Treatment Response With Potassium-competitive Acid Blockers Based on Clinical Phenotypes of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis.

Background/Aims: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is typically managed based on the clinical phenotype. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of potassium-competitive acid blockers (PCABs) in patients with various clinical GERD phenotypes. Methods: Core databases were searched for studies comparing PCABs and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in clinical GERD phenotypes of erosive reflux disease (ERD), non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), PPI-resistant GERD and night-time heartburn. Additional analysis was performed based on disease severity and drug dosage, and pooled efficacy was calculated. Results: In 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the initial treatment of ERD, the risk ratio for healing with PCABs versus PPIs was 1.09 (95% CI, 1.04-1.13) at 2 weeks and 1.03 (95% CI, 1.00-1.07) at 8 weeks, respectively. PCABs exhibited a significant increase in both initial and sustained healing of ERD compared to PPIs in RCTs, driven particularly in severe ERD (Los Angeles grade C/D). In 3 NERD RCTs, PCAB was superior to placebo in proportion of days without heartburn. Observational studies on PPI-resistant symptomatic GERD reported symptom frequency improvement in 86.3% of patients, while 90.7% showed improvement in PPIresistant ERD across 5 observational studies. Two RCTs for night-time heartburn had different endpoints, limiting meta-analysis. Pronounced hypergastrinemia was observed in patients treated with PCABs. Conclusions: Compared to PPIs, PCABs have superior efficacy and faster therapeutic effect in the initial and maintenance therapy of ERD, particularly severe ERD. While PCABs may be an alternative treatment option in NERD and PPI-resistant GERD, findings were inconclusive in patients with night-time heartburn.

Discordance Rate and Risk Factor of Other Diagnostic Modalities for Small Bowel Tumors Detected by Device-Assisted Enteroscopy: A Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Disease (KASID) Multicenter Study.

Background/Aims: Despite advances in imaging and endoscopic technology, diagnostic modalities for small bowel tumors are simultaneously performed. We investigated the discrepancy rate between each modality and predictive factors of discrepancy in patients with definite small bowel tumors. Methods: Data of patients with definite small bowel tumors who underwent both device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) and computed tomography (CT) were retrieved from web-based enteroscopy registry database in Korea. Predictive risk factors associated with discrepancy were analyzed using logistic regression analysis. Results: Among 998 patients, 210 (21.0%) were diagnosed with small bowel tumor using DAE, in 193 patients with definite small bowel tumor, DAE and CT were performed. Of these patients, 12 (6.2%) showed discrepancy between examinations. Among 49 patients who underwent DAE and video capsule endoscopy (VCE) examination, 13 (26.5%) showed discrepancy between examinations. No significant independent risk factors were associated with concordance between DAE and CT in multivariate logistic regression analysis among the patients. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, red blood cell transfusion was negatively associated with concordance between DAE and VCE in patients with small bowel tumor (odds ratio, 0.163; 95% confidence interval, 0.026 to 1.004; p=0.050). Conclusions: For small bowel tumors, the discrepancy rate between DAE and CT was 6.2%, and 26.5% between DAE and VCE. Despite developments in cross-sectional imaging (VCE and DAE modalities), discrepancies still exist. For small bowel bleeding that require significant transfusion while showing insignificant VCE findings, DAE should be considered as the next diagnostic approach, considering the possibility of missed small bowel tumor.

Clinical outcomes of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding according to the risk indicated by Glasgow-Blatchford risk score-computed tomography score in the emergency room.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Acute upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding is a significant emergency situation with a mortality rate of 2% to 10%. Therefore, initial risk stratification is important for proper management. We aimed to evaluate the role of contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) for risk stratification in patients with acute UGI bleeding in the emergency room (ER). METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with UGI bleeding in the ER. Glasgow-Blatchford risk score-computed tomography (GBS-CT) was assessed using a combination of GBS and the MDCT scan scoring system. RESULTS: Of the 297 patients with UGI bleeding, 124 (41.8%) underwent abdominal MDCT. Among them, 90.3% were classified as high-risk by GBS, and five patients died (4.0%). Rebleeding occurred in nine patients (7.3%). The high-risk GBS-CT group had significantly higher in-hospital mortality (10.5% in high-risk vs. 1.4% in moderate risk vs. 0% in low-risk, p = 0.049), transfusion amount (p < 0.001), and endoscopic hemostasis (p < 0.001) compared to the moderate- and low-risk groups. CONCLUSION: Adding MDCT scans to the existing validated prognosis model when predicting the risk of UGI bleeding in patients in the ER plays a significant role in determining in-hospital mortality, transfusions, and the need for endoscopic hemostasis.