Prospective study on prevalence of esophageal chest pain in patients referred on an elective basis to a cardiac unit for suspected myocardial ischemia

New therapies for non-cardiac chest pain

After excluding a cardiac cause, potent anti-reflux therapy should be administered to patients with non-cardiac chest pain since gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is the most common underlying mechanism of this disorder. If GERD is an unlikely cause of patient's symptoms, an esophageal motor disorder should be excluded. Spastic motility disorders can be treated with a smooth muscle relaxant (such as calcium channel blocker, nitrate, or phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors). Alternatively, spastic motility disorders may respond to anti-spasmodics, pain modulators, botulinum toxin injection into the distal esophagus, and/or surgery. Patients with functional chest pain have recently seen an expanded treatment armamentarium including medications such as trazadone, tricyclic anti-depressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, pregabalin, and/or ramelteon.

Acid reflux in patients with coronary artery disease and refractory chest pain

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the influence of acid reflux on chest pain and ischemic events and the effects of cardiac drugs on acid reflux in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and refractory chest pain.

METHODS

Simultaneous 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring and 24-hour continuous electrocardiogram (ECG) (Holter) results were obtained for 64 patients. Ischemic events and cardiac drug prescriptions were compared between the patients with and without gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Patients fulfilling the GERD criteria received 14-day therapy with omeprazole at a dose of 20 mg bid. The results of the 24-hour pH monitoring, Holter and the SF-36 questionnaire were compared before treatment and again after two weeks of therapy.

RESULTS

GERD was identified in 38 (69%) patients, with 49% of all chest pain occurring in association with acid reflux. A higher incidence (p=0.033) and longer duration (p=0.040) of ischemic events were observed in the GERD (+) patients. More frequent combined use of cardiac drugs was found in the GERD (+) patients. However, fewer ischemic events and greater total SF-36 survey scores were noted after PPI therapy in the GERD (+) patients.

CONCLUSION

Acid reflux is common in patients with CAD and refractory chest pain. Refractory chest pain in patients with CAD can be partially noncardiac chest pain (NCCP) secondary to acid reflux. The combined use of common cardiac drugs may predispose or aggravate GERD. Short-term proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy not only restores a normal esophageal pH, but also significantly improves the general health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients.

Diagnostic utility of the oesophageal balloon distension test in the evaluation of oesophageal chest pain

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal balloon distension test (EBDT) has been advocated for the evaluation of functional oesophageal noncardiac chest pain (NCCP), but its diagnostic utility remains unclear.

AIM

To prospectively assess the diagnostic yield of EBDT in clinical practice and compare its yield with standard oesophageal tests.

METHODS

Over a period of 6 years, patients with chest pain and negative cardiac work-up underwent sequential testing with endoscopy/biopsy, oesophageal manometry, 24 h pH study and EBDT to elucidate an oesophageal source for their symptoms. Patients with a definite abnormality, for example, erosive oesophagitis on oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) were designated as having positive test and excluded from further work up.

RESULTS

Of 348 (m/f = 105/243) suspected NCCP patients, 16 (5%) were excluded; 332 (95%) underwent oesophageal testing. Among these, 48 (14%) had macro/microscopic oesophagitis on endoscopy, 7 (2%) had achalasia and 96 (28%) had excessive acid reflux (pH study). The remaining 181 (52%) patients underwent EBDT; 128 (37%) had oesophageal hypersensitivity. Chest pain was reproduced in 97/128 (75%) subjects. There were no adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Oesophageal testing can reveal an oesophageal source for chest pain in 86% of NCCP subjects. The majority (42%) of patients had gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Oesophageal balloon distension test identified hypersensitivity in over one-third of subjects. The oesophageal balloon distension test provides useful diagnostic information and should be performed routinely in patients with NCCP after excluding GERD.

Management of noncardiac chest pain in women

Noncardiac chest pain (NCCP) is very prevalent in the community. Although mortality remains low, morbidity and the financial implications are high. Women, especially those of middle age, should be thoroughly investigated as per current guidelines for coronary artery disease before labeling their chest pain as NCCP. Gastroesophageal reflux disease is the most common cause of NCCP; however other esophageal pathology including esophageal hypersensitivity, neuromuscular disease and eosinophilic esophagitis may also cause NCCP. Proton pump inhibitors are commonly used initially to manage NCCP, although patients who do not respond to this therapy require further investigation and differing treatment regimes. This article will focus on current knowledge regarding GI tract-related NCCP management strategies.

Noncardiac chest pain: diagnostic evaluation

Noncardiac chest pain (NCCP) is a common and challenging clinical problem. It is estimated that more than 70 million Americans (23% of the population) suffer from this condition yearly. Patients with NCCP represent a diagnostic dilemma. Their chest pain is often indistinguishable from cardiac pain leading to extensive and expensive evaluations. Once coronary artery disease and other cardiac and pulmonary sources of chest pain are excluded, patients are frequently referred to gastroenterologists to look primarily for esophageal sources of pain. A variety of diagnostic tests are available to the practicing clinician to identify the origin of pain, including ambulatory pH testing, esophageal motility, upper endoscopy, provocative testing and even therapeutic trials.

Recent advances in noncardiac chest pain in Korea

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is the most common cause of noncardiac chest pain (NCCP) and is present in up to 60% of patients with NCCP in Western countries. In Korea, after a reasonable cardiac evaluation, GERD is reported to underlie 41% of NCCP cases. Typical reflux symptoms are frequent in Korean patients suffering from NCCP. Therefore, a careful history of the predominant symptoms, including heartburn and acid regurgitation, is relatively indicative of the GERD diagnosis in Korea. In Korea, in contrast to Western countries, patients aged 40 years and over who have been diagnosed with NCCP but who are without alarming features should undergo endoscopy to exclude gastric cancer or peptic ulcers because of the higher prevalence of peptic ulcer disease and gastric cancers in the region. In a primary care setting, in the absence of any alarming symptoms, a symptomatic response to a trial of a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is sufficient for the presumptive diagnosis of GERD. In addition, the optimal duration of a PPI test may be at least 2 weeks, as GERD symptoms tend to be less frequent or atypical in Korean patients than in patients from Western countries. In patients diagnosed with GERD-related NCCP, long-term therapy (more than 2 months) with double the standard dose of a PPI is required to alleviate symptoms. Esophageal dysmotility is relatively uncommon, and pain modulators seem to offer significant improvement of chest pain control in non-GERD-related NCCP. Most traditionally available tricyclics or heterocyclics have many undesirable effects. Therefore, newer drugs with fewer side effects (for example, the serotonin - norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors) may be needed.

Noncardiac chest pain: epidemiology, natural course and pathogenesis

Noncardiac chest pain is defined as recurrent chest pain that is indistinguishable from ischemic heart pain after a reasonable workup has excluded a cardiac cause. Noncardiac chest pain is a prevalent disorder resulting in high healthcare utilization and significant work absenteeism. However, despite its chronic nature, noncardiac chest pain has no impact on patients' mortality. The main underlying mechanisms include gastroesophageal reflux, esophageal dysmotility and esophageal hypersensitivity. Gastroesophageal reflux disease is likely the most common cause of noncardiac chest pain. Esophageal dysmotility affects only the minority of noncardiac chest pain patients. Esophageal hypersensitivity may be present in non-GERD-related noncardiac chest pain patients regardless if esophageal dysmotility is present or absent. Psychological co-morbidities such as panic disorder, anxiety, and depression are also common in noncardiac chest pain patients and often modulate patients' perception of disease severity.

Investigation of esophageal sensation and biomechanical properties in functional chest pain

BACKGROUND

There is limited and conflicting data regarding the role of esophageal hypersensitivity in the pathogenesis of functional chest pain (FCP). We examined esophageal sensori-motor properties, mechanics, and symptoms in subjects with FCP.

METHODS

Esophageal balloon distension test was performed using impedance planimetry in 189 (m/f = 57/132) consecutive subjects with non-cardiac, non-reflux chest pain, and 36 (m/f = 16/20) healthy controls. The biomechanical and sensory properties of subjects with and without esophageal hypersensitivity were compared with controls. The frequency, intensity, and duration of chest pain were assessed.

KEY RESULTS

One hundred and forty-three (75%) subjects had esophageal hypersensitivity and 46 (25%) had normal sensitivity. Typical chest pain was reproduced in 105/143 (74%) subjects. Subjects with hypersensitivity demonstrated larger cross-sectional area (P < 0.001), decreased esophageal wall strain (P < 0.001) and distensibility (P < 0.001), and lower thresholds for perception (P < 0.01), discomfort (P < 0.01), and pain (P < 0.01) compared to those without hypersensitivity or healthy controls. Chest pain scores (mean +/- SD) for frequency, intensity and duration were 2.5 +/- 0.3, 2.2 +/- 0.2, and 2.2 +/- 0.2, respectively, and were similar between the two patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Seventy-five per cent of subjects with FCP demonstrate esophageal hypersensitivity. Visceral hyperalgesia and sensori-motor dysfunction of the esophagus play a key role in the pathogenesis of chest pain.

Clinical distinct features of noncardiac chest pain in young patients

Background/Aims

Noncardiac chest pain (NCCP) is a very common disorder world-wide and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is known to be the most common cause. The prevalence of NCCP may tend to decrease with increasing age. However, there is little report about young aged NCCP. The aim of this study was to examine the prevalence of GERD and to evaluate the efficacy of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) test in the young NCCP patients.

Methods

Thirty patients with at least weekly NCCP less than 40 years were enrolled. The baseline symptoms were assessed using a daily symptom diary for 14 days. Esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (EGD) and 24 hr esophageal pH monitoring were performed for the diagnosis of GERD and esophageal manometry was done. Then, patients were tried with lansoprazole 30 mg twice daily for 14 days, considering positive if a symptom score improved ≥ 50% compared to the baseline.

Results

Nine (30%) of the patients were diagnosed with GERD at EGD and/or 24 hr esophageal pH monitoring, also, 3 (10%) were diagnosed with GERD-associated esophageal motility disorder and 3 (10%) were non GERD-associated. Concerning PPI test, GERD-related NCCP had a higher positive PPI test (n = 8, 89%) than non GERD-related NCCP (n = 5, 24%) (p = 0.002).

Conclusions

In young patients with NCCP, a prevalence of GERD diagnosed using EGD and/or 24 hr esophageal pH monitoring was 30%. PPI test was very predictable on diagnosis of GERD-related NCCP, thus, PPI test in young NCCP patients may assist to the physician's clinical judgment of NCCP.

Patients dismissed from the hospital with a diagnosis of noncardiac chest pain: cardiac outcomes and health care utilization

OBJECTIVE

To determine the proportion of patients with noncardiac chest pain (NCCP) who see a gastroenterologist, the type and frequency of gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiac tests performed, and the frequency of cardiac death.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cohort of Olmsted County, Minnesota, residents presenting to the emergency department (ED) with chest pain between January 1, 1985, and December 31, 1992, was identified through the Rochester Epidemiology Project. We assessed the frequency of ED, cardiology, and gastroenterology visits and corresponding tests after a diagnosis of NCCP (n=320). We also assessed the frequency of cardiac events.

RESULTS

During follow-up, 49% of patients sought care in the ED, 42% had repeated cardiology evaluations, and 15% were seen by a gastroenterologist. Thirty-eight percent underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy, but very few underwent manometry or a pH probe. Patients with NCCP of unknown origin had 3 times the rate of GI consultations as their counterparts with a GI disorder. Survival free of cardiac death in the subset with NCCP with a GI disorder was 90.2% at 10 years and 84.8% at 20 years, compared with 93.7% at 10 years and 88.1% at 20 years for the subset with NCCP of unknown origin.

CONCLUSION

The frequency of health care utilization in NCCP patients is high, but relatively few GI consultations and even fewer GI tests are performed. Patients dismissed from the hospital with NCCP continue to experience cardiac events, which may highlight a need for more aggressive cardiovascular risk factor management in this population.

Clinical usefulness of subgrouping of patients with non-cardiac chest pain according to characteristic symptoms in Korea

BACKGROUND

Non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP) is a heterogeneous disorder. There is controversy about the associations between symptoms and causes in NCCP patients. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of subgrouping according to characteristic symptoms in NCCP patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-eight patients were classified into two groups, as patients with typical reflux symptoms (group I, n = 24) and those without typical reflux symptoms (group II, n = 34). They underwent upper endoscopy, manometry, and 24-h esophageal pH monitoring.

RESULTS

Twenty-four (41%) of the patients were diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) at upper endoscopy or 24-h esophageal pH monitoring. Eleven (19%) were diagnosed with GERD-associated esophageal motility disorder and 13 (22%) were diagnosed with non-GERD-associated esophageal motility disorder. The two groups did not differ significantly in age, sex, weight, smoking history, history of chronic alcoholism, or the severity, duration and frequency of symptoms. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and likelihood ratio of group I for GERD-related NCCP were significantly higher than those of group II. Group I had a higher proportion of patients with GERD-associated esophageal motility disorder (55%) than non-GERD-associated esophageal motility disorder (23%).

CONCLUSION

Typical reflux symptoms can be used to distinguish patients with GERD-related NCCP from patients with NCCP, and subgrouping according to characteristic symptoms may assist the diagnosis of these patients in Korea.

Central sensitization in patients with non-cardiac chest pain: a clinical experimental study

OBJECTIVE

Patients with non-cardiac chest pain (NNCP) suffer from unexplained and often intractable pain which can pose a major clinical problem. The aim of this study was to investigate nociceptive processing in NNCP patients and their response to experimentally acid-induced oesophageal hyperalgesia using a multimodal stimulation protocol.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ten highly selected patients with NCCP (mean age 43 years, 1 M) were compared with an age- and gender-matched group of 20 healthy subjects. After preconditioning, the distal oesophagus was painfully distended with a balloon using "impedance planimetry". This method assesses the luminal cross-sectional area of the oesophagus based on the electrical impedance of the fluid inside the balloon. The baseline distensions were done before and after pharmacological relaxation of the smooth muscle with 20 mg butylscopolamine. After baseline distensions, a series of up to 10 mechanical stimuli was performed (temporal summation). The stimulations were repeated after sensitization of the oesophagus induced by acid perfusion. The sensory intensities were assessed during the stimulations and the referred pain area was mapped.

RESULTS

At baseline distensions, no differences were seen between patients and controls before and after relaxation of the smooth muscles. The patients tolerated fewer repeated distensions than controls (4.8+/-0.5 versus 9.1+/-0.9; p=0.04) and had an increased size of the referred pain areas to the mechanical stimulations (32.9+/-6.2 versus 64.9+/-18.3 cm2; p=0.01). After sensitization with acid, the patients developed hyperalgesia (p<0.001), whereas no significant changes were seen in controls.

CONCLUSIONS

NCCP patients showed facilitated central pain mechanisms (temporal summation and visceral hyperalgesia after sensitization). This could be used in the diagnosis and understanding of the symptoms in these patients.

Experimental human pain models in gastro-esophageal reflux disease and unexplained chest pain

Methods related to experimental human pain research aim at activating different nociceptors, evoke pain from different organs and activate specific pathways and mechanisms. The different possibilities for using mechanical, electrical, thermal and chemical methods in visceral pain research are discussed with emphasis of combinations (e.g., the multimodal approach). The methods have been used widely in assessment of pain mechanisms in the esophagus and have contributed to our understanding of the symptoms reported in these patients. Hence abnormal activation and plastic changes of central pain pathways seem to play a major role in the symptoms in some patients with gastro-esophageal reflux disease and in patients with functional chest pain of esophageal origin. These findings may lead to an alternative approach for treatment in patients that does not respond to conventional medical or surgical therapy.

The importance of symptom assessment in the surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease and Barrett's esophagus

The "art" and science of symptom assessment in the evaluation of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease has been under emphasized. In fact, it is critical to judgements regarding surgical versus non-surgical therapy and is much more difficult than meets the eye. Many symptoms thought to be secondary to gastroesophageal reflux are not, and some, such as asthma cough and chest pain, which are commonly thought secondary to other causes, are indeed symptoms of reflux. Diagnostic studies are helpful but far from perfect, ultimately requiring the clinician's expert judgement as the key factor in determining a successful outcome. The following outlines both an approach to the assessment of symptoms and when possible, clinical studies shedding light on their cause and interpretation.

Chest pain from gastroesophageal reflux disease in patients with coronary artery disease

Management of patients with coronary artery disease is a major challenge for physicians, patients, and the healthcare system. Chest pain experienced by patients with coronary disease can be of noncardiac origin, and symptoms frequently related to gastroesophageal etiologies. The distal esophagus and the heart share a common afferent nerve supply, suggesting that location and radiation of perceived pain may be identical. In addition, there is substantial overlap between the prevalence of coronary disease and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Many physicians, including cardiologists, prescribe acid-reducing therapy to coronary patients. However, no prospective, randomized studies to date have evaluated the potential benefit of such treatments to prevent chest pain symptoms for these patients. We review the studies on noncardiac chest pain demonstrating reflux in patients with and without coronary disease. Also, the association of reflux with exertional chest pain and cardiac syndrome X is discussed. A rationale is presented for prevention of noncardiac chest pain in coronary patients, and the potential role of acid-suppressive therapy in managing these patients is discussed.

[Role of esophageal provocative tests in the investigation of patients with chest pain of undetermined origin]

BACKGROUND

Traditional methods employed in esophageal investigation of patients with chest pain of undetermined origin includes upper endoscopy, esophageal manometry and pH monitoring. These methods many times disclose abnormalities that can only be enrolled as the possible cause of chest pain. Provocative tests can reproduce pain in the laboratory, establishing its esophageal origin.

OBJECTIVES

Determine the positivity of acid perfusion test, edrophonium and balloon distension in patients with chest pain of undetermined origin and compare with results of traditional exams, establishing the gain for the diagnosis of esophageal pain.

RESULTS

Forty patients with chest pain of undetermined origin (normal coronary angiography), 80% female, mean age of 54.7 years were submitted to traditional exams and provocative tests. Upper endoscopy disclosed erosive esophagitis in two (5%) and peptic ulcer in one (2.5%), esophageal manometry was abnormal in 60%. pH monitoring was abnormal in 14 (35%) with a positive symptom index in 7. Chest pain was considered of proved esophageal origin by traditional exams in 7 (17.5%) patients with a positive symptom index and of probable esophageal origin in 19 (47.5%) being 8 with gastroesophageal reflux disease and 11 abnormal esophageal motility. In 14 (35%) an esophageal origin could not be demonstrated. The acid perfusion test was positive in 10 (25%), edrophonium test in 8 (20%) and balloon distension test in 15 (37.5%) and at least one provocative test was positive in 23 (57.5%) patients. The introduction of provocative tests allowed the diagnosis of proved esophageal pain in 12 of 19 (63.1%) patients with probable esophageal pain and in 6 of 14 (42.8%) with normal or inconclusive traditional exams what represented a diagnostic gain of 45% (18/40). Two patients had negative provocative tests and a positive symptom index, making a total of 25 (62.5%) patients with proved esophageal pain.

Functional chest pain: nociception and visceral hyperalgesia

Functional chest pain is a common, yet poorly understood entity. The focus of this review is to explore the evolving research and clinical approaches with a particular emphasis on the sensory or afferent neuronal dysfunction of the esophagus as a key player in the manifestation of this pain syndrome. Although once regarded as a psychologic or esophageal motility disorder, recent advances have shown that many of these patients have visceral hyperalgesia. Whether visceral hypersensitivity is a central or peripheral perturbation of the gut-brain axis remains debatable. Response to empirical therapy with high-dose proton pump inhibitors, upper endoscopy, or prolonged recording of esophageal pH may identify gastroesophageal reflux disease as a source of chest pain. Esophageal balloon distension study can serve as a useful test for identifying hypersensitivity. Newer techniques, including functional magnetic resonance imaging, magnetoencephalogram, and cortical evoked potentials, are being investigated. High doses of proton pump inhibitors and low doses of tricyclic antidepressants or trazadone remain the mainstay of therapy, although several new approaches including theophylline have been shown to be beneficial.

Sensory testing of the esophagus

Originally, sensory testing of the esophagus included the acid perfusion test and the edrophonium test, which were developed to assess patients with non-cardiac chest pain. In the last 2 decades interest in functional esophageal disorders has increased and thus further understanding of the underlying mechanisms of esophageal pain required development of new sensory testing techniques. Balloon distension using a computerized electronic device, electrical stimulation and impedance planimetry have generated important information about esophageal sensory thresholds for pain in different disease states. Intraluminal ultrasonography has been used to determine the physiologic changes of the muscle wall of the esophagus during perception of typical esophageal symptoms. Central evaluation of patients undergoing esophageal stimulation has recently been introduced to assess cerebral activation in different esophageal disorders. However, many studies using esophageal sensory testing are afflicted with significant design flaws, making interpretation of the results very difficult. This is primarily due to lack of recognition of factors that can modulate esophageal sensation.

Noncardiac chest pain: an Asian view

NCCP is a common condition in Asia. The diagnostic approach of NCCP in Asians is similar to the Western population. GERD is the most common etiology. PPI therapy is an attractive alternative to other invasive diagnostic tests for NCCP and is equally effective for the Asian population.

A review of the atypical manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Manifestations of atypical gastroesophageal reflux disease (GORD) are varied, and the presentation of atypical symptoms may occur in the absence of typical symptoms. The most sensitive and specific investigation for GORD is pH monitoring, and its application in atypical disease is utilized throughout this paper as a basis for correlating disease and pathogenesis. The less well-known areas of laryngeal manifestations, particularly chronic hoarseness and globus, are discussed in addition to recent work on orodental manifestations. Well-known areas of cardiac and respiratory manifestations, which include chronic cough and asthma, are also reviewed. Evidence from clinical trials indicates that aggressive anti-reflux therapy in patients with atypical symptoms can be effective. Where appropriate, medical therapy may involve long-term proton pump inhibitor, although further research outlining the roles of other therapies such as surgery is awaited.

Does esophageal function vary at the striated and smooth muscle segments in functional chest pain?

OBJECTIVE

Hypersensitivity of the esophageal wall may contribute to the pathogenesis of functional chest pain. Whether the hypersensitivity is more uniformly distributed along the esophageal wall or is segmental is not known.

METHODS

Graded balloon distentions were performed randomly at the smooth muscle as well as at the striated muscle portions of the esophagus in 20 patients with functional chest pain and in 15 healthy volunteers, using impedance planimetry. Sensory thresholds and cross-sectional area were examined in relation to the esophageal wall tension, and the results were compared between two levels as well as the two groups of subjects.

RESULTS

During balloon distention, 17 (85%) patients reported typical chest pain, 11 (55%) at both levels, four (20%) at the smooth muscle level, and two (10%) at the striated muscle level only. The sensory thresholds for perception, discomfort, or pain were lower in patients than in controls (p < 0.05). The cross-sectional area and the esophageal wall stiffness at the smooth muscle level were lower than those obtained at the striated muscle level both in controls and in patients (p < 0.01). The wall tension at which moderate discomfort and pain were reported was lower in patients than controls (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although in most patients the esophagus is uniformly hypersensitive, in some either the smooth muscle or the striated muscle segment can be hypersensitive. If considering balloon distention at only one level, we recommend balloon placement at 10 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter because of a higher yield of hypersensitivity.

Functional Heartburn

Functional heartburn is defined as the presence of a retrosternal burning sensation in the absence of pathologic gastroesophageal reflux. The underlying pathophysiology seems to be heterogeneous. In a subset of patients, esophageal hypersensitivity to physiologic esophageal acid exposure is involved, and this is likely to respond to intensive antireflux treatment. Antireflux surgery was not studied systematically in these patients and should be considered only in exceptional cases. In the remaining patients, non-acid reflux, esophageal mechanosensitivity, and psychological factors may be involved. Treatment options in these patients are limited owing to a lack of studies. Emerging therapies include selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and relaxation therapy.

Reflux symptoms are associated with psychiatric disease

AIMS

To evaluate the frequency of reflux symptoms in patients with a diagnosed psychiatric disorder and to assess potential risk factors for symptom occurrence.

METHODS

The presence of reflux symptoms was compared between a case population of 94 psychiatric patients and a control population of 198 non-psychiatric patients.

RESULTS

Heartburn, exercise-induced heartburn, cough and dysphagia were all reported significantly more frequently by subjects with psychiatric disorders than by control subjects. The presence of any psychiatric diagnosis exerted an increased risk for both heartburn (odds ratio, 2.71; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-7.30) and exercise-induced heartburn (3.34; 1.12-9.96). The type of psychiatric disorder, the type of psychotropic medication and the lifestyle did not influence the presence of reflux symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Reflux symptoms occur more frequently in patients with than without a diagnosed psychiatric disorder. The reflux symptoms are not associated with any specific type of medication and may reflect a generally reduced threshold for or distorted perception of symptoms.

Functional chest pain of esophageal origin: hyperalgesia or motor dysfunction

OBJECTIVE

Many patients with functional (noncardiac) chest pain exhibit both hypersensitivity and motor dysfunction of the esophageal wall. We aimed to determine whether the sensory or motor dysfunction plays an important role in the pathogenesis of chest pain.

METHODS

We performed graded balloon distentions of the esophagus using impedance planimetry in 16 consecutive patients with chest pain and otherwise normal cardiac and esophageal evaluations and in 13 healthy controls. In those patients who experienced chest pain with balloon distention, the test was repeated after atropine was given. Sensory and biomechanical parameters were measured.

RESULTS

Balloon distention reproduced typical chest pain in 13/16 patients (81%) and at lower (p < 0.01) sensory thresholds than controls. Pain was reproduced in all 13 patients and at lower (p < 0.05) sensory thresholds after atropine. Also, after atropine, the esophageal cross-sectional area and wall tension increased (p < 0.05), the tension/strain association shifted to the right (p < 0.05), and reactivity decreased (p < 0.002) relative to results before atropine or in healthy controls (i.e., the esophageal wall relaxed and became more deformable).

CONCLUSIONS

Even after relaxing the esophageal wall, most patients experienced chest pain and at lower sensory thresholds. Hence, hyperalgesia rather than motor dysfunction appears to be the predominant mechanism for functional chest pain of esophageal origin.

A critical approach to noncardiac chest pain: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment

Approximately 30% of coronary angiograms performed in this country are negative for significant coronary artery disease. These patients are classified as having noncardiac or unexplained chest pain (UCP). Despite the good overall prognosis, this condition has significant morbidity and costs. The pathophysiology of this condition is likely caused by overlapping cardiac, esophageal, and psychiatric abnormalities with visceral hyperalgesia playing a central role. Gastroenterologists are often consulted in the evaluation of these patients because esophageal disorders are among the most common conditions associated with UCP. However, clinical symptoms are unreliable in differentiating between esophageal and cardiac causes of UCP. Gastroesophageal reflux disease, not esophageal motility disorders, is the most common esophageal disorder present in patients with UCP. The most useful diagnostic test in the evaluation of UCP is 24-h pH monitoring. An initial empiric trial of high-dose acid suppression is the most cost-effective intervention in the management of these patients. A clinical algorithm is suggested for the evaluation and treatment of UCP.

The diagnostic value of oesophageal radionuclide transit in patients admitted for but without acute myocardial infarction

The use of radionuclide transit (RT) as a screening test for chest pain of oesophageal origin has been debated. The aim of this study was to determine the value of RT as a screening test for oesophageal disorders in comparison with oesophageal manometry in patients admitted with acute chest pain but without acute myocardial infarction (non-AMI patients), and to assess the frequency of oesophageal disease present in these patients. A total of 222 non-AMI patients entered the study. An extensive examination programme comprised noninvasive cardiac studies, pulmonary studies, a careful physical examination of the musculoskeletal system, and oesophago-gastric examinations including endoscopy, pH monitoring of the oesophagus and a Bernstein test. In 91% of the patients one or more diagnoses were obtained. Based on clinical and laboratory data a 'consensus' diagnosis was made. With manometry as the reference RT had a poor sensitivity (35%) but an acceptable specificity (82%). With the consensus diagnosis as the gold standard the sensitivities of both manometry and RT were poor (29%), whereas the specificity of RT, but not of manometry, was very high (97%). Gastrointestinal diagnoses were found in 57% of the patients. In conclusion, none of the applied oesophageal examinations are valuable as single screening tests. Both RT and manometry have low sensitivities. RT may be used as a cheap, noninvasive and rapid supplementary examination. When positive, it strongly supports further invasive studies of the oesophagus in non-AMI patients with unexplained chest pain.

Managing the patient with atypical chest pain

Since angina and heartburn can feel the same, excluding cardiac disease may be the first order of business. That done, clinical findings and laboratory tests can help identify the esophageal disturbance. Gastric acid reflux, motility disorders, and visceral nerve hypersensitivity--alone or in combination--can cause chest pain, and each may call for a different pharmacologic regimen.

Evaluation of chest pain in the emergency department

The evaluation of chest pain in the emergency setting should be systematic, risk based, and goal driven. An effective program must be able to evaluate all patients with equal thoroughness under the assumption that any patient with chest pain could potentially be having an MI. The initial evaluation is based on the history, a focused physical examination, and the ECG. This information is sufficient to categorize patients into groups at high, moderate, and low risk. Table 14 is a template for a comprehensive chest-pain evaluation program. Patients at high risk need rapid initiation of appropriate therapy: thrombolytics or primary angioplasty for the patients with MIs or aspirin/heparin for the patients with unstable angina. Patients at moderate risk need to have an acute coronary syndrome ruled in or out expediently and additional comorbidities addressed before discharge. Patients at low risk also need to be evaluated, and once the likelihood of an unstable acute coronary syndrome is eliminated, they can be discharged with further evaluation performed as outpatients. Subsequent evaluation should attempt to assign a definitive diagnosis while also addressing issues specific to risk reduction, such as cholesterol lowering and smoking cessation. It is well documented that 4% to 5% of patients with MIs are inadvertently missed during the initial evaluation. This number is surprisingly consistent among many studies using various protocols and suggests that an initial evaluation limited to the history, physical examination, and ECG will fail to identify the small number of these patients who otherwise appear at low risk. The solution is to improve the sensitivity of the evaluation process to identify these patients. It appears that more than simple observation is required, and at the present time, no simple laboratory test can meet this need. However, success has been reported with a number of strategies including emergency imaging with either radionuclides such as sestamibi or echocardiography. Early provocative testing, either stress or pharmaceutic, may also be effective. The added value of these tests is only in their use as part of a systematic protocol for the evaluation of all patients with acute chest pain. The initial evaluation of the patient with chest pain should always consider cardiac ischemia as the cause, even in those with more atypical symptoms in whom a cardiac origin is considered less likely. The explicit goals for the evaluation of acute chest pain should be to reduce the time to treat MIs and to reduce the inadvertent discharge of patients with occult acute coronary syndromes. All physicians should become familiar with appropriate risk stratification of patients with acute chest pain. Systematic strategies must be in place to assure rapid and consistent identification of all patients and the expedient initiation of treatment for those patients with acute coronary syndromes. These strategies should include additional methods of identifying acute coronary syndromes in patients initially appearing as at moderate or low risk to assure that no unstable patients are discharged. All patients should be followed up closely until the cardiovascular evaluation is completed and, when possible, a definitive diagnosis is determined. Finally, this must be done efficiently, cost-effectively, and in a manner that will result in an overall improvement in patient care.

Noncardiac chest pain: where does it start?

The pathogenesis of recurrent noncardiac chest pain remains an enigma. The literature suggests that it may be caused by a heightened state of visceral nociperception. Coronary atherosclerosis must first be excluded with a reasonable degree of certainty. The physician can then focus on reassuring the patient and continuing management, bearing in mind the caveat, first do no harm. Polypharmacy and hazardous procedures should be avoided. Aggressive acid suppression is helpful in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease, and antidepressants have shown promise in otherwise unexplained cases of chest pain. Despite significant morbidity in patients with the disorder, the long-term prognosis is excellent.

Prevalence of esophageal disorders in patients with chest pain newly referred to the cardiologist

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The prevalence of esophageal disorders (dysmotility and/or gastroesophageal reflux) in patients with chest pain newly referred to a cardiologic clinic is unknown. The aims of our study were to investigate the prevalence of esophageal abnormalities in these patients and to assess the value of medical history in predicting the origin of the patient's chest pain.

DESIGN

We evaluated 28 consecutive patients who were newly referred to the cardiologist because of angina-like chest pain. Patients with evidence of severe myocardial ischemia were excluded. Cardiologic evaluation included medical history, physical examination, ECG, and exercise testing; further cardiologic workup was carried out only when considered necessary. Gastroenterologic evaluation consisted of medical history, esophageal manometry, endoscopy, and 24-h ambulatory monitoring of esophageal pH and pressure.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

In five patients a diagnosis of ischemic coronary artery disease was made. In only two of these five patients, the cardiologic history strongly suggested a cardiac origin of the pain. Twelve patients had a pathologic 24-h pH profile, four of whom also had reflux esophagitis. Ten patients had symptomatic reflux. In only three of these ten patients, the history was judged to be indicative of an esophageal origin of the chest pain. No motility disorders were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Thirty-six percent of the patients with chest pain newly referred to a cardiologic out-patient clinic have symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux. Neither cardiologic nor gastroenterologic history data have a high predictive value with respect to the origin of the chest pain.

Typical and atypical presentations of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The role of esophageal testing in diagnosis and management

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common disease with many typical and atypical forms of presentation. In the classic presentations of GERD with heartburn and regurgitation, esophageal testing, except for endoscopy, is only required for poorly responding patients or prior to surgical therapy. The atypical presentations of GERD, including chest pain, asthma, and ear, nose, and throat complaints, frequently are not associated with heartburn or regurgitation. Esophageal testing, particularly 24-hour pH monitoring is key to making the diagnosis and ensuring adequate acid suppression.

Role of nuclear medicine in evaluating patients with suspected gastrointestinal motility disorders

Functional symptoms caused by gastrointestinal motility disorders are relatively common in the general population. Knowledge of the relationship between symptoms and the underlying gastrointestinal dysmotility provides physicians with a framework for successful evaluation and treatment of patients with possible motor disorders of the gastrointestinal tract. Scintigraphy provides for noninvasive and quantitative assessment of physiological transit throughout the gastrointestinal tract, and it is extremely useful for diagnosing gastrointestinal motor dysfunction. The wide range of scintigraphic studies now available supplement other diagnostic tests for evaluation of all segments of the gastrointestinal tract.

Equine model of inducing ulceration in alimentary squamous epithelial mucosa

Ulceration of the gastric squamous epithelial mucosa was induced in 10 horses using a feeding protocol previously shown to expose the gastric mucosa to repeated periods of high acidity. The feeding protocol consisted of alternating feed deprivation with free access to hay. Over a period of seven days, each horse was provided hay for 84 hr and deprived of hay for 84 hr. Hay was never withheld for longer than 24 hr at a time. Gastroscopy was performed on each horse at the beginning of the protocol after 12 hr of feed deprivation, and after a total of 36 hr, 60 hr, and 84 hr of feed deprivation. All horses had normal esophageal and gastric mucosa at the beginning of the protocol. Alternating periods of feeding and feed deprivation resulted in progressive ulceration of the gastric squamous epithelial mucosa in all but one of the horses. Lesions progressed from erosions to ulceration within 36-72 hr of feed deprivation, and by 84 hr of feed deprivation ulcers had developed thickened, raised margins. Esophageal mucosa appeared normal in all horses throughout the study. The protocol of alternating feeding with feed deprivation in horses consistently produced gastric squamous epithelial ulceration and provided a useful model for characterizing temporal transitions in peptic-injured alimentary squamous epithelia.

Bursts of non-deglutitive simultaneous contractions may be a normal oesophageal motility pattern

The frequency and characteristics of non-deglutitive motor activity of the human oesophagus and its relation to motility patterns in the antrum and upper small intestine were studied in 25 fasted healthy subjects. Motility of the oesophagus, antrum, and upper small intestine was recorded by means of a manometric perfused catheter system. The most striking non-deglutitive motility pattern consisted of repetitive bursts of non-sequential pressure peaks occurring in the smooth muscle portion of the oesophagus. The mean number of pressure peaks per burst was 2.7 (SD 2) waves with a mean amplitude of 19.5 (SD 9.9) mm Hg and a duration of 3.09 (SD 0.22) seconds. The highest amplitude was 80 mm Hg and the longest burst consisted of 13 repetitive waves. The bursts were recorded up to a distance of 15-20 cm above the lower oesophageal sphincter. Ninety five per cent of the bursts occurred during a 15 minute period before the onset of phase 3 of the migrating motor complex in the antral or upper small intestinal area, or during the lower oesophageal sphincter component of the migrating motor complex. In conclusion, spontaneous bursts of non-sequential pressure peaks occurred in the smooth muscle part of the human oesophagus in relation to phase 3 of the migrating motor complex. They represent the oesophageal body component of phase 3 of the migrating motor complex and are not a sign of oesophageal motor abnormalities.

Functional gastrointestinal disorders in unselected patients with non-cardiac chest pain

Patients with non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP) (n = 387) and cardiac chest pain (CCP) (n = 93) were compared with community controls (n = 81), using a symptom questionnaire that assessed the presence of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), functional dyspepsia, and oesophageal dysfunction and chest pain characteristics. A significantly (p < 0.05) increased prevalence of symptoms compatible with IBS occurred in NCCP patients when compared with those with CCP and with controls. Dysphagia was more frequent in both those with non-cardiac and cardiac chest pain than in controls; this was not apparent, however, when patients with concomitant IBS were excluded. The presence of oesophageal or gastrointestinal symptoms did not enable discrimination with regard to the chest pain characteristics. We conclude that unselected referred patients with documented NCCP are more likely to have IBS and that the presence of oesophageal symptoms such as dysphagia may merely reflect the spectrum of the 'irritable gut'.

Anginal pain of esophageal origin: clinical presentation, prevalence, and prognosis

Since 1768, when Heberden recognized a relationship of angina pectoris with eating, the close resemblance between angina-like pain of esophageal and cardiac origin has led to diagnostic confusion, with the role of the esophagus being, in turn, over- and underemphasized as a cause of symptoms. Although the classic features of angina do not distinguish the origin of the pain, certain other symptoms may identify esophageal pain. These include an inconsistent correlation of exercise with pain, periods of prolonged remission, provocation of pain by posture, association with other esophageal symptoms, relief by antacids, radiation of pain down the right arm and into the back, occurrence of pain at night, continuation of pain as a background ache, and relief from nitroglycerine delayed by 10 minutes or longer. However, while certain symptoms may alert the clinician to the possibility that angina-like pain is due to esophageal disease, no single symptom or combination of symptoms is infallible; there is no alternative to careful assessment. Esophageal disease accounts for the greatest number of patients with chest pain of unknown origin. The prevalence of angina-like esophageal pain in unselected emergency admissions with suspected myocardial infarction is 10-20%. Approximately one third or more of patients with angina and normal coronary arteries have esophageal problems. We have followed patients with angina-like esophageal pain for 9 years. Although prognosis remains good, confirming the original noncardiac diagnosis, greater than 80% of patients continue to have chest pain of undiminished intensity, and half are limited in their ability to work. Reassurance appeared to have one beneficial result: Patients were less likely to consult a physician after a positive diagnosis had been made.

Ambulatory esophageal monitoring in noncardiac chest pain

The esophageal origin of angina-like noncardiac chest pain can be identified with certainty only when spontaneous chest pain episodes are associated with gastroesophageal reflux, abnormal esophageal motility, or both. Since noncardiac chest pain typically occurs infrequently, prolonged monitoring is required to establish such an association. Ambulatory esophageal monitoring offers the additional advantages of studying the patient in everyday life and avoiding hospital admission. Although the amplification and storage of 24-hour signals in a portable recorder no longer poses technical problems, the complexity of the analysis of the recorded signals should not be underestimated. For noncardiac chest pain, the most relevant part of the analysis is the association between chest pain episodes and the recorded esophageal signals. To determine whether contraction amplitude or duration during chest pain episodes is abnormal, their measurements are compared with baseline values from the same patient. Fully automated analysis by computer is feasible and, since it avoids observer bias, preferable. The yield of 24-hour monitoring in noncardiac chest pain reported by different groups of investigators varies considerably. Motor abnormalities have been identified as the cause of chest pain in 4.5-18% of patients studied, and reflux in 4.5-25%. In addition, some patients had both dysmotility- and reflux-related pain episodes. As expected, the yield of the technique is higher in patients with frequent pain episodes. In patients who do not experience pain during 24-hour monitoring, the technique cannot provide a firm diagnosis of pain of esophageal origin. Recently, a much higher yield of 24-hour monitoring was reported in patients with noncardiac chest pain admitted to a coronary-care unit. A total of 76% of these patients were found to have either reflux- or dysmotility-related chest pain. Despite its relatively low yield, the addition of esophageal pressure monitoring to ambulatory pH monitoring is worthwhile and probably also cost-effective in patients with frequent episodes of unexplained chest pain.

Provocation testing in noncardiac chest pain

The ability to reproduce chest pain and to identify the esophagus as the source of this pain are the major reasons why provocation testing has become standard in the evaluation of patients with noncardiac chest pain. Recent studies that challenge the validity of performing provocation tests have polarized experts into two camps: those who would abandon such testing because of its low sensitivity and low specificity, and those who would use testing judiciously because of moderate increases in diagnostic yield. Use of 24-hour pH and pressure testing has shown a high number of chest pain events associated with acid reflux in patients with positive cholinergic stimulation tests and esophageal dysmotility, as well as pain with esophageal dysmotility in patients with positive acid infusion tests. Mechanisms of esophageal chest pain are not known. All provocation agents can decrease coronary flow reserve (i.e., induce microvascular angina), thus raising the question of a cardiac source of pain even in patients with positive presumed esophageal provocation. Acid infusion, cholinergic stimulation, and balloon distention are discussed in light of 24-hour pH and pressure monitoring. Esophageal distention and the role of acid in inducing chest pain are emphasized. The role of stress, the use of defined stressors to induce chest pain, and altered pain perception as a final common pathway for chest pain are examined.

Irritable esophagus

An esophageal origin of noncardiac chest pain is generally accepted if prolonged pH and pressure recordings show that the pain episodes correlate in time with acid reflux, esophageal motor abnormalities, or a combination of both, or if provocative testing (acid perfusion, edrophonium, balloon distention) is positive. Many patients with noncardiac chest pain of esophageal origin are said to have an irritable esophagus. Irritable esophagus has been defined in two ways. Some researchers suggest it is actually a lowered esophageal pain threshold, based on the finding that such patients feel chest pain at lower balloon volumes than controls during intraesophageal balloon distention; they are said to be hypersensitive to balloon distention. Hypersensitivity to an esophageal stimulus is generally found in patients with noncardiac chest pain of esophageal origin, and hypersensitivity to a single stimulus is one criterion for a diagnosis. Our group defines irritable esophagus as a condition in which several different stimuli result in the same type of chest pain. Accordingly, we have grouped patients with esophageal chest pain into three categories: (a) patients with an acid-sensitive esophagus, in whom spontaneous pain episodes can be related to acid reflux (with or without accompanying motor disorders), and/or the acid perfusion test is positive; (b) patients with a mechano-sensitive esophagus, in whom the spontaneous pain episodes can be related to motility disturbances (without reflux), and/or the edrophonium test or balloon distention test is positive; (c) patients with an irritable esophagus, in whom some spontaneous pain episodes are related to reflux, while others are related to abnormal motility (without reflux). The last group includes patients whose spontaneous chest pain is related to reflux, with a positive motility tests; whose pain is related to abnormal motility, with a positive reflux test; and patients with positive tests for both reflux and abnormal motility. Seven studies examined a total of 281 noncardiac chest pain patients using prolonged pH and pressure recordings and provocative tests. An acid-sensitive, a mechano-sensitive, or an irritable esophagus was found in 20%, 14%, and 24% of patients, respectively.

Critique of the session on diagnostic testing

During the session on diagnostic testing, various diagnostic tests used to identify the cause of chest pain were discussed. This critique of diagnostic assessments of the complex etiology of chest pain is presented as a contribution toward further investigation and clarification of this difficult clinical syndrome. The first step in the evaluation process is to exclude coronary artery disease. Patients with angina and normal coronary artery flow may have atypical disease, such as microvascular angina or syndrome X. The precise relationship between these disorders and esophageal disease or gastroesophageal reflux, as well as their possible involvement in chest pain of undetermined origin, requires further definition. A limitation of esophageal provocation tests is that they may identify the esophagus as the source of pain without determining the specific esophageal disorder that causes the pain. Problems associated with 24-hour pH and pressure monitoring include (a) poor correlation between reflux episodes and heartburn symptoms, (b) the lack of a good functioning swallowing signal, and (c) the huge amount of data that must be analyzed, along with shortcomings in computer-aided analysis. Nevertheless, the various available diagnostic tests can provide important information to the clinician.

Acute noncardiac chest pain in a coronary care unit. Evaluation by 24-hour pressure and pH recording of the esophagus

Twenty-four-hour recording of esophageal pressure and pH was performed successfully in 41 patients admitted to the coronary care unit of a general hospital who had an episode of acute, prolonged retrosternal chest pain and who were initially suspected of suffering from coronary artery disease (severe angina pectoris, myocardial infarction), but in whom the pain was subsequently shown not to be of cardiac origin. The recordings were analyzed with fully automated techniques. A pain episode was considered to be related to abnormal esophageal motility when contraction amplitudes or durations in the pain episode exceeded the patient's upper limit of normal (97.5th percentile) or when the proportion of abnormal propagated contractions (simultaneous, nontransmitted) in the pain episode was significantly increased (chi 2 test). Thirty patients (73%) had one or more pain episodes (in total 63 pain episodes) during the 24-hour recording. Forty-three percent of the pain episodes was related to abnormal motility and 30% to reflux, and 27% was not related to esophageal function disturbance. Using the criterium that the symptom index had to be greater than or equal to 75%, it was found that the pain was related to reflux in 13 patients (43%) and to motor abnormalities in 10 patients (33%). It is concluded that in the majority of patients acutely admitted with noncardiac chest pain, esophageal motor abnormalities and reflux can be shown to be the likely cause of the symptoms.

Clinical application of 24-hour ambulatory esophageal pH and pressure monitoring

Recently, 24-h recording of intraesophageal pH and pressure signals in ambulatory subjects has become possible. Several research applications of the technique have emerged, but until now only a few clinical applications have been established, the most important of which is noncardiac chest pain. In the computer analysis of the signals, the patient with noncardiac chest pain is used as his or her own control; motility and pH profiles during pain are compared with asymptomatic base-line values obtained from the same patient. Automated analysis by means of a computer avoids observer bias and saves time. By means of 24-h monitoring, motor abnormalities have been identified as the cause of the chest pain in 4.5% to 18% and reflux in 4.5% to 25% of the patients studied. In addition, patients were identified who have both dysmotility- and reflux-related pain episodes. The yield of 24-h monitoring is highest in patients who have frequent pain episodes. A high yield of 24-h monitoring was found in patients with noncardiac chest pain admitted to a coronary care unit. Seventy-six per cent of these patients were found to have either reflux- of dysmotility-related chest pain. Patients with proven coronary artery disease who do not respond well to adequate treatment frequently have gastroesophageal reflux (39%) or esophageal motor abnormalities (50%) as the cause of their ongoing pain attacks. In these patients, identification of the esophageal cause of the symptoms not only helps the physician to select the optimal treatment but also reduces the patient's need for medical care.

Psychiatric disorders in patients with esophageal disease

Psychiatric disorders have potentially important roles in the manifestations of esophageal disease. A primary causative role for psychiatric factors in the common motility disorders associated with chest pain (esophageal spasm and the nonspecific motor disorders) remains unproven, but psychiatric disorders appear particularly prevalent in this group. In most other esophageal diseases, psychiatric factors interact through recognized psychophysiologic or behavioral mechanisms to affect the clinical presentation. Recognizing the possible levels of interaction has significant therapeutic implications.