Search

A pilot study was conducted to evaluate the association between gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) using pH-impedance monitoring and polysomnography. The study found a direct association between higher apnea hypopnea index (AHI) values and various pH-impedance monitoring metrics in the recumbent position, suggesting that nocturnal reflux events may exacerbate the occurrence of apneas. However, no significant association was found in the upright position or overall exam. The results suggest that the management of one condition could positively influence the other, and further research is needed to fully understand this relationship. [Extracted from the article]

Objective: The objective of this work was to gather an international consensus group to propose a global definition and diagnostic approach of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) to guide primary care and specialist physicians in the management of LPR., Methods: Forty-eight international experts (otolaryngologists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, and physiologists) were included in a modified Delphi process to revise 48 statements about definition, clinical presentation, and diagnostic approaches to LPR. Three voting rounds determined a consensus statement to be acceptable when 80% of experts agreed with a rating of at least 8/10. Votes were anonymous and the analyses of voting rounds were performed by an independent statistician., Results: After the third round, 79.2% of statements (N = 38/48) were approved. LPR was defined as a disease of the upper aerodigestive tract resulting from the direct and/or indirect effects of gastroduodenal content reflux, inducing morphological and/or neurological changes in the upper aerodigestive tract. LPR is associated with recognized non-specific laryngeal and extra-laryngeal symptoms and signs that can be evaluated with validated patient-reported outcome questionnaires and clinical instruments. The hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH testing can suggest the diagnosis of LPR when there is >1 acid, weakly acid or nonacid hypopharyngeal reflux event in 24 h., Conclusion: A global consensus definition for LPR is presented to improve detection and diagnosis of the disease for otolaryngologists, pulmonologists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, and primary care practitioners. The approved statements are offered to improve collaborative research by adopting common and validated diagnostic approaches to LPR., Level of Evidence: 5 Laryngoscope, 134:1614-1624, 2024., (© 2023 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Background: Data on the role of the microbiome in adult patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) are limited., Aims: To prospectively collect and characterise the salivary, oesophageal and gastric microbiome in patients with EoE, further correlating the findings with disease activity., Methods: Adult patients with symptoms of oesophageal dysfunction undergoing upper endoscopy were consecutively enrolled. Patients were classified as EoE patients, in case of more than 15 eosinophils per high-power field, or non-EoE controls, in case of lack of eosinophilic infiltration. Before and during endoscopy, saliva, oesophageal and gastric fundus biopsies were collected. Microbiota assessment was performed by 16 s rRNA analysis. A Sparse Partial Least Squares Discriminant Analysis (sPLS-DA) was implemented to identify biomarkers., Results: Saliva samples were collected from 29 EoE patients and 20 non-EoE controls;, biopsies from 25 EoE and 5 non-EoE controls. In saliva samples, 23 Amplicon Sequence Variants (ASVs) were positively associated with EoE and 27 ASVs with controls, making it possible to discriminate between EoE and non-EoE patients with a classification error (CE) of 24%. In a validation cohort, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of this model were 78.6%, 80%, 75%, 80% and 60%, respectively. Moreover, the analysis of oesophageal microbiota samples observed a clear microbial pattern able to discriminate between active and inactive EoE (CE = 8%)., Conclusion: Our preliminary data suggest that salivary metabarcoding analysis in combination with machine learning approaches could become a valid, cheap, non-invasive test to segregate between EoE and non-EoE patients., (© 2022 The Authors. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Chicago classification version 4.0 (CCv4.0) introduced stringent diagnostic criteria for oesophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO), in order to increase the clinical relevance of the diagnosis, although this has not yet been demonstrated., Aims: To determine the prevalence of EGJOO using CCv4.0 criteria in patients with CCv3.0-based EGJOO, and to assess if provocative manoeuvres can predict a conclusive CCv4.0 diagnosis of EGJOO., Methods: Clinical presentation, high resolution manometry (HRM) with rapid drink challenge (RDC), and timed barium oesophagogram (TBE) data were extracted for patients diagnosed with EGJOO as per CCv3.0 between 2018 and 2020. Patients were then re-classified according to CCv4.0 criteria, using clinically relevant symptoms (dysphagia and/or chest pain), and abnormal barium emptying at 5 min on TBE. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses identified HRM predictors of EGJOO., Results: Of 2010 HRM studies, 144 (7.2%) fulfilled CCv3.0 criteria for EGJOO (median age 61 years, 56.9% female). Upon applying CCv4.0 criteria, EGJOO prevalence decreased to 1.2%. On ROC analysis, integrated relaxation pressure during RDC (RDC-IRP) was a significant predictor of a conclusive EGJOO diagnosis by CCv4.0 criteria (area under the curve: 96.1%). The optimal RDC-IRP threshold of 16.7 mm Hg had 87% sensitivity, 97.1% specificity, 95.7% negative predictive value and 91.3% positive predictive value for a conclusive EGJOO diagnosis; lower thresholds (10 mmHg, 12 mmHg) had better sensitivity but lower specificity., Conclusion: CCv4.0 criteria reduced the prevalence of EGJOO by 80%, thereby refining the diagnosis and identifying clinically relevant outflow obstruction. Elevated RDC-IRP can predict conclusive EGJOO per CCv4.0., (© 2022 The Authors. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Conventionally, patients with functional dyspepsia are subgrouped based on upper gastrointestinal symptoms, according to the Rome criteria. However, psychological co-morbidity and extraintestinal symptoms are also relevant to functional gastrointestinal disorders., Aim: To investigate whether it is possible to subgroup people with functional dyspepsia using factors beyond upper gastrointestinal symptoms., Methods: We collected demographic, symptom and psychological health data from adult subjects meeting the Rome III criteria for functional dyspepsia in two secondary care cross-sectional surveys in Canada and the UK. We performed latent class analysis, a method of model-based clustering, to identify specific subgroups (clusters). For each cluster, we drew a radar plot, and compared these by visual inspection, describing cluster characteristics., Results: In total, 400 individuals met Rome III criteria for functional dyspepsia in the Canadian cohort, and 262 the UK cohort. A four-cluster model was the optimum solution and the characteristics of the clusters were almost identical between the two cohorts. The clusters were defined by a pattern of gastrointestinal symptoms and were further differentiated by the extent of extraintestinal and psychological co-morbidity. Cluster 1 (mean age 46.7 years, 66.7% female) consisted of epigastric pain and nausea with high psychological burden, cluster 2 (mean age 41.5 years, 77.7% female) high overall gastrointestinal symptom severity with high psychological burden, cluster 3 (45.8 years, 67.2% female) oesophageal symptoms and early satiety with low psychological burden, and cluster 4 (mean age 40.4 years, 71.5% female) postprandial fullness with low psychological burden. We validated the model derived using the Canadian study population externally by applying it to the UK dataset. We demonstrated reproducibility; it would perform similarly when applied to a different dataset., Conclusions: Latent class analysis identified four distinct functional dyspepsia subgroups characterised by varying degrees of gastrointestinal symptoms, extraintestinal symptoms and psychological co-morbidity. Further research is needed to assess whether they might be used to direct treatment., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Prevalence of uninvestigated dyspepsia varies across cross-sectional surveys. This may be due to differences in definitions used or study methodology, rather than global variability., Aim: To determine the global prevalence of uninvestigated dyspepsia according to Rome criteria., Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched to identify population-based studies reporting prevalence of uninvestigated dyspepsia in adults (≥18 years old) according to Rome I, II, III or IV criteria. Prevalence of uninvestigated dyspepsia was extracted, according to criteria used to define it. Pooled prevalence, according to study location and certain other characteristics, odds ratios (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated., Results: Of 2133 citations evaluated, 67 studies fulfilled eligibility criteria, representing 98 separate populations, comprising 338 383 subjects. Pooled prevalence ranged from 17.6% (95% CI 9.8%-27.1%) in studies defining uninvestigated dyspepsia according to Rome I criteria, to 6.9% (95% CI 5.7%-8.2%) in those using Rome IV criteria. Postprandial distress syndrome was the commonest subtype, occurring in 46.2% of participants using Rome III criteria, and 62.8% with Rome IV. Prevalence of uninvestigated dyspepsia was up to 1.5-fold higher in women, irrespective of the definition used. There was significant heterogeneity between studies in all our analyses, which persisted even when the same criteria were applied and similar methodology was used., Conclusions: Even when uniform symptom-based criteria are used to define the presence of uninvestigated dyspepsia, prevalence varies between countries. This suggests that there are environmental, cultural, ethnic, dietary or genetic influences determining symptoms., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Little is known about the relationship between proton pump inhibitor-responsive oesophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE), eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD)., Aim: To compare high resolution manometry features and symptom profiles of patients with EoE, PPI-REE and GERD., Methods: Consecutive patients diagnosed with EoE or PPI-REE according to international criteria (presence of at least one typical symptom of oesophageal dysfunction; at least 15 eosinophils per high-power field at mid/proximal oesophagus, persistence or resolution of eosinophils after an 8-week PPI trial), and a group of patients with proven GERD and oesophageal eosinophilia, prospectively completed the GerdQ questionnaire and underwent high resolution manometry., Results: Thirty-five patients with EoE, 17 with PPI-REE and 27 with GERD were enrolled. When compared to GERD, both EoE and PPI-REE had higher rates of dysphagia (15% vs. 94% vs. 88%, P < 0.0001), patients with EoE reported heartburn and regurgitation less frequently (26% vs. 85%, and 17% vs. 74%, respectively; P < 0.001 for each and had lower GerdQ score [1 (0-6) vs. 8 (6-12), P < 0.001] than GERD patients. There was no significant difference comparing PPI-REE and GERD patients. Patients with PPI-REE had a higher prevalence of erosive oesophagitis than patients with EoE (35% vs. 9%, P = 0.04), which was similar to that of GERD (48%, P = 0.54). Patients with EoE had a lower frequency of high resolution manometry features associated with GERD than patients with PPI-REE. There was no significant difference between PPI-REE and GERD patients., Conclusion: GERD, as assessed by GerdQ and high resolution manometry is common in patients with PPI-REE, which may share similar pathogenic mechanisms., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)