Search

Background: Vonoprazan is a new acid-suppressing drug that received FDA approval in 2022. It reversibly inhibits gastric acid secretion by competing with the potassium ions on the luminal surface of the parietal cells (potassium-competitive acid blockers or P-CABs). Vonoprazan has been on the market for a short time and there are many clinical trials to support its clinical application. However, medical experience and comprehensive clinical data is still limited, especially on how and if, gastric histology is altered due to therapy., Methods: A 12-week experiment trial with 30 Wistar rats was to assess the presence of gastrointestinal morphologic abnormalities upon administration of omeprazole and vonoprazan. At six weeks of age, rats were randomly assigned to one of 5 groups: (1) saline as negative control group, (2) oral omeprazole (40 mg/kg), as positive control group, (3) oral omeprazole (40 mg/kg) for 4 weeks, proceeded by 8 weeks off omeprazole, (4) oral vonoprazan (4 mg/kg), as positive control group, and (5) oral vonoprazan (4 mg/kg) for 4 weeks, proceeded by 8 weeks off vonoprazan., Results: We identified non-inflammatory alterations characterized by parietal (oxyntic) cell loss and chief (zymogen) cell hyperplasia and replacement by pancreatic acinar cell metaplasia (PACM). No significant abnormalities were identified in any other tissues in the hepatobiliary and gastrointestinal tracts., Conclusion: PACM has been reported in gastric mucosa, at the esophagogastric junction, at the distal esophagus, and in Barrett esophagus. However, the pathogenesis of this entity is still unclear. Whereas some authors have suggested that PACM is an acquired process others have raised the possibility of PACM being congenital in nature. Our results suggest that the duration of vonoprazan administration at a dose of 4 mg/kg plays an important role in the development of PACM., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) continues to be among the most common diseases seen by gastroenterologists, surgeons, and primary care physicians. Our understanding of the varied presentations of GERD, enhancements in diagnostic testing, and approach to patient management have evolved. During this time, scrutiny of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has increased considerably. Although PPIs remain the medical treatment of choice for GERD, multiple publications have raised questions about adverse events, raising doubts about the safety of long-term use and increasing concern about overprescribing of PPIs. New data regarding the potential for surgical and endoscopic interventions have emerged. In this new document, we provide updated, evidence-based recommendations and practical guidance for the evaluation and management of GERD, including pharmacologic, lifestyle, surgical, and endoscopic management. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to evaluate the evidence and the strength of recommendations. Key concepts and suggestions that as of this writing do not have sufficient evidence to grade are also provided., (Copyright © 2021 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) continue to be the medication of choice for treatment of acid-related disease, with few if any overt side effects seen with daily use. They are often prescribed empirically, often in high doses and with many patients being treated with multiple PPIs without an objective diagnosis. Therefore, they are believed to be overprescribed and used without indication. In this article we discuss the appropriate clinical indications for PPIs, review in detail the major associated adverse events, and put in perspective key issues in balancing benefits and risk of this exceptional (and safe) class of drug., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are among the most commonly prescribed medications and studies are reporting potentially harmful PPI-related adverse events. While these studies' findings are controversial, their impact on patients and physicians remains unknown., Aim: To determine patient and physician awareness of PPI-related adverse events, source of information, and subsequent effect on patient behaviour and physician practice., Methods: A 20-item questionnaire was administered to English speaking adult patients and physicians in primary care and specialty clinics about topics including knowledge of PPI-related adverse events, change in behaviour of patients on PPIs and physician management of patients on PPIs., Results: Of 277 patients surveyed, 45% reported knowledge of side effects related to PPIs. Patients were more likely to hear about PPI side effects from non-physician sources (66%) than physicians (38%). Of patients who had heard about PPI side effects, bone fractures and osteoporosis were the most common concerns, 42% and 44% respectively. Of PPI users, 38% changed their behaviour based upon concerns about PPI-related adverse events. Change in patient behaviour due to concern about PPI side effects was associated with age ≥ 65 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.07 [1.19-13.94]; P = 0.03) and concern about long-term side effects (OR 2.31 [1.03-5.17]; P = 0.04). Of 83 physicians surveyed, 60% reported concern about PPI-related adverse events, with bone fractures (46%) and osteoporosis (49%) being the most frequently reported. Overall, 37% of physicians reported changing their practice based upon their concerns., Conclusions: Nearly half of patients reported knowledge of PPI-related adverse events, most often from non-physician sources, and general concern regarding their impact. PPI users are changing their behaviour based upon these concerns, without physician input, and care providers are changing behaviour based on relatively weak evidence., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common disorder among elderly patients seeking medical care. Diagnosis and management of GERD in the older patient is a unique challenge for both the primary care provider and the gastroenterologist. Such patients may have atypical symptoms, more severe disease, and a higher rate of complications such as erosive esophagitis, Barrett esophagus, and esophageal cancer. Moreover, the elderly may be more sensitive to the morbidity and mortality of the available treatments for GERD. A careful and vigilant approach to the diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of reflux disease in the elderly is warranted., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

DescriptionThe purpose of this best practice advice (BPA) article from the Clinical Practice Update Committee of the American Gastroenterological Association is to provide an update on advances and innovation regarding the screening and surveillance of Barrett's esophagus.MethodsThe BPA statements presented here were developed from expert review of existing literature combined with discussion and expert opinion to provide practical advice. Formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of BPAs was not the intent of this clinical practice update. This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Screening with standard upper endoscopy may be considered in individuals with at least 3 established risk factors for Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma, including individuals who are male, non-Hispanic white, age >50 years, have a history of smoking, chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease, obesity, or a family history of BE or esophageal adenocarcinoma. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Nonendoscopic cell-collection devices may be considered as an option to screen for BE. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Screening and surveillance endoscopic examination should be performed using high-definition white light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy, with endoscopists spending adequate time inspecting the Barrett's segment. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Screening and surveillance exams should define the extent of BE using a standardized grading system documenting the circumferential and maximal extent of the columnar lined esophagus (Prague classification) with a clear description of landmarks and the location and characteristics of visible lesions (nodularity, ulceration), when present. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Advanced imaging technologies such as endomicroscopy may be used as adjunctive techniques to identify dysplasia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Sampling during screening and surveillance exams should be performed using the Seattle biopsy protocol (4-quadrant biopsies every 1-2 cm and target biopsies from any visible lesion). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Wide-area transepithelial sampling may be used as an adjunctive technique to sample the suspected or established Barrett's segment (in addition to the Seattle biopsy protocol). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Patients with erosive esophagitis should be biopsied when concern of dysplasia or malignancy exists. A repeat endoscopy should be performed after 8 weeks of twice a day proton pump inhibitor therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Tissue systems pathology-based prediction assay may be utilized for risk stratification of patients with nondysplastic BE. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Risk stratification models may be utilized to selectively identify individuals at risk for Barrett's associated neoplasia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Given the significant interobserver variability among pathologists, the diagnosis of BE-related neoplasia should be confirmed by an expert pathology review. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: Patients with BE-related neoplasia should be referred to endoscopists with expertise in advanced imaging, resection, and ablation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: All patients with BE should be placed on at least daily proton pump inhibitor therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Patients with nondysplastic BE should undergo surveillance endoscopy in 3 to 5 years. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 15: In patients undergoing surveillance after endoscopic eradication therapy, random biopsies should be taken of the esophagogastric junction, gastric cardia, and the distal 2 cm of the neosquamous epithelium as well as from all visible lesions, independent of the length of the original BE segment.

BACKGROUND: Optimal ambulatory reflux monitoring methodology in symptomatic reflux patients continues to be debated. AIMS: To utilise published literature and expert opinion to develop recommendation statements addressing use of ambulatory reflux monitoring in clinical practice METHODS: The RAND Appropriateness Method (RAM) was utilised among 17 experts with discussion, revision and two rounds of ranking of recommendation statements. Ambulatory reflux monitoring protocol, methodology and thresholds ranked as appropriate by ≥80% of panellists met the criteria for appropriateness. RESULTS: Prolonged (96-h recommended) wireless pH monitoring off proton pump inhibitor (PPI) was identified as the appropriate diagnostic tool to assess the need for acid suppression in patients with unproven gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and persisting typical reflux symptoms despite once-daily PPI. Acid exposure time (AET) 6.0% across ≥2 days is conclusive evidence for GERD and supports treatment for GERD, while AET >10% across ≥2 days identifies severe acid burden that supports escalation of anti-reflux treatment. In previously proven GERD, impedance-pH monitoring on PPI is helpful in defining refractory GERD and mechanisms of continued symptoms; the presence of  4.0% and positive reflux-symptom association support escalation of anti-reflux treatment, including use of invasive therapeutics. CONCLUSIONS: Statements meeting appropriateness for average clinical care have been identified when utilising reflux monitoring in patients with typical reflux symptoms and PPI non-response.

Summary: Background: Optimal ambulatory reflux monitoring methodology in symptomatic reflux patients continues to be debated. Aims: To utilise published literature and expert opinion to develop recommendation statements addressing use of ambulatory reflux monitoring in clinical practice Methods: The RAND Appropriateness Method (RAM) was utilised among 17 experts with discussion, revision and two rounds of ranking of recommendation statements. Ambulatory reflux monitoring protocol, methodology and thresholds ranked as appropriate by ≥80% of panellists met the criteria for appropriateness. Results: Prolonged (96‐h recommended) wireless pH monitoring off proton pump inhibitor (PPI) was identified as the appropriate diagnostic tool to assess the need for acid suppression in patients with unproven gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and persisting typical reflux symptoms despite once‐daily PPI. Acid exposure time (AET) <4.0% on all days of monitoring with negative reflux‐symptom association excludes GERD and does not support ongoing PPI treatment. Conversely, AET >6.0% across ≥2 days is conclusive evidence for GERD and supports treatment for GERD, while AET >10% across ≥2 days identifies severe acid burden that supports escalation of anti‐reflux treatment. In previously proven GERD, impedance‐pH monitoring on PPI is helpful in defining refractory GERD and mechanisms of continued symptoms; the presence of <40 reflux events, AET <2.0% and a negative reflux‐symptom association does not support escalation of anti‐reflux treatment. In contrast, AET > 4.0% and positive reflux‐symptom association support escalation of anti‐reflux treatment, including use of invasive therapeutics. Conclusions: Statements meeting appropriateness for average clinical care have been identified when utilising reflux monitoring in patients with typical reflux symptoms and PPI non‐response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

LINKED CONTENT This article is linked to Ghosh et al and Sugiyama papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15522 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15763. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

LINKED CONTENT This article is linked to Ghosh et al and Kurlander and Rubenstein papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15522 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15564. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]