Upper GI tract findings in patients with heartburn in whom proton pump inhibitor treatment failed versus those not receiving antireflux treatment

The Cost Effectiveness of Adjunctive Treatments for Proton Pump Inhibitor-Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Half of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) experience persistent symptoms while on proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), thus driving efforts to develop novel adjunctive therapies for PPI-refractory GERD. An economic analysis was performed to establish at what cost and efficacy such potential medications are likely to become cost effective in clinical practice.

METHODS

A Markov decision model was used to examine a hypothetical cohort of patients being evaluated for PPI-refractory GERD in the USA. The model compared 3 strategies: (1) usual care (i.e., upfront diagnostic testing with upper endoscopy ± ambulatory pH testing); (2) use of a PPI-adjunctive therapy after positive ambulatory pH testing; and (3) empiric use of a PPI-adjunctive therapy (i.e., diagnostic testing only after failing empiric treatment). The primary outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained (third-party payer perspective) over a 10-year time horizon using a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000/QALY.

RESULTS

In two-way sensitivity analyses varying the cost and effectiveness of the PPI-adjunctive therapy, most combinations revealed that use of the medication after positive pH testing was the most cost-effective approach. Empiric treatment was the preferred strategy only when the therapy was highly efficacious (≥ 87.5% response rate) and low cost (≤ $109/month). Use of PPI-adjunctive treatments were not cost effective when the cost exceeded $1150/month.

CONCLUSION

Use of PPI-adjunctive therapies in those with persistent GERD symptoms may become cost effective when guided by ambulatory pH tests. These data can guide investigators, industry, and payers as they develop, validate, and price new treatments for PPI-refractory GERD.

Latin American consensus on diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) can be challenging given varying symptom presentations, and complex multifactorial pathophysiology. The gold standard for GERD diagnosis is esophageal acid exposure time (AET) measured by pH-metry. A variety of additional diagnostic tools are available. The goal of this consensus was to assess the individual merits of GERD diagnostic tools based on current evidence, and provide consensus recommendations following discussion and voting by experts.

METHODS

This consensus was developed by 15 experts from nine countries, based on a systematic search of the literature, using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) methodology to assess the quality and strength of the evidence, and provide recommendations regarding the diagnostic utility of different GERD diagnosis tools, using AET as the reference standard.

KEY RESULTS

A proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trial is appropriate for patients with heartburn and no alarm symptoms, but nor for patients with regurgitation, chest pain, or extraesophageal presentations. Severe erosive esophagitis and abnormal reflux monitoring off PPI are clearly indicative of GERD. Esophagram, esophageal biopsies, laryngoscopy, and pharyngeal pH monitoring are not recommended to diagnose GERD. Patients with PPI-refractory symptoms and normal endoscopy require reflux monitoring by pH or pH-impedance to confirm or exclude GERD, and identify treatment failure mechanisms. GERD confounders need to be considered in some patients, pH-impedance can identify supragrastric belching, impedance-manometry can diagnose rumination.

CONCLUSIONS

Erosive esophagitis on endoscopy and abnormal pH or pH-impedance monitoring are the most appropriate methods to establish a diagnosis of GERD. Other tools may add useful complementary information.

Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Diagnosis and Management

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common, with increasing worldwide disease prevalence and high economic burden. A significant number of patients will remain symptomatic following an empiric proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trial. Persistent symptoms despite PPI therapy are often mislabeled as refractory GERD. For patients with no prior GERD evidence (unproven GERD), testing is performed off antisecretory therapy to identify objective evidence of pathologic reflux using criteria outlined by the Lyon consensus. In proven GERD, differentiation between refractory symptoms (persisting symptoms despite optimized antisecretory therapy) and refractory GERD (abnormal reflux metrics on ambulatory pH impedance monitoring and/or persistent erosive esophagitis on endoscopy while on optimized PPI therapy) can direct subsequent management. While refractory symptoms may arise from esophageal hypersensitivity or functional heartburn, proven refractory GERD requires personalization of the management approach, tapping from an array of non-pharmacologic, pharmacologic, endoscopic, and surgical interventions. Proper diagnosis and management of refractory GERD is critical to mitigate undesirable long-term complications such as strictures, Barrett's esophagus, and esophageal adenocarcinoma. This review outlines the diagnostic workup of patients presenting with refractory GERD symptoms, describes the distinction between unproven and proven GERD, and provides a comprehensive review of the current treatment strategies available for the management of refractory GERD.

Role of endoscopy in gastroesophageal reflux disease

In general, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is diagnosed clinically based on typical symptoms and/or response to proton pump inhibitor treatment. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is reserved for patients presenting with alarm symptoms, such as dysphagia, odynophagia, significant weight loss, gastrointestinal bleeding, or anorexia; those who meet the criteria for Barrett's esophagus screening; those who report a lack or partial response to proton pump inhibitor treatment; and those with prior endoscopic or surgical anti-reflux interventions. Newer endoscopic techniques are primarily used to increase diagnostic yield and provide an alternative to medical or surgical treatment for GERD. The available endoscopic modalities for the diagnosis of GERD include conventional endoscopy with white-light imaging, high-resolution and high-magnification endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, image-enhanced endoscopy (narrow-band imaging, I- SCAN, flexible spectral imaging color enhancement, blue laser imaging, and linked color imaging), and confocal laser endomicroscopy. Endoscopic techniques for treating GERD include esophageal radiofrequency energy delivery/Stretta procedure, transoral incisionless fundoplication, and endoscopic full-thickness plication. Other novel techniques include anti-reflux mucosectomy, peroral endoscopic cardiac constriction, endoscopic submucosal dissection, and endoscopic band ligation. Currently, many of the new endoscopic techniques are not widely available, and their use is limited to centers of excellence.

Building a Comprehensive Rural Anti-Reflux Center

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal disease (GERD) is a highly prevalent gastrointestinal disease. In rural areas, general surgeons perform esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) despite its low diagnostic yield. When EGD findings are equivocal, GERD patients are usually referred to tertiary hospitals for further workup. We envisaged establishing a comprehensive anti-reflux program with diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities in a rural setting.

STUDY DESIGN

This is an IRB approved retrospective chart review of patients who presented with GERD symptoms to a rural anti-reflux clinic between August 2015 and February 2021. Standardized workup included upper gastrointestinal study and EGD with concomitant wireless pH placement. High resolution impedance manometry and gastric emptying scans were selectively utilized initially, then were performed routinely. We used endoFLIP impedance planimetry system starting in February 2019.

RESULTS

A total of 830 patients were evaluated. There were 537 (64.6%) females and 293 (35.4%) males. The average age was 57.7 ± 15.2 years. The average BMI was 30.8 ± 6.7 kg/m². Approximately one-third of these patients were referred by the primary care provider (PCP) within our health system and a comparable percentage from external PCPs. Self referral was noted in 15.4% and 19.2% were referred by different specialties such as pulmonary (10.7%), surgical for large hiatal hernia (5.8%), inpatient and emergency room (2%), and gastroenterology (0.7%).

CONCLUSION

Rural surgeons with appropriate endoscopic and laparoscopic training can establish a comprehensive anti-reflux program with diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. It meets the high community need and can expand to be a regional center. The revenues generated are critical for the financial survival of rural hospitals.

British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (BSPGHAN) joint consensus guidelines on the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic oesophagitis in children and adults

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is an increasingly common cause of dysphagia in both children and adults, as well as one of the most prevalent oesophageal diseases with a significant impact on physical health and quality of life. We have provided a single comprehensive guideline for both paediatric and adult gastroenterologists on current best practice for the evaluation and management of EoE.

METHODS

The Oesophageal Section of the British Society of Gastroenterology was commissioned by the Clinical Standards Service Committee to develop these guidelines. The Guideline Development Group included adult and paediatric gastroenterologists, surgeons, dietitians, allergists, pathologists and patient representatives. The Population, Intervention, Comparator and Outcomes process was used to generate questions for a systematic review of the evidence. Published evidence was reviewed and updated to June 2021. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to assess the evidence and make recommendations. Two rounds of voting were held to assess the level of agreement and the strength of recommendations, with 80% consensus required for acceptance.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven statements on EoE presentation, diagnosis, investigation, management and complications were produced with further statements created on areas for future research.

CONCLUSIONS

These comprehensive adult and paediatric guidelines of the British Society of Gastroenterology and British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition are based on evidence and expert consensus from a multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals, including patient advocates and patient support groups, to help clinicians with the management patients with EoE and its complications.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease: risk factors, current possibilities of diagnosis and treatment optimisation

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common causes of health care seeking at the primary care level in many countries. At an epidemiological level, GERD has been shown to be associated with a number of risk factors: obesity, tobacco smoking, alcohol abuse, certain patterns of eating behaviour, and the use of several medications. GERD is now regarded as a heterogeneous disease and includes different phenotypes (erosive reflux disease, non-erosive reflux disease, hypersensitive oesophagus, functional heartburn), the proper diagnosis of which improves the effectiveness of therapy in patients with heartburn symptoms. Daily impedance–pH monitoring is known to be an integral part of the diagnostic algorithm for GERD and is a functional diagnostic method to record all types of refluxes entering the oesophagus regardless of pH, to assess their association with symptoms, and to determine whether patients with heartburn symptoms belong to a particular phenotype. Esophageal manometry plays a key role in the evaluation of patients with heartburn symptoms, as it helps to rule out other conditions that may mimic GERD: achalasia cardia and scleroderma esophagus. This technique is used to assess thoracic esophageal motility and sphincter function and in the assessment of patients prior to antireflux surgery or in the refractory course of GERD. The article describes in detail GERD risk factors (triggers of heartburn), as well as diagnostic aspects, taking into account a differentiated approach to patients with heartburn based on daily impedance–pH monitoring data in accordance with the current guidelines and recommendations.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Personalized Approach to the Evaluation and Management of GERD: Expert Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

As many as one-half of all patients with suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) do not derive benefit from acid suppression. This review outlines a personalized diagnostic and therapeutic approach to GERD symptoms.

METHODS

The Best Practice Advice statements presented here were developed from expert review of existing literature combined with extensive discussion and expert opinion to provide practical advice. Formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of recommendations was not the intent of this clinical practice update. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Clinicians should develop a care plan for investigation of symptoms suggestive of GERD, selection of therapy (with explanation of potential risks and benefits), and long-term management, including possible de-escalation, in a shared-decision making model with the patient. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Clinicians should provide standardized educational material on GERD mechanisms, weight management, lifestyle and dietary behaviors, relaxation strategies, and awareness about the brain-gut axis relationship to patients with reflux symptoms. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Clinicians should emphasize safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the treatment of GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Clinicians should provide patients presenting with troublesome heartburn, regurgitation, and/or non-cardiac chest pain without alarm symptoms a 4- to 8-week trial of single-dose PPI therapy. With inadequate response, dosing can be increased to twice a day or switched to a more effective acid suppressive agent once a day. When there is adequate response, PPI should be tapered to the lowest effective dose. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: If PPI therapy is continued in a patient with unproven GERD, clinicians should evaluate the appropriateness and dosing within 12 months after initiation, and offer endoscopy with prolonged wireless reflux monitoring off PPI therapy to establish appropriateness of long-term PPI therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: If troublesome heartburn, regurgitation, and/or non-cardiac chest pain do not respond adequately to a PPI trial or when alarm symptoms exist, clinicians should investigate with endoscopy and, in the absence of erosive reflux disease (Los Angeles B or greater) or long-segment (≥3 cm) Barrett's esophagus, perform prolonged wireless pH monitoring off medication (96-hour preferred if available) to confirm and phenotype GERD or to rule out GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Complete endoscopic evaluation of GERD symptoms includes inspection for erosive esophagitis (graded according to the Los Angeles classification when present), diaphragmatic hiatus (Hill grade of flap valve), axial hiatus hernia length, and inspection for Barrett's esophagus (graded according to the Prague classification and biopsied when present). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Clinicians should perform upfront objective reflux testing off medication (rather than an empiric PPI trial) in patients with isolated extra-esophageal symptoms and suspicion for reflux etiology. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: In symptomatic patients with proven GERD, clinicians should consider ambulatory 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring on PPI as an option to determine the mechanism of persisting esophageal symptoms despite therapy (if adequate expertise exists for interpretation). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Clinicians should personalize adjunctive pharmacotherapy to the GERD phenotype, in contrast to empiric use of these agents. Adjunctive agents include alginate antacids for breakthrough symptoms, nighttime H2 receptor antagonists for nocturnal symptoms, baclofen for regurgitation or belch predominant symptoms, and prokinetics for coexistent gastroparesis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Clinicians should provide pharmacologic neuromodulation, and/or referral to a behavioral therapist for hypnotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, diaphragmatic breathing, and relaxation strategies in patients with functional heartburn or reflux disease associated with esophageal hypervigilance reflux hypersensitivity and/or behavioral disorders. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: In patients with proven GERD, laparoscopic fundoplication and magnetic sphincter augmentation are effective surgical options, and transoral incisionless fundoplication is an effective endoscopic option in carefully selected patients. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: In patients with proven GERD, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is an effective primary anti-reflux intervention in obese patients, and a salvage option in non-obese patients, whereas sleeve gastrectomy has potential to worsen GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Candidacy for invasive anti-reflux procedures includes confirmatory evidence of pathologic GERD, exclusion of achalasia, and assessment of esophageal peristaltic function.

ACG Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

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

Functional gastrointestinal disorders. Overlap syndrome Clinical guidelines of the Russian Scientific Medical Society of Internal Medicine and Gastroenterological Scientific Society of Russia

.

Treatment strategies for reflux esophagitis including a potassium-competitive acid blocker: A cost-effectiveness analysis in Japan

INTRODUCTION

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a common condition, and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the mainstays of treatment. However, concerns have been raised about the safety of PPIs. A potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB), vonoprazan (VPZ), was recently introduced, which may provide clinical benefits. This study was performed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of alternative long-term strategies including continuous and discontinuous treatment with VPZ for the management of reflux esophagitis in Japan.

METHODS

A health state transition model was developed to capture the long-term management of reflux esophagitis. Four different strategies were compared: (a) intermittent PPI using lansoprazole (LPZ); (b) intermittent P-CAB; (c) maintenance PPI using LPZ; and (d) maintenance P-CAB.

RESULTS

Intermittent P-CAB was the most cost-effective, and the number of days for which medication was required with this strategy was fewest. Maintenance PPI was more efficacious, but more costly than intermittent P-CAB. Maintenance P-CAB was more efficacious, but more costly than maintenance PPI. Co-payments were higher for maintenance PPI than for intermittent P-CAB, and for maintenance P-CAB than for maintenance PPI, which were considered reasonable for the majority of patients to improve symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Intermittent P-CAB appears to be the strategy of choice for the majority of reflux esophagitis patients in clinical practice. If a patient is not satisfied with the symptom control of the current strategy, switching to a more effective strategy appears to be a reasonable option for the majority of patients.

ESNM/ANMS consensus paper: Diagnosis and management of refractory gastro-esophageal reflux disease

Up to 40% of patients with symptoms suspicious of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) do not respond completely to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. The term "refractory GERD" has been used loosely in the literature. A distinction should be made between refractory symptoms (ie, symptoms may or may not be GERD-related), refractory GERD symptoms (ie, persisting symptoms in patients with proven GERD, regardless of relationship to ongoing reflux), and refractory GERD (ie, objective evidence of GERD despite adequate medical management). The present ESNM/ANMS consensus paper proposes use the term "refractory GERD symptoms" only in patients with persisting symptoms and previously proven GERD by either endoscopy or esophageal pH monitoring. Even in this context, symptoms may or may not be reflux related. Objective evaluation, including endoscopy and esophageal physiologic testing, is requisite to provide insights into mechanisms of symptom generation and evidence of true refractory GERD. Some patients may have true ongoing refractory acid or weakly acidic reflux despite PPIs, while others have no evidence of ongoing reflux, and yet others have functional esophageal disorders (overlapping with proven GERD confirmed off therapy). In this context, attention should also be paid to supragastric belching and rumination syndrome, which may be important contributors to refractory symptoms.

Utility of Routine Esophageal Biopsies in Patients With Refractory Reflux Symptoms

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to assess the diagnostic yield of routine esophageal biopsies in patients with refractory reflux symptoms.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled consecutive patients referred for upper endoscopy and collected histological, clinical, and endoscopic data.

RESULTS

Of the 301 included patients, 14 (4.7%) patients met the clinicopathological diagnostic definition of eosinophilic esophagitis. Presence of dysphagia, food bolus impaction, atopic background, and typical endoscopic features were the factors with the strongest association and diagnostic accuracy for eosinophilic esophagitis. The diagnostic yield in patients lacking symptoms of dysphagia or endoscopic features was negligible (0% and 1.9%, respectively).

DISCUSSION

Routine esophageal biopsy sampling in patients with refractory reflux symptoms has a low diagnostic yield. Esophageal biopsies should only be obtained in patients with refractory reflux symptoms who also present with dysphagia (see Visual abstract, Supplementary Digital Content 2, http://links.lww.com/AJG/B792).

The role of endoscopy in eosinophilic esophagitis: from diagnosis to therapy

Endoscopy plays an important role in the management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), since it is involved in the diagnosis, follow-up and treatment of this condition. In patients presenting with food impaction, dysphagia and other symptoms of suspected EoE, esophago-gastric-duodenoscopy (EGD) with multiple esophageal biopsies should be performed to confirm or rule out the diagnosis of EoE. The EREFS system, a validated instrument for assessment of the endoscopically-identified esophageal features in EoE (edema, rings, exudates, longitudinal furrows and strictures), is currently used in the clinical practice for the evaluation of the macroscopic aspects of esophageal mucosa during EGD. Multiple esophageal biopsies are mandatory to further confirm EoE diagnosis and subsequent response to treatment, since symptoms reported by patients do not always correlate with histological activity, and considering the low sensitivity of endoscopic assessment; a cut-off of ≥15 eosinophils in at least one high power field is the density threshold considered the standard for diagnosis (sensitivity 100%, specificity 96%). Other histological features, included in the EoE histologic scoring system (EoEHSS), are supportive for the diagnosis and for the assessment of inflammatory activity during follow-up. Esophageal dilation, performed either with Savary dilators/bougie or hydrostatic balloon, is an effective and safe treatment in both adult and pediatric EoE patients with fibrostenotic features, mainly in association with other therapeutic strategies which can control eosinophilic inflammation.

The Role of Symptom Association Analysis in Gastroesophageal Reflux Testing

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is characterized by the reflux of gastric contents into the esophagus with an estimated worldwide prevalence of 8%-33%. The current paradigm in gastroesophageal reflux disease diagnosis relies on recognition of symptoms and/or the presence of mucosal disease at the time of esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Recognition of symptoms, however, can arise with challenges, particularly when patients complain of less typical symptoms. Since first reported in 1969 by Spencer et al., the application of prolonged intraesophageal pH monitoring to identify pathologic reflux has evolved considerably. Utility of pH monitoring aims to investigate the degree of acid burden and frequency of reflux episode, and the relationship between symptoms and acid reflux events. This relationship is represented by either the Symptom Index, Symptom Sensitivity Index, Symptom Association Probability, or Ghillebert Probability Estimate. This article reviews symptom-association analysis during esophageal reflux testing, covering the literature on current methods of reflux testing, interpretation of symptom association, and practical issues that can arise during symptom analysis.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease: key messages for clinicians

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic common disorder for which patients often refer to specialists. In the last decades, numerous studies helped to clarify the pathophysiology and the natural history of this disease. Currently, in the clinical setting, GERD is defined by the presence of symptoms that, when endoscopic investigation is required, permit to distinguish between cases with or without associated esophageal mucosal injuries. These conditions are called erosive reflux disease and non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), respectively. The latter is the most common manifestation of GERD. Symptoms are defined typical, as heartburn and regurgitation, and atypical (also called extra-esophageal), as coughing and/or wheezing, hoarseness, sore throat, otitis media, and dental manifestations. In this context, it is crucial for clinicians to investigate the presence of features of suspected malignancy, as unexplained weight loss, anemia, dysphagia, persistent vomiting, familiar history of cancer, long history of GERD, and beginning of GERD symptoms after the age of 50 years. The presence of these risk factors should induce to perform an endoscopic examination. Particular attention should be given to functional conditions that can mimic GERD, such as functional heartburn and hypersensitive esophagus as well as, more rarely, eosinophilic esophagitis. The former ones have different pathophysiology and this explains the frequent non-response to proton pump inhibitor drugs. This narrative review provides to clinicians a useful and practical overview of the state-of-the-art on advancements in the knowledge of GERD.

Mucosal impedance for esophageal disease: evaluating the evidence

Impedance has traditionally been employed in esophageal disease as a means to assess bolus flow and reflux episodes. Recent and ongoing research has provided new and novel applications for this technology. Measurement of esophageal mucosal impedance, via either multichannel intraluminal impedance catheters or specially designed endoscopically deployed impedance catheters, provides a marker of mucosal integrity. Mucosal impedance has been shown to segregate gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and eosinophilic esophagitis from non-GERD controls and may play a role in predicting response to reflux intervention. More data are needed with regard to other esophageal subgroups, outcome studies, and functional disease. Our paper reviews the history of impedance in esophageal disease, the means of assessing baseline and mucosal impedance, data with regard to the newly developed mucosal impedance probes, the clinical utility of mucosal impedance in specific clinical conditions, and limitations in our existing knowledge, along with suggestions for future studies.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Functional Heartburn: Expert Review

BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: A diagnosis of functional heartburn should be considered when retrosternal burning pain or discomfort persists despite maximal (double-dose) proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy taken appropriately before meals during a 3-month period. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: A diagnosis of functional heartburn requires upper endoscopy with esophageal biopsies to rule out anatomic and mucosal abnormalities, esophageal high-resolution manometry to rule out major motor disorders, and pH monitoring off PPI therapy (or pH-impedance monitoring on therapy in patients with proven gastroesophageal reflux disease [GERD]), to document physiologic levels of esophageal acid exposure in the distal esophagus with absence of reflux-symptom association (ie, negative symptom index and symptom association probability). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Overlap of functional heartburn with proven GERD is diagnosed according to Rome IV criteria when heartburn persists despite maximal PPI therapy in patients with history of proven GERD (ie, positive pH study, erosive esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, or esophageal ulcer), and pH impedance testing on PPI therapy demonstrates physiologic acid exposure without reflux-symptom association (ie, negative symptom index and symptom association probability). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: PPIs have no therapeutic value in functional heartburn, the exception being proven GERD that overlaps with functional heartburn. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Neuromodulators, including tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, tegaserod, and histamine-2 receptor antagonists have benefit as either primary therapy in functional heartburn or as add-on therapy in functional heartburn that overlaps with proven GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Based on available evidence, acupuncture and hypnotherapy may have benefit as monotherapy in functional heartburn, or as adjunctive therapy combined with other therapeutic modalities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Based on available evidence, anti-reflux surgery and endoscopic GERD treatment modalities have no therapeutic benefit in functional heartburn and should not be recommended.

Drawbacks of the Current Algorithm for Patients With Symptoms of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and the Impact of Adding Wireless pH Study to the Initial Diagnostic Endoscopy: Data From High-Volume Rural Antireflux Center

Background

Patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are often given a trial of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). When they respond, patients usually continue PPI therapy. If this empiric treatment fails, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is recommended. When EGD findings are equivocal, pH study is warranted. We hypothesize that this algorithm results in prolonged PPI therapy, repetition of EGDs and patient dissatisfaction. This study evaluates the impact of placing a pH probe at the time of the initial EGD.

Methods

IRB approval was obtained for retrospective chart review of patients who presented with GERD symptoms between August 2015 and March 2019. Patients were included if they underwent EGD with placement of wireless pH probe.

Results

A total of 379 patients (260 females, 119 males) with average age was 56.7±14.2 years. There were 253/379 (66.7%) patients who had previous EGDs (1-10). Health Satisfaction Survey was completed by 357/379 (94.2%) patients and 250/357 (70%) reported dissatisfaction with GERD control. PPI use was noted in 299/379 (78.8%) patients with average duration of 10.9±9.1 years. Testing off antisecretory medication was performed in 360/379 (94.9%). The average time interval between the clinic visit and performing EGD and pH study was 22±25 days.

Conclusion

The current GERD algorithm results in prolonged PPI therapy, repeated endoscopies and patient dissatisfaction. Placing a pH probe at the time of initial endoscopy is safe and expedient in a rural setting. Positive pH studies avoid repeating EGDs and negative pH studies warrant a search for potential alternative diagnosis.

Real-time MRI for dynamic assessment of gastroesophageal reflux disease: Comparison to pH-metry and impedance

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic potential of real-time MRI for dynamic assessment of gastroesophageal reflux in patients with GERD (gastroesophageal reflux disease)-like symptoms compared to pH-metry and impedance.

METHODS

Patients who underwent real-time MRI and pH-metry between 2015-2018 were included in this retrospective study. Real-time MRI at 3 T was achieved by undersampled radial FLASH acquisitions with iterative image reconstruction by NLINV. Real-time MRI visualized transit of pineapple juice through the gastroesophageal junction and during Valsalva maneuver. MRI results were compared to 24 h pH-metry to assess acidic reflux (following Lyon Consensus guidelines) and to impedance to assess non-acidic reflux. A standard 2 × 2 table was chosen to calculate diagnostic performance.

RESULTS

91/93 eligible patients fulfilled inclusion criteria (male n = 49; female n = 42; median age 55 y). All MRI studies were successfully completed without adverse events at a mean examination time of 15 min. On real-time MRI, reflux was evident in 60 patients (66 %). pH-metry revealed reflux in 41 patients (45 %), and impedance in 54 patients (59 %). Compared to pH-metry and impedance, real-time MRI sensitivity was 0.78 (95 % CI: 0.66-0.87), specificity 0.67 (95 % CI: 0.45-0.84) and PPV 0.87 (95 % CI: 0.75-0.94).

CONCLUSION

Real-time MRI is an imaging method for assessment of gastroesophageal reflux in patients with GERD-like symptoms. Considering its high positive predictive value, real-time MRI can accurately identify patients in which further invasive testing with pH-metry and impedance might be considered.

Esophageal physiologic profiles within erosive esophagitis in China: Predominantly low-grade esophagitis with low reflux burden

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The Lyon Consensus defines LA grades C&D erosive esophagitis (EE) or acid exposure time (AET) >6% as the conclusive evidence for gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, most of EE is LA grade A&B and the rate of AET exceeding 6% is low in China. We aimed to evaluate patients with EE in the Chinese population based on the Lyon Criteria.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed among patients with EE who had esophageal function tests performed in a tertiary hospital from 2013 to 2017. Erosive esophagitis was staged according to the Los Angeles classification. Their motor profiles from high-resolution manometry (HRM), reflux profiles from multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) monitoring and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) efficacy were analyzed. Patients were categorized as conclusive or inconclusive GERD.

RESULTS

Among 112 patients with EE who underwent esophageal function tests, EE of LA grade C&D was found in only 4.46% (N = 5). Almost 35% (N = 37) of patients with LA grade A&B EE had AET exceeded 6%, who had good PPI response similar to those with LA grade C&D EE (77.42% vs 100%, P = .559). The remaining 70 patients (62.50%) were inconclusive GERD, of whom 56.25% responded to PPI. Inconclusive GERD patients had a wide range (7.14%-97.14%) of positive adjunctive evidences from HRM and MII-pH monitoring without significant correlation to PPI response rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The reflux burden within patients with EE is predominantly low in China, and adjunctive HRM and MII-pH profiles from Lyon criteria do not segregate PPI response.

Reflux esophagitis, functional and non-functional

The pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease has been explained by acid-peptic model. However, related with the progress of the diagnostic modalities, another phenotypical group of patients were defined and called "functional disorders of the esophagus". These patients are important because diagnosis is particularly difficult, co-morbid disorders especially psychiatric diseases are common, proton pump inhibitor response is low, and surgical results are very poor. Simpler and translational science studies are required in functional groups in order to differentiate from acid-peptic disorders. New and more accurate diagnostic modalities as well as therapeutic approaches are strongly needed in this particularly new and exciting era, especially in the effect of neuromodulators. Current diagnostic modalities should also be evaluated and in fact, normal values should be established. New medications, especially acting at the level of esophageal epithelium and intercellular spaces, might shift the paradigm.

Efficacy and Safety of AlbisD Compared With Omeprazole 20 mg in Patients With Non-erosive Reflux Disease: A Randomized, Open-label, Active-controlled, Pilot Study

Background/Aims

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are frequently used to treat non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), but their effect is limited. It is not known whether a potential alternative, AlbisD, containing ranitidine hydrochloride, sucralfate hydrate, and tripotassium dicitrato bismuthate, is effective and safe in treating NERD. The aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AlbisD compared with omperazole in patients with NERD.

Methods

This was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority comparative study. A total of 126 patients with NERD were randomly allocated to either AlbisD twice daily or omeprazole 20 mg once daily for 4 weeks from February 2016 to August 2016. The study patients had histories of heartburn or regurgitation of moderate severity (> score 2) and a frequency of at least 2 episodes per week, and had no mucosal breaks of the esophagus on endoscopy. The primary efficacy variable was complete cure of heartburn at week 4. Secondary efficacy variables evaluating symptoms of heartburn and acid reflux as well as safety profiles were compared in the 2 groups at week 2 and 4 after treatment.

Results

A total of 113 patients completed the study (57 and 56 in AlbisD and omeprazole groups, respectively). The proportion of patients with complete cure of heartburn at week 4 was not significantly different between the AlbisD and omeprazole groups (35.1% vs 32.1% respectively, P = 0.740). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the any secondary variables including proportions of days without heartburn or acid reflux over 4 weeks (including daytime and nighttime). Adverse events were similarly reported in the 2 groups (7 [12.3%] vs 6 [10.7%]), and there were no serious adverse events.

Conclusions

The efficacy and safety of AlibsD in treating NERD patients are not inferior to those of omeprazole. Therefore, AlbisD can be an alternative to PPIs for NERD.

Management of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) continues to be one of the most prevalent gastrointestinal tract disorders. Management of GERD is individualized for each patient depending on severity of symptoms, complications of GERD and patient/physician preference. The different management options include life style modification, pharmacological therapy, minimally invasive procedures and surgery. The final decision regarding management should be made based on an individualized patient centered approach on a case-by-case basis in consultation with a multidisciplinary team including primary care physician, gastroenterologist and surgeon. We provide a comprehensive review for the management of GERD.

Natural history, pathophysiology and evaluation of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common diseases encountered by both internists and gastroenterologists. GERD can cause a wide variety of symptoms ranging from heartburn and regurgitation to more atypical symptoms such as cough, chest pain, and hoarseness. The diagnosis is often times made on the basis of history and clinical symptomatology. The prevalence of GERD is currently estimated to be 8-33% with the incidence of disease only expected to increase over time. Although most cases of GERD can be diagnosed based on symptoms and clinical presentation, the diagnosis of GERD can be challenging when symptoms are atypical. In this review, we provide a comprehensive summary of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, evaluation and diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Pepsin in Saliva as a Diagnostic Marker for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is very common. Salivary pepsin detection has previously been considered as a method for GERD diagnosis. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the utility of salivary pepsin assay as a diagnostic tool of GERD. MATERIAL AND METHODS PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochran Library, and EMBASE (from January 1980 to 23 October 2018) were searched for pepsin in saliva for GERD diagnosis. We summarized the retrieved specificity, sensitivity, negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves data in the meta-analysis. RESULTS In final analysis, a total of 5 studies were included. The summary sensitivity, specificity, NLR, and PLR were 0.60 (95% CI 0.41-0.76), 0.71 (95% CI 0.51-0.86), 0.56 (95% CI 0.34-0.93), and 2.1 (95% CI 1.1-4.1), respectively. The pooled DOR was 4 (95% CI 1.0-11.0) and area under the ROC was 0.70 (95% CI 0.66-0.74). CONCLUSIONS The meta-analysis showed that pepsin in saliva has moderate diagnostic value for GERD, and is not as helpful as previously thought.

Clinical measurement of gastrointestinal motility and function: who, when and which test?

Symptoms related to abnormal gastrointestinal motility and function are common. Oropharyngeal and oesophageal dysphagia, heartburn, bloating, abdominal pain and alterations in bowel habits are among the most frequent reasons for seeking medical attention from internists or general practitioners and are also common reasons for referral to gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons. However, the nonspecific nature of gastrointestinal symptoms, the absence of a definitive diagnosis on routine investigations (such as endoscopy, radiology or blood tests) and the lack of specific treatments make disease management challenging. Advances in technology have driven progress in the understanding of many of these conditions. This Review serves as an introduction to a series of Consensus Statements on the clinical measurements of gastrointestinal motility, function and sensitivity. A structured, evidence-based approach to the initial assessment and empirical treatment of patients presenting with gastrointestinal symptoms is discussed, followed by an outline of the contribution of modern physiological measurement on the management of patients in whom the cause of symptoms has not been identified with other tests. Discussions include the indications for and utility of high-resolution manometry, ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring, gastric emptying studies, breath tests and investigations of anorectal structure and function in day-to-day practice and clinical management.

The role of esophageal pH-impedance testing in clinical practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Ambulatory reflux monitoring is typically performed when esophageal symptoms do not respond to usual antireflux medications, or prior to invasive antireflux therapy. Although pH-based metrics have been the standard in defining esophageal reflux burden, novel impedance parameters have been introduced in recent years that can either be extracted from pH-impedance monitoring or obtained directly from esophageal mucosa. This review evaluates the clinical role of esophageal pH-impedance monitoring in clinical practice in the present day.

RECENT FINDINGS

Elevated acid exposure time in the distal esophagus remains the primary metric that predicts symptom improvement from antireflux therapy. Although conventional impedance-based metrics (numbers of reflux episodes, reflux-symptom association) provide complementary evidence, novel impedance-based metrics show promise in documenting reflux-induced damage to esophageal mucosal integrity, and in potentially predicting treatment outcome. The postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave measures integrity of primary peristalsis triggered by a reflux episode. Baseline impedance values reflect histopathological damage to mucosal integrity, and improve following successful antireflux therapy. Mucosal impedance assessed at endoscopy is a new diagnostic tool that is currently being evaluated in multinational research studies.

SUMMARY

Esophageal pH-impedance monitoring has potential to augment confidence in a reflux diagnosis beyond that provided by pH-monitoring alone.

Modern diagnosis of GERD: the Lyon Consensus

Clinical history, questionnaire data and response to antisecretory therapy are insufficient to make a conclusive diagnosis of GERD in isolation, but are of value in determining need for further investigation. Conclusive evidence for reflux on oesophageal testing include advanced grade erosive oesophagitis (LA grades C and D), long-segment Barrett's mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal oesophageal acid exposure time (AET) >6% on ambulatory pH or pH-impedance monitoring. A normal endoscopy does not exclude GERD, but provides supportive evidence refuting GERD in conjunction with distal AET <4% and <40 reflux episodes on pH-impedance monitoring off proton pump inhibitors. Reflux-symptom association on ambulatory reflux monitoring provides supportive evidence for reflux triggered symptoms, and may predict a better treatment outcome when present. When endoscopy and pH or pH-impedance monitoring are inconclusive, adjunctive evidence from biopsy findings (histopathology scores, dilated intercellular spaces), motor evaluation (hypotensive lower oesophageal sphincter, hiatus hernia and oesophageal body hypomotility on high-resolution manometry) and novel impedance metrics (baseline impedance, postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index) can add confidence for a GERD diagnosis; however, diagnosis cannot be based on these findings alone. An assessment of anatomy, motor function, reflux burden and symptomatic phenotype will therefore help direct management. Future GERD management strategies should focus on defining individual patient phenotypes based on the level of refluxate exposure, mechanism of reflux, efficacy of clearance, underlying anatomy of the oesophagogastric junction and psychometrics defining symptomatic presentations.

Proton pump inhibitor-refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease: challenges and solutions

A significant percentage of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) will not respond to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. The causes of PPI-refractory GERD are numerous and diverse, and include adherence, persistent acid, functional disorders, nonacid reflux, and PPI bioavailability. The evaluation should start with a symptom assessment and may progress to imaging, endoscopy, and monitoring of esophageal pH, impedance, and bilirubin. There are a variety of pharmacologic and procedural interventions that should be selected based on the underlying mechanism of PPI failure. Pharmacologic treatments can include antacids, prokinetics, alginates, bile acid binders, reflux inhibitors, and antidepressants. Procedural options include laparoscopic fundoplication and LINX as well as endoscopic procedures, such as transoral incisionless fundoplication and Stretta. Several alternative and complementary treatments of possible benefit also exist.

Epidemiology and Natural History of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has emerged over the past 2 decades as a major cause of upper gastrointestinal morbidity. Over this time, the epidemiology of EoE has also rapidly evolved. EoE has transformed from a rare case-reportable condition to disease that is commonly encountered in the gastroenterology clinic, hospital emergency room, and endoscopy suite. The incidence and prevalence are increasing at rates that outpace increased disease recognition. Current incidence estimates range from 5 to 10 cases per 100,000, and current prevalence estimates range from 0.5 to 1 case per 1000. We review the data and potential reasons behind this increase, examine risk factors, and identify important areas for research into disease etiology. The article also discusses the progression of EoE from an inflammatory to fibrostenotic phenotype. An accurate view of the natural history of EoE is central to discussions with patients regarding disease prognosis and decisions about long-term use of medical, endoscopic, and diet therapies. Progressive remodelling appears to be gradual, but not universal, and the duration of untreated disease is the best predictor of stricture risk. Ultimately, prospective, long-term outcome studies focusing on multiple aspects of disease activity are needed to fully understand the natural history of EoE.

Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) commonly starts with an empiric trial of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and complementary lifestyle measures, for patients without alarm symptoms. Optimization of therapy (improving compliance and timing of PPI doses), or increasing PPI dosage to twice daily in select circumstances, can reduce persistent symptoms. Patients with continued symptoms can be evaluated with endoscopy and tests of esophageal physiology, to better determine their disease phenotype and optimize treatment. Laparoscopic fundoplication, magnetic sphincter augmentation, and endoscopic therapies can benefit patients with well-characterized GERD. Patients with functional diseases that overlap with or mimic GERD can also be treated with neuromodulators (primarily antidepressants), or psychological interventions (psychotherapy, hypnotherapy, cognitive and behavioral therapy). Future approaches to treatment of GERD include potassium-competitive acid blockers, reflux-reducing agents, bile acid binders, injection of inert substances into the esophagogastric junction, and electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter.

Expert consensus document: Advances in the physiological assessment and diagnosis of GERD

GERD is a common condition worldwide. Key mechanisms of disease include abnormal oesophagogastric junction structure and function, and impaired oesophageal clearance. A therapeutic trial of acid-suppressive PPI therapy is often the initial management, with endoscopy performed in the setting of alarm symptoms and to exclude other conditions. If symptoms persist and endoscopy does not reveal evidence of GERD, oesophageal function tests are performed, including oesophageal manometry and ambulatory reflux monitoring. However, reflux episodes can be physiological, and some findings on endoscopy and manometry can be encountered in asymptomatic individuals without GERD symptoms. The diagnosis of GERD on the basis of functional oesophageal testing has been previously reported, but no updated expert recommendations on indications and the interpretation of oesophageal function testing in GERD has been made since the Porto consensus over a decade ago. In this Consensus Statement, we aim to describe modern oesophageal physiological tests and their analysis with an emphasis on establishing indications and consensus on interpretation parameters of oesophageal function testing for the evaluation of GERD in clinical practice. This document reflects the collective conclusions of the international GERD working group, incorporating existing data with expert consensus opinion.

Proton Pump Inhibitors in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Friend or Foe

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been redefined, in light of recent advances highlighting GERD phenotypes that respond to PPIs, and fresh revelations of potential risks of long-term PPI therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Erosive esophagitis predicts excellent response to PPI therapy, but non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) with abnormal reflux parameters on ambulatory reflux monitoring also demonstrates a similar response. In contrast, response is suboptimal in the absence of abnormal reflux parameters. In this setting, if an alternate appropriate indication for PPI therapy does not coexist, risks may outweigh benefits of PPI therapy. Adverse events from long-term PPI therapy continue to be reported, most based on association rather than cause-and-effect. Appropriate indications need to be established before embarking on long-term PPI therapy. Future research will define true risks of long-term PPI therapy, and develop alternate management options for acid peptic diseases.

Prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis in patients with gastroesophageal reflux symptoms: A cross-sectional study from a tertiary care hospital in North India

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is being recognized increasingly all over the globe; Indian data is however sparse. We screened patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) for presence of EoE in them.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD underwent gastroduodenoscopy and esophageal biopsies, obtained from both the upper esophagus (5 cm below the upper esophageal sphincter) and lower esophagus (5 cm above gastroesophageal junction), as well as from any other endoscopically visible abnormal mucosa. Demographic and clinical characteristics, endoscopic findings, peripheral blood eosinophilic count, and history of use of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) were analyzed. Stool examination was done to rule out parasitoids. EoE was diagnosed if number of mucosal eosinophil infiltrate was >20 per high-power field. In the latter, Warthin-Starry stain was performed to rule out presence of H elicobacter pylori.

RESULTS

Of 190 consecutive patients with symptoms of GERD screened, esophageal biopsies were available in 185 cases. Of them, 6 had EoE, suggesting a prevalence of 3.2% among patients with GERD. On univariate analysis, history of allergy, non-response to PPI, and absolute eosinophil counts and on multivariable analysis, history of allergy and no response to PPIs were significant predictors of EoE. Presence of EOE did not correlate with severity of reflux symptoms.

CONCLUSION

In this hospital-based study from northern part of India, prevalence of EoE in patients with GERD was 3.2%. EoE should be considered as a diagnostic possibility, especially in those with history of allergy, no-response to PPI, and absolute eosinophil count of ≥250/cumm.

Regional Variability of Repeat Esophagogastroduodenoscopy Use in the National Veteran Population

BACKGROUND

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) procedures are performed frequently to evaluate gastrointestinal disease and symptoms.

AIM

To determine regional practice variability of repeat EGDs in a national population.

METHODS

The study sample included US Veterans with an outpatient index EGD from 1/1/2008 to 12/2010. We determined risk of repeat endoscopy from 1/2008 to 10/1/2014. A logistic regression model was used to assess the association between the odds of repeated EGD and patient demographics, ICD diagnostic codes, and geographic region. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to obtain the adjusted odds ratio and predicted probabilities of repeat EGDs by region.

RESULTS

A total of 202,086 patients had an index endoscopy from 1/2008 to 12/2010. Unique patients with an index endoscopy were predominantly male (93.2%), white (72.8%), and on average 61 years. A total of 58,469 patients (28.9%) had one or more repeat EGDs, accounting for 103,253 repeat procedures through 10/2014. ICD-9-CM codes associated with increased risk of repeat procedures were Barrett's esophagus (OR 3.6, 95% CI 3.5-3.7), dysphagia (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.3), ulcer (OR 1.3, 95% CI 2.2-2.4), stricture (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.7-1.9), and esophageal varices (OR 2.8, 95% CI 2.7-3.0). There was a significant difference in the probability of repeat EGD by VA region, with the Midwest region having the highest probability (31.2%) and Southeast the lowest probability (27.3%). This difference would account for 400 more EGD procedures per 10,000 Veterans, after adjusting for patient demographics and diagnosis codes.

CONCLUSIONS

Regional practice variability accounts for a substantial volume of repeat EGD procedures, regardless of patient characteristics and associated diagnoses.

Fewer acute respiratory infection episodes among patients receiving treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease

Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) present with comorbid complications with implications for healthcare utilization. To date, little is known about the effects of GERD treatment with a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) on patients’ subsequent healthcare utilization for acute respiratory infections (ARIs). This population-based study compared ARI episodes captured through outpatient visits, one year before and one year after GERD patients received PPI treatment. We used retrospective data from the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database 2005 in Taiwan, comparing 21,486 patients diagnosed with GERD from 2010 to 2012 with 21,486 age-sex matched comparison patients without GERD. Annual ARI episodes represented by ambulatory care visits for ARI (visits during a 7-day period bundled into one episode), were compared between the patient groups during the 1-year period before and after the index date (date of GERD diagnosis for study patients, first ambulatory visit in the same year for their matched comparison counterpart). Multiple regression analysis using a difference-in-difference approach was performed to estimate the adjusted association between GERD treatment and the subsequent annual ARI rate. We found that the mean annual ARI episode rate among GERD patients reduced by 11.4%, from 4.39 before PPI treatment, to 3.89 following treatment (mean change = -0.5 visit, 95% confidence interval (CI) = (-0.64, -0.36)). In Poisson regression analysis, GERD treatment showed an independent association with the annual ARI rate, showing a negative estimate (with p<0.001). The study suggests that GERD treatment with PPIs may help reduce healthcare visits for ARIs, highlighting the importance of treatment-seeking by GERD patients and compliance with treatment.

Asia-Pacific consensus on the management of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: an update focusing on refractory reflux disease and Barrett's oesophagus

OBJECTIVE

Since the publication of the Asia-Pacific consensus on gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in 2008, there has been further scientific advancement in this field. This updated consensus focuses on proton pump inhibitor-refractory reflux disease and Barrett's oesophagus.

METHODS

A steering committee identified three areas to address: (1) burden of disease and diagnosis of reflux disease; (2) proton pump inhibitor-refractory reflux disease; (3) Barrett's oesophagus. Three working groups formulated draft statements with supporting evidence. Discussions were done via email before a final face-to-face discussion. We used a Delphi consensus process, with a 70% agreement threshold, using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria to categorise the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of 32 statements were proposed and 31 were accepted by consensus. A rise in the prevalence rates of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in Asia was noted, with the majority being non-erosive reflux disease. Overweight and obesity contributed to the rise. Proton pump inhibitor-refractory reflux disease was recognised to be common. A distinction was made between refractory symptoms and refractory reflux disease, with clarification of the roles of endoscopy and functional testing summarised in two algorithms. The definition of Barrett's oesophagus was revised such that a minimum length of 1 cm was required and the presence of intestinal metaplasia no longer necessary. We recommended the use of standardised endoscopic reporting and advocated endoscopic therapy for confirmed dysplasia and early cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines standardise the management of patients with refractory gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and Barrett's oesophagus in the Asia-Pacific region.

Management of refractory typical GERD symptoms

The management of patients with refractory GERD (rGERD) is a major clinical challenge for gastroenterologists. In up to 30% of patients with typical GERD symptoms (heartburn and/or regurgitation), acid-suppressive therapy does not provide clinical benefit. In this Review, we discuss the current management algorithm for GERD and the features and management of patients who do not respond to treatment (such as those individuals with an incorrect diagnosis of GERD, inadequate PPI intake, persisting acid reflux and persisting weakly acidic reflux). Symptom response to existing surgical techniques, novel antireflux procedures, and the value of add-on medical therapies (including prokinetics and reflux inhibitors) for rGERD symptoms are discussed. Pharmaceutical agents targeting oesophageal sensitivity, a condition that can contribute to symptom generation in rGERD, are also discussed. Finally, on the basis of available published data and our expert opinion, we present an outline of a current, usable algorithm for management of patients with rGERD that considers the timing and diagnostic use of pH-impedance monitoring on or off PPI, additional diagnostic tests, the clinical use of baclofen and the use of add-on neuromodulators (tricyclic agents and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors).