to curb overutilization of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), achieving meaningful reductions in PPI use is proving a challenge. SUMMARY: An international group of primary care doctors and gastroenterologists examined the literature surrounding PPI use and use-reduction to clarify: (i) what constitutes rational PPI prescribing; (ii) when and in whom PPI use-reduction should be attempted; and (iii) what strategies to use when attempting PPI use-reduction. KEY MESSAGES: Before starting a PPI for reflux-like symptoms, patients should be educated on potential causes and alternative approaches including dietary and lifestyle modification, weight loss, and relaxation strategies. When commencing a PPI, patients should understand the reason for treatment, planned duration, and review date. PPI use at hospital discharge should not be continued without a recognized indication for long-term treatment. Long-term PPI therapy should be reviewed at least annually. PPI use-reduction should be based on the lack of a rational indication for long-term PPI use, not concern for PPI-associated adverse events. PPI use-reduction strategies involving switching to on-demand PPI or dose tapering, with rescue therapy for rebound symptoms, are more likely to succeed than abrupt cessation.

Pilot study evaluating salivary bile acids as a diagnostic biomarker of laryngopharyngeal reflux.

Bile acids in refluxate contribute to esophageal and laryngeal symptoms and are quantifiable. The aim of this study was to compare salivary bile acid concentrations across healthy controls and symptomatic patients (esophageal or laryngeal) with or without objective gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This prospective study enrolled adults into three groups: esophageal symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation, chest pain); laryngeal symptoms (cough, throat clearing, sore throat, dysphonia); and controls. Symptomatic patients primarily underwent prolonged wireless reflux monitoring off acid suppression and were categorized as symptomatic no GERD (acid exposure time <4%) or esophageal/laryngeal symptoms with GERD (acid exposure time ≥4%). Controls did not undergo reflux monitoring nor upper endoscopy. Saliva samples were provided for bile acid analysis via ultraperformance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Thirty-five participants were enrolled (mean age 47.4 years [SD 18.9], 16 [46%] male), including 10 controls and 25 symptomatic: 9 no GERD, 5 esophageal symptoms + GERD, and 11 laryngeal symptoms + GERD. Total salivary bile acids were highest in the laryngeal symptoms + GERD group (24.2 nM [SD 24.7]) compared to other groups (controls: 5.8 [6.0], P = 0.03; symptomatic no GERD: 3.1 [4.4]; P < 0.01; esophageal symptoms + GERD: 7.1 [7.1], P = 0.10). Bile acids were elevated in 45% (5/11) of the laryngeal symptoms + GERD group compared to 0% of the other three groups (P < 0.01). Salivary bile acids were higher among patients with laryngeal symptoms and objective GERD versus other groups. Salivary bile acids are a quantifiable biomarker with diagnostic potential for laryngopharyngeal reflux.

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.

Development and Validation of a National US Achalasia Cohort: The Veterans Affairs Achalasia Cohort (VA-AC).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Achalasia is an esophageal motility disorder associated with significant morbidity, yet achalasia-associated risk factors and outcomes are not well-characterized. Our aim was to establish a national cohort of individuals with achalasia, utilizing Veterans Health Administration (VHA) data. METHODS: We iteratively developed combinations of International Classification of Diseases and Current Procedural Terminology code algorithms to validate an approach for identifying achalasia cases. We assessed algorithm accuracy for achalasia diagnosis through manual chart review of candidate achalasia cases and candidate non-achalasia controls. The prespecified end point chosen to establish algorithm performance success was achieving a 1-sided 95% confidence lower bound for a positive predictive value >85% for a random sample of 100 candidate achalasia cases. Once adequate performance was validated, we queried national VHA data to establish and characterize a cohort of individuals diagnosed with achalasia between 1999 and 2020. RESULTS: Three rounds of algorithm modification and validation were conducted to achieve the prespecified performance endpoint. In the final round, a combination of 3 or more International Classification of Diseases codes for achalasia in the subject's lifetime and a Current Procedural Terminology code for esophageal manometry achieved an observed 94% positive predictive value (1-sided 95% confidence lower bound of 88.5%) for identifying achalasia. Applying the algorithm to national VHA data identified a cohort of 2100 individuals with achalasia, with a median age 65 years and who were 93% male. CONCLUSIONS: Using a rigorous validation approach, we established a national cohort of 2100 individuals with achalasia within the VHA, one of the largest established to date. This cohort can be utilized to study risk factors for achalasia and outcomes over time.

Optimizing the Management Algorithm for Heartburn in General Gastroenterology: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Minimization Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Heartburn is the most common symptom seen in gastroenterology practice. We aimed to optimize cost-effective evaluation and management of heartburn. METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model from insurer and patient perspectives comparing 4 strategies for patients failing empiric proton pump inhibitors (PPIs): (1) PPI optimization without testing, (2) endoscopy with PPI optimization for all patients, (3) endoscopy with PPI discontinuation when erosive findings are absent, and (4) endoscopy/ambulatory reflux monitoring with PPI discontinuation as appropriate for phenotypic management. Health outcomes were respectively defined on systematic reviews of clinical trials. Cost outcomes were defined on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services databases and commercial multipliers for direct healthcare costs, and national observational studies evaluating healthcare utilization. The time horizon was 1 year. All testing was performed off PPI. RESULTS: PPI optimization without testing cost $3784/y to insurers and $3128 to patients due to lower work productivity and suboptimal symptom relief. Endoscopy with PPI optimization lowered insurer costs by $1020/y and added 11 healthy days/y by identifying erosive reflux disease. Endoscopy with PPI discontinuation added 11 additional healthy days/y by identifying patients without erosive reflux disease that did not need PPI. By optimizing phenotype-guided treatment, endoscopy/ambulatory reflux monitoring with a trial of PPI discontinuation was the most effective of all strategies (gaining 22 healthy days/y) and saved $2183 to insurers and $2396 to patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with heartburn, endoscopy with ambulatory reflux monitoring (off PPI) optimizes cost-effective management by matching treatment to phenotype. When erosive findings are absent, trialing PPI discontinuation is more cost-effective than optimizing PPI.

Development and Validation of the Veterans Affairs Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gaps remain in understanding the epidemiology of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Our aim was to identify and validate a national cohort of individuals with EoE using Veterans Health Administration (VHA) data. METHODS: We used 2 validation strategies to develop algorithms that identified adults with EoE between 1999 and 2020. The first validation strategy applied International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code algorithms to a base cohort of individuals who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy with esophageal biopsy specimens. The second applied ICD code algorithms to a base cohort of all individuals in the VHA. For each ICD algorithm applied, a random sample of candidate EoE cases and non-EoE controls were selected and the charts were reviewed manually by a blinded reviewer. Each algorithm was modified iteratively until the prespecified diagnostic accuracy end point (95% confidence lower bound for a positive predictive value [PPV], >88%) was achieved. We compiled individuals from each strategy's maximum performance algorithm to construct the Veterans Affairs Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort. RESULTS: The maximum performance algorithm from the first validation strategy included 2 or more ICD code encounters for EoE separated by more than 30 days and achieved a 93.3% PPV (lower bound, 88.1%) for identifying true EoE cases. The maximum performance algorithm from the second validation strategy included 4 or more ICD code encounters for EoE in which 2 codes were separated by at least 30 days, and similarly achieved a 93.3% PPV (lower bound, 88.1%). Combining both strategies yielded 6637 individuals, which comprised the Veterans Affairs Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated 2 highly accurate coding algorithms for EoE and established a nationwide VHA cohort of adults with EoE for future studies.