[Prevalence of supraesophageal manifestations in patients with gastroesophageal erosive and non-erosive reflux disease]. / Prevalência de queixas supra-esofágicas em pacientes com doenças do refluxo erosiva e não-erosiva.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory, ear-nose and throat complaints, chest pain and dysphagia can be a part of clinical manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The first two are named supraesophageal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Controversy about the prevalence of these clinical manifestations in patients with non-erosive and erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease exists. AIMS: Evaluate the prevalence of supraesophageal manifestations in patients with erosive and non-erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease. METHODS: Files from patients submitted to upper endoscopy, esophageal manometry and pH monitoring for the investigation of gastroesophageal reflux disease (heartburn as the chief complaint) were reviewed and respiratory and ear, nose and throat symptoms were recorded. Patients with erosive disease (grades I to III according to Savary-Miller classification) and with non-erosive disease (normal endoscopy with abnormal pH monitoring were selected. Statistical analysis included the chi-square test. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria being 162 with erosive disease (70% with grade I esophagitis) and 118 with non-erosive disease. Overall, 88 patients had ear, nose and throat symptoms (31%), the more frequent were hoarseness and clearing and 42, respiratory manifestations (15%), being cough the more prevalent. In the ear, nose and throat symptoms group, 45 were erosive disease (28%) and 43 non-erosive disease (36.4%). As for the respiratory symptom group, 21 patients (13%) were erosive disease and 21 (18%) were non-erosive disease. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the prevalence of supraesophageal manifestations between patients with gastroesophageal erosive and non-erosive reflux disease.

Prevalência de queixas supra-esofágicas em pacientes com doenças do refluxo erosiva e não-erosiva / Prevalence of supraesophageal manifestations in patients with gastroesophageal erosive and non-erosive reflux disease

RACIONAL: Na doença do refluxo gastroesofágico pode-se encontrar, como parte do quadro clínico da doença, queixas respiratórias, otorrinolaringológicas, dor torácica ou disfagia. As duas primeiras são intituladas de manifestações supra-esofágicas da doença. É discutível a prevalência destas alterações em pacientes com doença do refluxo gastroesofágico nas formas erosiva e não-erosiva. OBJETIVOS: Avaliar a prevalência de manifestações supra-esofágicas em pacientes com doenças do refluxo erosiva e não-erosiva. MÉTODOS: Foram revistas as fichas de pacientes que realizaram endoscopia digestiva alta, esofagomanometria e pHmetria prolongada nos últimos 5 anos, na investigação de doença do refluxo gastroesofágico (pirose como queixa principal), em que havia informações a respeito de queixas respiratórias e otorrinolaringológicas. Foram selecionados pacientes com doença do refluxo erosiva (graus I a III, pela classificação de Savary-Miller) e com doença do refluxo não-erosiva (endoscopia negativa, com pHmetria prolongada anormal). A análise estatística utilizou o teste de qui-quadrado. RESULTADOS: Duzentos e oitenta pacientes preencheram os critérios de inclusão, sendo 162 com doença do refluxo erosiva (70 por cento com esofagite grau I) e 118 com doença do refluxo não-erosiva. No grupo total, 88 apresentavam queixas otorrinolaringológicas (31 por cento), com predomínio de rouquidão e pigarro e 42, queixas respiratórias (15 por cento), predominando a tosse crônica. Dos pacientes com queixas otorrinolaringológicas, 45 pertenciam ao grupo doença do refluxo erosiva (28 por cento) e 43 ao grupo doença do refluxo não-erosiva (36,4 por cento). Em relação aos com queixas respiratórias, 21 pacientes (13 por cento) pertenciam ao grupo doença do refluxo erosiva e 21 (18 por cento) ao grupo doença do refluxo não-erosiva. CONCLUSÃO: Não houve diferença entre a prevalência das queixas supra-esofágicas em pacientes com doenças do refluxo erosiva e não-erosiva.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory, ear-nose and throat complaints, chest pain and dysphagia can be a part of clinical manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The first two are named supraesophageal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Controversy about the prevalence of these clinical manifestations in patients with non-erosive and erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease exists. AIMS: Evaluate the prevalence of supraesophageal manifestations in patients with erosive and non-erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease. METHODS: Files from patients submitted to upper endoscopy, esophageal manometry and pH monitoring for the investigation of gastroesophageal reflux disease (heartburn as the chief complaint) were reviewed and respiratory and ear, nose and throat symptoms were recorded. Patients with erosive disease (grades I to III according to Savary-Miller classifi cation) and with non-erosive disease (normal endoscopy with abnormal pH monitoring were selected. Statistical analysis included the chi-square test. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty patients fulfi lled the inclusion criteria being 162 with erosive disease (70 percent with grade I esophagitis) and 118 with non-erosive disease. Overall, 88 patients had ear, nose and throat symptoms (31 percent), the more frequent were hoarseness and clearing and 42, respiratory manifestations (15 percent), being cough the more prevalent. In the ear, nose and throat symptoms group, 45 were erosive disease (28 percent) and 43 non-erosive disease (36.4 percent). As for the respiratory symptom group, 21 patients (13 percent) were erosive disease and 21 (18 percent) were non-erosive disease. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the prevalence of supraesophageal manifestations between patients with gastroesophageal erosive and non-erosive reflux disease.

[Relationship between the size of hiatal hernia and esophageal acid exposure time in erosive and non-erosive reflux disease]. / Relação entre o tamanho de hérnia hiatal e tempo de exposição ácida esofágica nas doenças do refluxo erosiva e não-erosiva.

BACKGROUND: In the last few years studies have demonstrated that hiatal hernias have an important role in the pathogenesis of reflux disease, promoting reflux by many different mechanisms, emphasizing that the larger the hiatal hernia, the higher the reflux intensity and erosive esophagitis prevalence. AIM: To correlate the size of hiatal hernias (small or large) with reflux intensity (measured by pH monitoring parameters) in patients with non-erosive and erosive reflux disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed pH monitoring from patients with typical reflux symptoms (heartburn) previously submitted to upper endoscopy. Reflux intensity was measured by the % of total time of pH < 4 (%TT) and by % of time of pH < 4 in upright (%UT) and supine (%ST) positions. Patients were classified as non-erosive reflux disease if no erosive esophagitis was found in endoscopy and pH monitoring was abnormal and as erosive reflux disease if they had erosive esophagitis. Hiatal hernias were classified as small if their size ranged from 2 to 4 cm and large if > or = 5 cm. RESULTS: A total of 192 patients were included, being 115 in erosive reflux disease group and 77 in non-erosive reflux disease group. In erosive reflux disease patients, there were 94 (81%) with small hiatal hernias and 21 (19%) with large ones and in non-erosive reflux disease patients there were 66 (85%) with small and 11(15%) with large hiatal hernias. In erosive reflux disease group, the %TT, %UT and %ST were of 13.1 +/- 7.1; 13.4 +/- 7.4 and 12.3 +/- 11.5 in small hiatal hernias and 20.2 +/- 12.3; 17.8 +/- 14.1 and 20.7 +/- 14.1 in large hiatal hernias, respectively (P < 0.05 for %TT and %TS). In non-erosive reflux disease patients, %TT, %UT and %ST were 9.6 +/- 4.8; 10.8 +/- 6.8 and 8.6 +/- 7.3 in small hiatal hernias and of 14.6 +/- 13.3; 11.2 +/- 7.5 and 18.1 +/- 21.0 in large hiatal hernias respectively (P < 0.05 for %TT and %TS). CONCLUSION: Large hiatal hernias increase acid exposure time only in supine position in erosive esophagitis patients and in non-erosive patients.

Relação entre o tamanho de hérnia hiatal e tempo de exposição ácida esofágica nas doenças do refluxo erosiva e não-erosiva / Relationship between the size of hiatal hernia and esophageal acid exposure time in erosive and non-erosive reflux disease

RACIONAL: Nos últimos anos, estudos têm demonstrado a importância da hérnia hiatal na etiopatogenia da doença do refluxo gastroesofágico, atuando por vários mecanismos, sendo enfatizado que quanto maior a hérnia, maior seria a possibilidade de refluxo e esofagite. OBJETIVOS: Avaliar por parâmetros de pHmetria prolongada, se a presença de hérnias volumosas se correlaciona com maior intensidade do refluxo, em pacientes com a doença do refluxo erosiva e doença do refluxo não-erosiva. PACIENTES E MÉTODOS: Foram revistas as pHmetrias prolongadas anormais consecutivas de pacientes em investigação de doença do refluxo gastroesofágico (pirose como queixa principal) e analisadas as percentagens de tempo total ( por centoTT), em posição ereta ( por centoTE) e posição supina ( por centoTS) com pH <4. Todos haviam realizado previamente endoscopia digestiva alta. Selecionaram-se pacientes com doença do refluxo erosiva (esofagite pela classificação de Savary-Miller) e com doença do refluxo não-erosiva (sem esofagite, com pHmetria prolongada anormal), todos com hérnia hiatal. Considerou-se hérnia hiatal não volumosa aquelas entre 2 e <5 cm e hérnia hiatal volumosa quando de tamanho =/>5 cm. RESULTADOS: Cento e noventa e dois pacientes preencheram os critérios de inclusão, sendo 115 com doença do refluxo erosiva e 77 com doença do refluxo não-erosiva. No primeiro grupo, 94 (81 por cento) pacientes apresentavam hérnias hiatais não-volumosas, enquanto que 21 (19 por cento) apresentavam hérnias hiatais volumosas. No grupo com doença do refluxo não-erosiva, 66 (85 por cento) pacientes apresentavam hérnia hiatal não-volumosa e 11 (15 por cento) hérnia hiatal volumosa. Na doença do refluxo erosiva, as por centoTT, por centoTE e por centoTS foram de 13,1 + 7,1, 13,4 + 7,4 e 12,3 + 11,5 nas hérnias hiatais não-volumosas, aumentando para 20,2 + 12,3, 17,8 + 14,1 e 20,7 + 14,1 nas hérnias hiatais volumosas, respectivamente, sendo este aumento estatisticamente significante nos tempos total e supino. Na doença do refluxo não-erosiva, as por centoTT, por centoTE e por centoTS foram de 9,6 + 4,8, 10,8+ 6,8 e 8,6 + 7,3 nas hérnias hiatais não volumosas e de 14,6 + 13,3, 11,2 + 7,5 18,1 + 21,0 nas hérnias volumosas, respectivamente, com significância semelhante à anterior. CONCLUSAO: As hérnias volumosas aumentam o tempo de exposição ácida esofágica exclusivamente na posição supina nos pacientes com doença do refluxo erosiva e doença do refluxo não-erosiva.

Ineffective esophageal motility in gastroesophageal erosive reflux disease and in nonerosive reflux disease: are they different?

BACKGROUND: In GERD patients, ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), a hypocontractile disorder, is the most common motor abnormality. IEM has been associated with reflux in both the supine and upright position, prolonged esophageal clearance, and delayed of bolus transport. IEM has been equally present in erosive and in nonerosive GERD. GOAL: Considering that reflux has been found to be more severe in erosive GERD than in nonerosive GERD patients and that IEM delays esophageal clearance, our hypothesis is that patients with erosive GERD have more severe IEM than those with nonerosive disease. STUDY: A retrospective review of consecutive manometries of patients with the chief complaint of heartburn and a diagnosis of IEM were performed, and patients with both erosive and nonerosive GERD were selected. According to the number of ineffective contractions, IEM was stratified into three groups: 30% to 40%, mild; 50% to 60%, moderate; and greater than 60%, severe. We also registered the number of low amplitude, failed, and normal waves in each manometry of both groups. We evaluated 110 patients: 70 (64%) with erosive GERD and 40 (36%) with nonerosive GERD. The percentage of mild, moderate and severe IEM was similar in erosive and in nonerosive GERD patients, as well the number of low amplitude, failed or normal waves (P < 0.5). CONCLUSION: There were no differences between the severity of IEM in erosive and in nonerosive GERD patients.