Contribution of histology to the diagnosis of reflux disease

Esophageal epithelial resistance

Besides its important role of digestion and absorption, esophageal tissue has an essential role as a major barrier against intraluminal pathogens like hostile microorganisms and toxins. This barrier function is achieved via various mechanical, chemical, and immunological mechanisms which are typically altered in inflammatory diseases, thereby causing subsequent damage of the mucosa. In this review we will focus on the main structural and functional barriers of host defense within the esophageal mucosa, including the epithelial layer, membrane-bound and secretory mucins, and different types of defensins. In addition, we will discuss the relevance of biofilm on esophageal tissue and will illustrate the importance of different regulators of intestinal permeability like zonulin and desmosomal components.

Defining esophageal landmarks, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and Barrett's esophagus

The following paper on gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and Barrett's esophagus (BE) includes commentaries on defining esophageal landmarks; new techniques for evaluating upper esophageal sphincter (UES) tone; differential diagnosis of GERD, BE, and hiatal hernia (HH); the use of high-resolution manometry for evaluation of reflux; the role of fundic relaxation in reflux; the use of 24-h esophageal pH-impedance testing in differentiating acid from nonacid reflux and its potential inclusion in future Rome criteria; classification of endoscopic findings in GERD; the search for the cell origin that generates BE; and the relationship between BE, Barrett's carcinoma, and obesity.

Evaluation of anatomical and functional changes esophageal stump of patients with advanced megaesophagus submitted to subtotal laparoscopic esophagectomy

PURPOSE

Evaluate anatomical and functional changes of the esophageal stump and gastric fundus of patients with advanced megaesophagus, submitted to laparoscopic subtotal esophagectomy.

METHODS

Twenty patients with advanced megaesophagus, previously submitted to a videolaparoscopic subtotal esophagectomy, were evaluated. Were conducted: radiological evaluation of the stump esophagus with transposed stomach, electromanometric, endoscopic examination and histopathology of the esophageal stump and gastric fundus, without making gastric tube or pyloroplasty.

RESULTS

It was observed that the average height and pressure of the anastomosis, in the electromanometric evaluation, were 23.45cm (±1.84cm) and 7.55mmHg (±5.65mmHg). In patients with megaesophagus III, the pressure of the anastomosis was 10.91mmHg (±6.33mmHg), and pressure from the UES, 31.89mmHg (±14.64mm Hg), were significantly higher than those in grade IV. The pathological evaluation detected mild esophagitis in 35% of patients, moderate in 20% and acanthosis glicogenica in 45%. The examination of the gastric fundus showed that 50% of patients were infected with Helicobacter pylori. Chronic gastritis occurred in 95% of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic esophagectomy shown to be effective in the treatment of advanced achalasia. The cervical level anastomosis protects the esophageal stump from the aggression resulted from gastric reflux after the esophagectomy.