Functional heartburn has more in common with functional dyspepsia than with non-erosive reflux disease

Current and emerging therapies for the management of functional gastrointestinal disorders

The functional gastrointestinal disorders are common disorders that are associated with significant quality-of-life impairment and considerable economic burden on the healthcare system. They are frequently associated with a comorbid psychiatric condition; this, together with a striking lack of effective pharmacological therapies, means they represent a considerable therapeutic challenge to the treating physician. In this overview, we examine the evidence to support the use of agents currently used in the management of the more common functional gastrointestinal disorders and review emerging therapies.

The daily response for proton pump inhibitor treatment in Japanese reflux esophagitis and non-erosive reflux disease

We investigated comparison according to reflux esophagitis and non-erosive reflux disease about “daily” symptom improvement for proton pump inhibitor treatment. We enrolled 57 reflux esophagitis and 90 non-erosive reflux disease patients. They took rabeprazole 10 mg/day for 28 days and completed “daily” in the Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of GERD from baseline until day 14, and after 28 days of treatment. The efficacy endpoint was the improvement rates in Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of GERD, based on baseline. Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of GERD was decreased in reflux esophagitis and non-erosive reflux disease (p<0.001) and was significantly lower in reflux esophagitis than in non-erosive reflux disease from the first day of treatment (p<0.05). Symptomatic improvement rates were also significantly higher in reflux esophagitis (50.3 ± 44.9%) than in non-erosive reflux disease (31.7 ± 43.2%) from the first day of treatment (p<0.0001). The symptomatic improvement rates in reflux esophagitis were significant increased from the second day of treatment until after 28 days of treatment (p = 0.0006), however, these in non-erosive reflux disease were significant increased from third days until after 28 days of treatment (p = 0.0002). In non-erosive reflux disease, the improvement of dysmotility symptom was particularly gradual as well as of reflux symptom, too. As for results of prediction of proton pump inhibitor response (completed symptom resolution) form early symptom improvement within 1 week, it was able to predict proton pump inhibitor response from the symptom improvement rate on 3 days in reflux esophagitis and on day 7 in non-erosive reflux disease. In conclusion, the prediction of the proton pump inhibitor response in non-erosive reflux disease was slow in comparison with reflux esophagitis. The cause was gradual improvement of dysmotility symptom.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for the treatment of hypersensitive esophagus: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVES

Ambulatory 24-h pH-impedance monitoring can be used to assess the relationship of persistent symptoms and reflux episodes, despite proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. Using this technique, we aimed to identify patients with hypersensitive esophagus and evaluate the effect of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) on their symptoms.

METHODS

Patients with normal endoscopy and typical reflux symptoms (heartburn, chest pain, and regurgitation), despite PPI therapy twice daily, underwent 24-h pH-impedance monitoring. Distal esophageal acid exposure (% time pH <4) was measured and reflux episodes were classified into acid or non-acid. A positive symptom index (SI) was declared if at least half of the symptom events were preceded by reflux episodes. Patients with a normal distal esophageal acid exposure time, but with a positive SI were classified as having hypersensitive esophagus and were randomized to receive citalopram 20 mg or placebo once daily for 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 252 patients (150 females (59.5%); mean age 55 (range 18-75) years) underwent 24-h pH-impedance monitoring. Two hundred and nineteen patients (86.9%) recorded symptoms during the study day, while 105 (47.9%) of those had a positive SI (22 (20.95%) with acid, 5 (4.76%) with both acid and non-acid, and 78 (74.29%) with non-acid reflux). Among those 105 patients, 75 (71.4%) had normal distal esophageal acid exposure time and were randomized to receive citalopram 20 mg (group A, n=39) or placebo (group B, n=36). At the end of the follow-up period, 15 out of the 39 patients of group A (38.5%) and 24 out of the 36 patients of group B (66.7%) continue to report reflux symptoms (P=0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with SSRIs is effective in a select group of patients with hypersensitive esophagus.

Alginate controls heartburn in patients with erosive and nonerosive reflux disease

AIM: To evaluate the effect of a novel alginate-based compound, Faringel, in modifying reflux characteristics and controlling symptoms.

METHODS: In this prospective, open-label study, 40 patients reporting heartburn and regurgitation with proven reflux disease (i.e., positive impedance-pH test/evidence of erosive esophagitis at upper endoscopy) underwent 2 h impedance-pH testing after eating a refluxogenic meal. They were studied for 1 h under basal conditions and 1 h after taking 10 mL Faringel. In both sessions, measurements were obtained in right lateral and supine decubitus positions. Patients also completed a validated questionnaire consisting of a 2-item 5-point (0-4) Likert scale and a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS) in order to evaluate the efficacy of Faringel in symptom relief. Tolerability of the treatment was assessed using a 6-point Likert scale ranging from very good (1) to very poor (6).

RESULTS: Faringel decreased significantly (P < 0.001), in both the right lateral and supine decubitus positions, esophageal acid exposure time [median 10 (25th-75th percentil 6-16) vs 5.8 (4-10) and 16 (11-19) vs 7.5 (5-11), respectively] and acid refluxes [5 (3-8) vs 1 (1-1) and 6 (4-8) vs 2 (1-2), respectively], but increased significantly (P < 0.01) the number of nonacid reflux events compared with baseline [2 (1-3) vs 3 (2-5) and 3 (2-4) vs 6 (3-8), respectively]. Percentage of proximal migration decreased in both decubitus positions (60% vs 32% and 64% vs 35%, respectively; P < 0.001). Faringel was significantly effective in controlling heartburn, based on both the Likert scale [3.1 (range 1-4) vs 0.9 (0-2); P < 0.001] and VAS score [7.1 (3-9.8) vs 2 (0.1-4.8); P < 0.001], but it had less success against regurgitation, based on both the Likert scale [2.6 (1-4) vs 2.2 (1-4); P = not significant (NS)] and VAS score [5.6 (2-9.6) vs 3.9 (1-8.8); P = NS]. Overall, the tolerability of Faringel was very good 5 (2-6), with only two patients reporting modest adverse events (i.e., nausea and bloating).

CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that Faringel is well-tolerated and effective in reducing heartburn by modifying esophageal acid exposure time, number of acid refluxes and their proximal migration.

Functional heartburn: definition and management strategies

Functional heartburn (FH) is a functional gastro-intestinal disorder characterized by symptoms of heartburn not related to gastro-esophageal reflux. The absence of evidence of reflux-related symptoms relies on absence of esophagitis at endoscopy (including biopsies to exclude eosinophilic esophagitis), a normal esophageal acid exposure during esophageal pH-monitoring together with a negative symptom-reflux association analysis and an unsatisfactory response to proton pump inhibitor therapy. Addition of impedance measurement to pH-monitoring is likely to increase the number of patients with recognized reflux-related symptoms. The pathophysiology of functional heartburn remains largely unknown but involves disturbed esophageal perception and psychological factors such as depression, anxiety and somatization. The treatment of FH remains largely empirical and an individual approach is therefore recommended. The clinician should provide reassurance and refrain from performing too many invasive tests or therapeutic procedures. The use of pain modulators is recommended by most experts despite the lack of appropriate clinical trials to support it.

Frequency and clinical implications of supraesophageal and dyspeptic symptoms in gastroesophageal reflux disease

OBJECTIVE

We studied the frequency of supraesophageal and dyspeptic symptoms and their impact on the quality of life (QoL) and treatment response in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

Multicenter, prospective, observational study of patients who consulted a gastroenterologist because of typical GERD symptoms. Upper digestive symptoms were assessed using direct interviews. The Short Form-12 and the Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia questionnaires were used to measure QoL. Patients were treated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs).

RESULTS

A total of 301 patients (58% men; mean age, 45 years) were included. Baseline symptoms were heartburn (99% of cases; nocturnal heartburn 78%), regurgitation (86%), both heartburn and regurgitation (85%), dyspeptic symptoms (91%; epigastric pain syndrome 20%, postprandial distress syndrome 4%, both 75%), and supraesophageal symptoms (58%). In 56% of cases of heartburn, 35% of regurgitation, and 34% of nocturnal heartburn, symptoms were severe or very severe. One in six patients had dysphagia. Supraesophageal and/or dyspeptic symptoms were associated with worse scores on the Short Form-12 and Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia instruments. After treatment, heartburn and regurgitation disappeared in 93 and 87% of the patients, respectively. The percentage of patients responding to PPI treatment was significantly higher (P<0.05) in those with heartburn than those without heartburn (96 vs. 86%) and in those with regurgitation than without regurgitation (95 vs. 83%), whereas no differences were observed in those with and without supraesophageal or dyspeptic symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Patients with typical GERD symptoms (heartburn and/or regurgitation) very frequently have dyspeptic and supraesophageal manifestations, which are related to a worse QoL but unrelated to PPI response.

Classification of functional dyspepsia based on concomitant bowel symptoms

BACKGROUND

  Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a heterogeneous disease, and categorized into postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS). However, many FD patients have overlap of both PDS and EPS. The present study was designed to examine whether FD could be categorized based on the presence of concomitant gastrointestinal symptoms.

METHODS

  A web survey comprised of the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS), Rome III criteria of FD, and demographic information was sent to public participants who have no history of severe illness. Factor and cluster analyses were conducted to identify sub-categories of FD based on GSRS.

KEY RESULTS

  A total of 8038 participants completed the survey. A total of 563 participants met the criteria for FD, whereas 6635 participants did not have dyspepsia symptoms. The remainder had either organic disease (377) or uninvestigated dyspepsia (463). The cluster analysis categorized participants as constipation predominant (cluster C), diarrhea predominant (cluster D), or having neither diarrhea nor constipation (cluster nCnD). Cluster C and D were significantly associated with the presence of FD [odds ratio (OR) 2.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.06-3.21; OR 2.80; 95% CI 2.27-3.45, respectively]. In FD, especially in PDS cases, the scores of upper gastrointestinal symptoms were higher in cluster C or D than in cluster nCnD.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

  The severity of dyspepsia symptoms is associated with the presence of bowel symptoms especially in PDS. This novel categorization of FD based on concomitant constipation or diarrhea may improve classification of patients.

Impedance-pH reflux patterns can differentiate non-erosive reflux disease from functional heartburn patients

INTRODUCTION

Symptom association is important to distinguish non-erosive reflux disease [NERD; abnormal oesophageal acid exposure time (AET) and/or positive symptom association] from functional heartburn (FH; normal AET and negative symptom association). Asymptomatic patients during reflux monitoring are challenging as symptom association cannot be assessed.

AIM

To evaluate whether impedance-pH reflux patterns are useful to differentiate NERD from FH.

METHODS

Endoscopy-negative reflux patients underwent impedance-pH off-therapy. Oesophageal AET, characteristics of reflux episodes and symptom association probability (SAP) were measured. Twenty patients asymptomatic during the first test repeated a second examination.

RESULTS

Of 329 patients, 130 (40%) were pH-POS, 120 (36%) pH-NEG/SAP+ (hypersensitive oesophagus = HO) and 79 (24%) pH-NEG/SAP- (FH). Total and acid reflux episodes were significantly higher (p < 0.01) in pH-POS compared to pH-NEG/SAP+, pH-NEG/SAP- and healthy volunteers (HVs). Patients pH-NEG/SAP+ had a significantly increased number of weakly acidic reflux episodes compared to pH-POS, pH-NEG/SAP- and HVs (p < 0.01). The rate of proximal reflux episodes in pH-POS (50%) and pH-NEG/SAP+ (47%) was higher (p < 0.01) than in pH-NEG/SAP- (33%) and HVs (33%). Measuring AET, number of reflux episodes and percentage of proximal reflux events permits to identify FH in 70% of cases and HO in 80% of cases who repeated the examination.

CONCLUSION

In patients with normal AET and SAP+, increased number of weakly acidic reflux and higher rate of proximal reflux are the main discriminant features. There is large overlap between FH and HVs. These differences can be of help in diagnosing patients with normal oesophageal acid exposure who fail to have symptoms during MII-pH testing.

Overweight is a risk factor for both erosive and non-erosive reflux disease

INTRODUCTION

Studies have reported that the association between overweight and erosive oesophagitis is very strong, whilst seeming less consistent with non-erosive reflux disease.

AIM

We have hypothesized that this difference may be due to the heterogeneity of endoscopy-negative population.

METHODS

We studied 81 patients with erosive oesophagitis, 48 controls and 295 endoscopy-negative patients classified by impedance-pH-testing as: (1) pH-POS (abnormal acid exposure); (2) hypersensitive oesophagus (normal acid exposure/SAP+); (3) functional heartburn (normal acid exposure/SAP-). Body mass index was also calculated.

RESULTS

Mean body mass index was significantly higher (p<0.05) in erosive oesophagitis than in endoscopy-negative patients as a whole and controls [27 (18-40) vs. 25 (16-48) vs. 23 (16-34)]. However, the separation of endoscopy-negative patients showed that mean body mass index was higher (p<0.05) in those with increased acid exposure time [26 (18-45)] than in hypersensitive oesophagus [24 (16-48)]. The former subgroup was similar to erosive oesophagitis, whilst the latter one to both functional heartburn [23 (16-34)] and controls (p=ns). Increased body mass index represented a risk factor for erosive oesophagitis (odds ratio 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-1.6) and non-erosive reflux disease pH-POS subgroup (odds ratio 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-1.5).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that overweight represents an important risk factor for erosive oesophagitis and pH-POS non-erosive reflux disease and not for hypersensitive oesophagus and functional heartburn. This provides an explanation for the previously reported lesser role of this variable in non-erosive reflux disease population.

Barrett's esophagus: proton pump inhibitors and chemoprevention II

The following on proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and chemoprevention in relation to Barrett's esophagus includes commentaries on 48-h pH monitoring, pH-impedence, bile acid testing, dyspepsia, long/short segment Barrett's esophagus, nonerosive reflux disease (NERD), functional heartburn, dual-release delivery PPIs, immediate-release PPIs, long-term PPI use, prokinetic agents, obesity, baclofen, nocturnal acid breakthrough, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and new PPIs.

Insights into gastroesophageal reflux disease-associated dyspeptic symptoms

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with GERD frequently report dyspeptic-like symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, early satiety, bloating, and belching. The purpose of this review was to define the epidemiology and underlying mechanisms for dyspeptic symptoms in GERD patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review to identify the prevalence of dyspeptic symptoms in GERD patients. We identified 2057 studies, and 37 studies (2%) met the entry criteria, including 17 articles describing the prevalence of dyspeptic symptoms in GERD subjects, 7 studies describing mechanistic evaluation of dyspeptic symptoms in GERD, 7 studies describing questionnaires used to measure dyspeptic symptoms, and 6 studies assessing the role of proton pump inhibitor therapy for dyspeptic symptoms associated with GERD. We used an evidence-based approach to assess the literature.

RESULTS

The median (± standard deviation) prevalence of GERD in 30,384 subjects from 8 studies conducted in Western countries was 30% ± 8% (range, 20%-40%). Dyspeptic symptoms were present in 38% ± 14% (range, 21%-63%) and were more frequent in patients with frequent GERD symptoms, compared with patients with intermittent or no GERD symptoms [Evidence B]. Patients with nonerosive disease had a higher prevalence of dyspeptic symptoms [Evidence B] in addition to a lower response to proton pump inhibitor therapy [Evidence A], compared with patients with erosive esophagitis. Epigastic pain, belching, bloating, and early satiety demonstrated improvement on PPI therapy [Evidence A], compared with symptoms of nausea and vomiting that did not improve [Evidence A]. Patients with dyspepsia were at risk for a subsequent new diagnosis of GERD [Evidence B]. Dyspeptic symptoms contributed significantly to the decrement in health-related quality of life associated with GERD.

CONCLUSIONS

Dyspeptic symptoms are common in GERD patients and impact health-related quality of life.

Selective-serotonin reuptake inhibitors for the treatment of hypersensitive esophagus

In patients with proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) resistant reflux symptoms, ambulatory 24 h pH impedance monitoring can be used to assess whether a relationship exists between symptoms and reflux episodes. Using this technique it has been suggested that patients with typical reflux symptoms and a normal upper endoscopy should be subclassified as follows: normal endoscopy and abnormal distal acid esophageal exposure (patients with acid reflux); normal endoscopy, with normal distal acid esophageal exposure and a positive symptom association for either acid or nonacid reflux (patients with hypersensitive esophagus); and normal endoscopy, normal distal acid esophageal exposure and a negative symptom association for acid and nonacid reflux (patients with functional heartburn). Although for patients with a normal endoscopy and abnormal distal acid esophageal exposure more aggressive acid suppression can be recommended, managing patients with hypersensitive esophagus and functional heartburn remains a real challenge.Therefore, investigators have evaluated the role of tricyclic antidepressants or selective-serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in influencing esophageal perception. Imipramine has been shown to decrease pain perception in healthy male volunteers and improve symptoms of patients with chest pain and normal coronary angiograms. Trazodone improved symptoms in patients with esophageal contraction abnormalities, while administration of SSRIs lowered chemical and mechanical sensitivity and benefited patients with diffuse esophageal spasm. Furthermore, in a recent study conducted by our group, citalopram administered once daily for 6 months was effective in a select group of patients with hypersensitive esophagus, suggesting that there is a role for SSRIs in the treatment of this disorder.

Oesophageal motility and bolus transit abnormalities increase in parallel with the severity of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available regarding the frequency of oesophageal motility and bolus transit abnormalities in subgroups of patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

AIM

To assess oesophageal motility and bolus transit in endoscopically defined GERD subgroups.

METHODS

Patients (N=755) with typical reflux symptoms underwent upper endoscopy, conventional or impedance oesophageal manometry and/or impedance-pH testing. They were divided into: erosive oesophagitis (EO; N=340), Barrett Oesophagus (BO; N=106), non-erosive reflux disease (NERD; endoscopy-, abnormal pH and/or SAP/SI+; N=239) and functional heartburn (FH; endoscopy-, normal pH and SAP/SI-; N=70). Manometric patterns and bolus transit were defined according to previously published criteria.

RESULTS

Increasing GERD severity was associated with decreased lower oesophageal sphincter resting pressure (P< 0.05) and distal oesophageal amplitude (P<0.01), higher prevalence of hiatal hernia (P<0.01) and increased prevalence of ineffective oesophageal motility (P<0.01). Patients with EO and BO had a significantly lower percentage of complete bolus transit compared with NERD and FH (P<0.01). Overall, abnormal bolus transit (ABT) for liquid swallows was found in 12% of FH, 20% of NERD, 54% of EO and 56% of BO (P<0.01). Combined impedance-manometry showed abnormal oesophageal function in 4% of FH, 4% of NERD, 22% of EO and 21% of BO patients with normal oesophageal manometry.

CONCLUSIONS

Oesophageal motility abnormalities increase in parallel with the severity of GERD from NERD to EO and BO. Bolus transit abnormalities in severe reflux disease underscore the importance of impaired oesophageal function in the development of mucosal injury.

Mosapride as an adjunct to lansoprazole for symptom relief of reflux oesophagitis

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT Reflux oesophagitis is a common clinical disorder associated with significant morbidity. Proton pump inhibitors are the current pharmacotherapy of choice, but not all treated patients achieve symptom relief. Little is known about the efficacy of mosapride, a prokinetic agent which decreases episodes of gastro-oesophageal reflux, as an adjunct to proton pump inhibitors in improving the symptoms of reflux oesophagitis. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS Mosapride was generally not more effective than placebo as an adjunct therapy to a standard dose of lansoprazole in decreasing the symptom burden of patients with reflux oesophagitis. However, in a subgroup with more severe symptoms, combination therapy with lansoprazole and mosapride was possibly superior to monotherapy with lansoprazole. AIMS To investigate if mosapride, a prokinetic agent, was an effective adjunct to acid suppression in improving the symptoms of reflux oesophagitis. METHODS Patients (n= 96) with reflux oesophagitis were randomly assigned to either mosapride (5 mg three times daily) or placebo for 4 weeks. Symptom severity was assessed by a validated questionnaire at enrolment, 4 and 8 weeks after medication. The primary outcome for the first 4 weeks was decrease in symptom scores. After a 3 day washout period, patients initially allocated to mosapride crossed over to placebo and vice versa for the next 4 weeks. The outcome of the second phase was maintenance of symptom control. All patients received lansoprazole (30 mg once daily) throughout study. RESULTS The decreased symptom score after 4 weeks of treatment with lansoprazole and mosapride (n= 50) was 13.42 +/- 1.16 (mean +/- SEM), similar to that of lansoprazole plus placebo (10.85 +/- 1.03, n= 46), with an insignificant difference of 2.57 (95% CI -0.53, 5.67, P= 0.103). However, a sub-group analysis for patients with pre-treatment scores of >18 points (n= 48) revealed that lansoprazole plus mosapride achieved a greater reduction of symptom score than lansoprazole plus placebo (18.22 +/- 1.91 vs. 12.88 +/- 1.65; mean difference of 5.34, 95% CI 0.28, 10.40, P= 0.039). In the second phase, there was no difference between lansoprazole with mosapride or placebo in maintaining symptom control (39/44 or 86.64% vs. 41/50 or 82%, P= 0.401). Subgroup analysis for those with substantial residual symptoms revealed similar results. CONCLUSION Compared with placebo, mosapride generally does not provide additional benefit to a standard dose of lansoprazole in patients with reflux oesophagitis, except possibly in the subgroup of severely symptomatic patients.

Non-erosive reflux disease rather than cervical inlet patch involves globus

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux is the most favored etiology for globus; however, recent studies suggest that a cervical inlet patch (heterotopic gastric mucosa in the cervical esophagus) involves globus. This study aimed to reveal whether these two conditions were associated with globus.

METHODS

A prospective cross-sectional survey was conducted for 2116 consecutive patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy in our hospital. Patients were interviewed about globus sensations and reflux symptoms prior to endoscopy. Non-erosive reflux disease was considered with reflux symptoms without reflux esophagitis. Inlet patch was detected using narrow-band imaging.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were excluded, and of the remaining 2053 patients (1117 male, 61 years old on average), 120 (5.8%) and 284 (13.8%) had globus and inlet patch, respectively. Multivariate analysis (n = 1584) following the exclusion of proton pump inhibitor users revealed that female gender, younger age (<60), inlet patch, and reflux symptoms were independent risk factors for the development of globus; however, reflux esophagitis was an independent factor for reducing the development of globus. In a reanalysis of non-erosive reflux disease instead of reflux symptoms, inlet patch and non-erosive reflux disease were independent risk factors for the development of globus (odds ratio, 2.9 and 12.1, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-erosive reflux disease was more closely associated with globus than an inlet patch. Our controversial results indicating a strong association of globus with non-erosive reflux disease and an inverse association of globus with reflux esophagitis may suggest that mechanisms other than gastroesophageal reflux as the etiology, such as an esophageal visceral hypersensitivity, involve globus.

Characteristics of reflux episodes and symptom association in patients with erosive esophagitis and nonerosive reflux disease: study using combined impedance-pH off therapy

OBJECTIVES

We sought to compare reflux and symptom association patterns in patients with nonerosive reflux disease (NERD), erosive esophagitis (EE), and in healthy volunteers (HVs).

METHODS

Patients with EE and NERD underwent combined impedance-pH monitoring. Normal values were defined on the basis of previously collected data from 48 HVs. We evaluated distal esophageal acid exposure time (AET), number and type of reflux episodes (acid, nonacid), acid and bolus clearance times, proximal extension of reflux episodes, and symptom association probability (SAP).

RESULTS

Distal AET (percentage time, pH<4) was higher (P<0.01) in 58 EE patients (median 7.4%, 25-75th percentile 4.2-9.9%) compared with 168 NERD patients (4.2% (1.2-6.4%)) and 48 HVs (0.7% (0.2-1.4%)). Patients with EE and NERD had a higher (P<0.01) number of acid reflux episodes compared with HVs (51 (37-66) vs. 34 (22-51) vs. 17 (8-31); P<0.05), but a similar number of nonacid reflux episodes (22 (15-39) vs. 23 (15-38) vs. 18 (14-26); P=NS). The percentage of reflux episodes reaching the proximal esophagus was higher (P<0.01) in EE patients (57% (45-73%)) than in NERD patients (45% (36-60%)) and HVs (33% (19-46%)). A positive SAP for heartburn or regurgitation was found in 161 of 168 (96%) NERD and 54 of 58 (93%) EE patients (P=NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Acid reflux episodes, volume, and acid clearance are important factors in the pathogenesis of reflux-induced lesions. Nonacid reflux contributes less to esophageal mucosa damage, but is involved in the development of reflux symptoms in both NERD and EE patients.

Clinical characteristics of Japanese dyspeptic patients: is the Rome III classification applicable?

OBJECTIVE

While the Rome III classification seems logical, some aspects need further evaluation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics of Japanese dyspeptic patients and to determine whether this classification could be applied to them.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 364 consecutive patients with a mean age of 54.5 years who had chronic symptoms occurring at least several times per week that could be attributed to the upper gastrointestinal tract were recruited. All of them underwent blood tests, ultrasonography, and endoscopy, which revealed no organic, systemic, or metabolic diseases. They also answered a questionnaire about their symptoms.

RESULTS

The subjects were divided into a postprandial distress symptom (PDS) group, epigastric pain symptom (EPS) group, and chronic idiopathic nausea symptom group. There was considerable overlap among these groups (109/198, 55.1%), and patients with non-erosive reflux disease accounted for 52.0% (103/198) of all subjects. The Rome III classification could not be applied to 62.7% of the PDS group and 61.3% of the EPS group because the onset of symptoms occurred less than 6 months before diagnosis (4.6 +/- 0.4 months for PDS and 4.6 +/- 0.5 months for EPS).

CONCLUSIONS

The current Rome III criteria for functional dyspepsia dose not adequately identify a large proportion of Japanese dyspeptic patients, primarily due to earlier presentation for medical evaluation. Therefore, the 6-month period after onset of dyspeptic symptoms should be shortened at least in the Japanese population experiencing dyspeptic symptoms.