One-week Esomeprazole Treatment: an Effective Confirmatory Test in Patients with Suspected Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Antireflux surgery - choosing the right candidate

INTRODUCTION

Surgical gastric fundoplication is an effective treatment option for gastroesophageal reflux disease. In contrast to acid suppression, fundoplication nearly abolishes all types of reflux, acid and nonacid. However, in some cases, lasting side effects of the procedure may overshadow its positive effects. It has remained difficult to determine which patients are the most suitable candidates for fundoplication.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to evaluate the available data on preoperative factors that are associated with the outcome of fundoplication and to determine which combination of patient characteristics and preoperative test results provides optimal selection. In addition, we assess the need for tailoring the procedure on the basis of the preoperative quality of esophageal peristalsis.

EXPERT OPINION

Surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease is underutilized as it may provide an excellent option for a subset of GERD patients. It is not sensible to restrict surgical treatment to patients who do not respond to acid suppression. However, meticulous patient selection is key. Most importantly, surgical treatment should not be considered in patients in whom there is no convincing evidence that the symptoms are caused by reflux. Impaired esophageal peristalsis should not be regarded as a contraindication against fundoplication.

Diagnostic Accuracy of the Proton Pump Inhibitor Test in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Noncardiac Chest Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Response to a trial of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is currently accepted as a first step in the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, information on the diagnostic performance of the PPI test is limited.

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the PPI test in GERD and noncardiac chest pain (NCCP) and to assess the test performance in erosive reflux disease (ERD) and nonerosive reflux disease (NERD).

METHODS

Web of Science, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), and MEDLINE were searched for studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy of the PPI test in adult patients with typical GERD and NCCP who underwent evaluation using an accepted reference standard, from January 1, 1950, through February 1, 2021. Subgroup analyses were performed, and the risk of bias was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies (GERD=11, NCCP=8) involving 1691 patients were included. In GERD, the PPI test had 79% pooled sensitivity [95% confidence interval (CI), 72%-84%], and 45% pooled specificity (95% CI, 40%-49%). In NCCP, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 79% (95% CI, 69%-86%) and 79% (95% CI, 69%-86%), respectively. In ERD, the PPI test had 76% pooled sensitivity (95% CI, 66%-84%) and 30% pooled specificity (95% CI, 8%-67%). In NERD, the PPI test had 79% pooled sensitivity (95% CI, 70%-86%) and 50% pooled specificity (95% CI, 39%-61%).

CONCLUSIONS

The PPI test was sensitive in GERD but with suboptimal specificity. The test performed better in GERD-related NCCP. Diagnostic accuracy was comparable in ERD and NERD.

Adult and paediatric GERD: diagnosis, phenotypes and avoidance of excess treatments

Detailed investigations and objective measurements in patients with symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux should be performed with the intent of making the correct diagnosis, thus enabling choice of appropriate therapy. Establishing the most effective therapy is particularly important in adults who do not respond to standard treatment and in children. The use of PPIs for suspected GERD has increased substantially over the past decade, providing great relief in patients with acid-related symptoms, but also leading to adverse effects and a considerable economic burden. Adults with functional heartburn do not benefit from PPIs, while prolonged PPI use in patients with extraoesophageal symptoms remains a controversial area. Moreover, PPIs are not indicated in infants with GERD unless symptoms are proven to be acid-related. With regard to antireflux surgery, patients must be carefully selected to avoid the need for ongoing PPI treatment postoperatively. Correct diagnosis and phenotyping of patients with symptoms attributed to gastro-oesophageal reflux through detailed investigations is therefore imperative, leading to improved patient outcomes and rationalized use of available treatment options. In this Review, we outline currently available diagnostic tests and discuss approaches to limit any unnecessary medical or surgical interventions.

Short-term treatment with proton pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists and prokinetics for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-like symptoms and endoscopy negative reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Approximately 25% of adults regularly experience heartburn, a symptom of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). Most patients are treated empirically (without specific diagnostic evaluation e.g. endoscopy. Among patients who have an upper endoscopy, findings range from a normal appearance, mild erythema to severe oesophagitis with stricture formation. Patients without visible damage to the oesophagus have endoscopy negative reflux disease (ENRD). The pathogenesis of ENRD, and its response to treatment may differ from GORD with oesophagitis.

OBJECTIVES

Summarise, quantify and compare the efficacy of short-term use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), H2-receptor antagonists (H2RA) and prokinetics in adults with GORD, treated empirically and in those with endoscopy negative reflux disease (ENRD).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (January 1966 to November 2011), EMBASE (January 1988 to November 2011), and EBMR in November 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials reporting symptomatic outcome after short-term treatment for GORD using proton pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists or prokinetic agents. Participants had to be either from an empirical treatment group (no endoscopy used in treatment allocation) or from an endoscopy negative reflux disease group (no signs of erosive oesophagitis).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-four trials (1314 participants) were included: fifteen in the empirical treatment group, fifteen in the ENRD group and four in both. In empirical treatment of GORD the risk ratio (RR) for heartburn remission (the primary efficacy variable) in placebo-controlled trials for PPI was 0.37 (two trials, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32 to 0.44), for H2RAs 0.77 (two trials, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.99) and for prokinetics 0.86 (one trial, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01). In a direct comparison PPIs were more effective than H2RAs (seven trials, RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.73) and prokinetics (two trials, RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.87).In treatment of ENRD, the RR for heartburn remission for PPI versus placebo was 0.71 (ten trials, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.78) and for H2RA versus placebo was 0.84 (two trials, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.95). The RR for PPI versus H2RA was 0.78 (three trials, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.97) and for PPI versus prokinetic 0.72 (one trial, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.92).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PPIs are more effective than H2RAs in relieving heartburn in patients with GORD who are treated empirically and in those with ENRD, although the magnitude of benefit is greater for those treated empirically.

Limited ability of the proton-pump inhibitor test to identify patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The efficacy of proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy often is assessed to determine whether patients' symptoms are acid-related and if patients have gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), although the accuracy of this approach is questionable. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the PPI test, in conjunction with other tests, for the diagnosis of GERD.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the DIAMOND study, a multinational trial that compared the ability of the reflux disease questionnaire with that of symptom-based clinical diagnosis to identify GERD in primary care patients with frequent upper-gastrointestinal symptoms. Patients (n = 308) were given placebo and further evaluated by endoscopy, wireless esophageal pH-metry, and symptom association monitoring. Those with GERD (n = 197) were identified based on the presence of reflux esophagitis, esophageal pH level less than 4 for more than 5.5% of 24 hours, or positive results from symptom association monitoring (or a positive result from the PPI test in patients with borderline levels of esophageal acidity). All patients then were given single-blind therapy with esomeprazole (40 mg once daily) for 2 weeks and symptoms were recorded daily.

RESULTS

A positive response to the PPI test was observed in 69% of patients with GERD and in 51% of those without GERD. Response to placebo did not influence the diagnostic ability of the subsequent PPI test. More patients with reflux esophagitis had a positive result from the PPI test than patients without GERD (57% vs 35%; P = .002) or patients with GERD but no esophagitis. A clinical diagnosis by the primary care physician of an acid-related disease was not associated with response to PPIs.

CONCLUSIONS

In a well-characterized population of primary care patients with frequent upper-gastrointestinal symptoms of any type, the PPI test has limited ability to identify patients with GERD, diagnosed by current standard tests. (ClinicalTrials.gov Number, NCT00291746.).

Prompt upper endoscopy is an appropriate initial management in uninvestigated chinese patients with typical reflux symptoms

OBJECTIVES

We sought to investigate the prevalence of clinically significant endoscopic findings (CSEFs) in Chinese patients presenting with uninvestigated typical reflux symptoms in the absence of alarm symptoms, and to evaluate whether prompt endoscopy is an appropriate initial management in these patients.

METHODS

Consecutive patients presenting with uninvestigated typical reflux symptoms (i.e., heartburn or acid regurgitation) as chief complaints were recruited for symptom evaluation and upper endoscopy, followed by a 2-week proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy.

RESULTS

Of 469 patients recruited, CSEFs were observed in 180 (38.4%): 154 (32.8%) with erosive esophagitis (EE), 18 (3.8%) with Barrett's esophagus (BE), 24 (5.1%) with peptic ulcer disease (PUD), and 4 (0.9%) with carcinomas (1 esophageal carcinoma and 3 gastric adenocarcinomas). Multivariate analysis identified that an age >50 years (odds ratio (OR)=1.94, P=0.008), male gender (OR=4.11, P<0.001), being overweight or obese (OR=2.99, P<0.001), and alcohol use (OR=9.96, P<0.001) were independent risk factors for EE; an age >50 years (OR=4.61, P=0.003) and alcohol use (OR=5.50, P=0.003) were independent risk factors for BE; and Helicobacter pylori infection (OR=8.52, P<0.001) and alcohol use (OR=4.08, P=0.004) were independent risk factors for PUD. Symptom evaluation and response to PPI treatment were not correlated with EE, BE, and PUD in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CSEFs other than gastroesophageal reflux disease are present in a considerable proportion of Chinese patients with uninvestigated typical reflux symptoms but without alarm features. Symptom evaluation is of limited practical value, and thus prompt endoscopy seems to be an appropriate initial management option in these patients.

Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of gastroesophageal reflux disease: an evidence-based consensus

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common disorders in medical practice. A number of guidelines and recommendations for the diagnosis and management of GERD have been published in different countries, but a Brazilian accepted directive by the standards of evidence-based medicine is still lacking. As such, the aim of the Brazilian GERD Consensus Group was to develop guidelines for the diagnosis and management of GERD, strictly using evidence-based medicine methodology that could be clinically used by primary care physicians and specialists and would encompass the needs of physicians, investigators, insurance and regulatory bodies. A total of 30 questions were proposed. Systematic literature reviews, which defined inclusion and/or exclusion criteria, were conducted to identify and grade the available evidence to support each statement. A total of 11,069 papers on GERD were selected, of which 6,474 addressed the diagnosis and 4,595, therapeutics. Regarding diagnosis, 51 met the requirements for the analysis of evidence-based medicine: 19 of them were classified as grade A and 32 as grade B. As for therapeutics, 158 met the evidence-based medicine criteria; 89 were classified as grade A and 69 as grade B. In the topic Diagnosis, answers supported by publications grade A and B were accepted. In the topic Treatment only publications grade A were accepted: answers supported by publications grade B were submitted to the voting by the Consensus Group. The present publication presents the most representative studies that responded to the proposed questions, followed by pertinent comments. Follow examples. In patients with atypical manifestations, the conventional esophageal pH-metry contributes little to the diagnosis of GERD. The sensitivity, however, increases with the use of double-channel pH-metry. In patients with atypical manifestations, the impedance-pHmetry substantially contributes to the diagnosis of GERD. The examination, however, is costly and scarcely available in our country. The evaluation of the histological signs of esophagitis increases the diagnostic probability of GERD; hence, the observation of the dimensions of the intercellular space of the esophageal mucosa increases the probability of diagnostic certainty and also allows the analysis of the therapeutic response. There is no difference in the clinical response to the treatment with PPI in two separate daily doses when compared to a single daily dose. In the long term (>1 year), the eradication of H. pylori in patients with GERD does not decrease the presence of symptoms or the high recurrence rates of the disease, although it decreases the histological signs of gastric inflammation. It seems very likely that there is no association between the eradication of the H. pylori and the manifestations of GERD. The presence of a hiatal hernia requires larger doses of proton-pump inhibitor for the clinical treatment. The presence of permanent migration from the esophagogastric junction and the hernia dimensions (>2 cm) are factors of worse prognosis in GERD. In this case, hiatal hernias associated to GERD, especially the fixed ones and larger than 2 cm, must be considered for surgical treatment. The outcomes of the laparoscopic fundoplication are adequate.

Laryngopharyngeal reflux: a prospective analysis of a 34 item symptom questionnaire

OBJECTIVES

Laryngopharyngeal reflux is increasingly diagnosed, but both its symptoms and relationship to gastro-oesophageal reflux disease remain confused.

AIMS

(i) To assess symptoms in potential laryngopharyngeal reflux patients according to a comprehensive symptom list based on both a gastro-oesophageal reflux questionnaire and a laryngopharyngeal reflux questionnaire. (ii) To assess whether there are statistically discrete symptom clusters which might map to specific syndromes e.g. globus pharynges.

DESIGN

Prospective single cohort questionnaire survey.

METHODS

A 34-item questionnaire comprising all symptoms identifiable on (i) the original 25-item Gastroesophageal Symptom Assessment Scale (GSAS) and (ii) the nine Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) items, 'unbundled' as necessary, were administered to 62 ENT clinic attenders. Descriptive, correlation and cluster analysis was performed.

RESULTS

All but two of the combined 34-symptom list were endorsed by at least 20% of 62 patients. Certain symptoms which the Reflux Symptom Index groups as a single item were only weakly correlated. No specific symptom clusters were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither the most popular 'lower' oesophageal (GSAS) nor the 'throat' reflux (RSI) questionnaire adequately captures the full range of potential reflux symptoms regularly encountered in otolaryngology patients: inadequate evaluation of patients' symptoms may have contributed to the ongoing uncertainty about the role of acid or pepsin suppression. A more comprehensive reflux questionnaire is needed to characterise the true reflux correlations of laryngopharyngeal symptoms, and offer a symptom-specific measure of response to placebo and anti-reflux therapy.

The modern investigation and management of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD)

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease results from impaired function of the LOS and acid clearance of the distal oesophagus. Most patients do not require investigation and respond either to lifestyle changes, antacid/alginates, H2A, PPI or a combination of these treatments. Surgery is only rarely indicated.

A comparative study of proton-pump inhibitor tests for Chinese reflux patients in relation to the CYP2C19 genotypes

BACKGROUND

The proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) test has been proposed as a valuable tool for diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease in Western populations.

GOALS

We aim to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the PPI test using rabeprazole and pantoprazole in a Chinese population with a higher prevalence of poor PPI metabolization.

STUDY

After diagnostic endoscopy, patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms were randomly assigned to a 2-week test with rabeprazole (20 mg b.i.d.) or pantoprazole (40 mg b.i.d.). Therapeutic response was assessed with a 5-grade daily record. Genotypes of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 polymorphism were determined.

RESULTS

Of the 178 patients who completed the study, 92 (51.7%) had erosive esophagitis and 78 (48.3%) were endoscopy-negative reflux disease. On the basis of 50% reduction of symptoms, there was a nonsignificant difference of diagnostic performances between rabeprazole and pantoprazole. For the CYP2C19 genotypes, 138 (87.3%) were determined to be extensive metabolizers (EMs) and 20 (12.7%) were poor metabolizers (PMs). When comparing the EMs and PMs, the diagnostic specificity in the prediction of erosive esophagitis was higher in the EMs (57.6% vs. 20.0%, P=0.040), as was the accuracy (74.6% vs. 50.0%, P=0.023). There were no differences in the sensitivity, positive predictive value, or negative predictive value.

CONCLUSIONS

CYP2C19 genotypic polymorphism was related to a higher possibility of false-positive results for patients who metabolized PPI poorly. High-dose rabeprazole and pantoprazole showed a similar diagnostic performance.

Occurrence of community-acquired respiratory tract infection in patients receiving esomeprazole: retrospective analysis of adverse events in 31 clinical trials

BACKGROUND

A potential causal association between an increase in gastric pH and a risk of community-acquired respiratory tract infection (RTI), specifically pneumonia, has been debated in relation to the use of potent gastric acid-suppressive medication.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the occurrence of community-acquired RTI, including pneumonia, in patients receiving esomeprazole versus placebo and other acid-suppressive agents in randomized clinical trials.

METHODS

The AstraZeneca ARIADNE safety database was searched for comparative, controlled phase II-IV randomized, blinded clinical studies with esomeprazole and standard reporting of all adverse events (AEs). Pooled AE data were presented according to treatment comparison (esomeprazole versus placebo, esomeprazole 40 mg versus 20 mg daily, esomeprazole versus omeprazole, lansoprazole and/or ranitidine, respectively). Frequency and relative risk (RR), with 99% confidence interval (CI) and adjustment for time on treatment, were calculated for the following four AE categories: all RTIs; signs and symptoms potentially indicating RTI; lower RTI; and pneumonia.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies were identified, in which 16 583 patients received esomeprazole and 12 044 patients received either placebo or comparator acid-suppressive drugs. The occurrence of all four categories of AEs was similar between esomeprazole and placebo (all RTIs: 9.2% versus 8.5%; signs and symptoms of RTI: 1.8% versus 1.8%; lower RTI: 1.6% versus 1.5%; and pneumonia: 0.2% in both groups). The RR estimates were as follows: all RTIs, 0.93 (99% CI 0.78, 1.11); signs and symptoms of RTI, 0.85 (99% CI 0.57, 1.27); lower RTI, 0.92 (99% CI 0.59, 1.42); and pneumonia, 0.94 (99% CI 0.29, 3.07). The distribution of RTIs by patient sex and age showed a similar pattern in esomeprazole and placebo-treated patients. The comparisons of esomeprazole with the other comparator acid-suppressive drugs showed a similar pattern with only minor numerical differences in the occurrence of RTI between the drugs. There were no significant between-group differences with esomeprazole versus placebo for all four categories of AEs according to esomeprazole dosage, treatment indication and duration of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled analysis found no causal association between acid-suppressive therapy with esomeprazole and increased risk of community-acquired RTI, including pneumonia, in patients receiving this agent for gastric acid-related disorders.

The proton pump inhibitor (PPI) test in GERD: does it still have a role?

The proton pump inhibitor (PPI) test is a short course of high-dose PPI, used to diagnose gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This diagnostic strategy is commonly used globally, primarily because of its availability, simplicity, and high sensitivity. The PPI test has been proven to be a sensitive tool for diagnosing GERD in noncardiac chest pain patients and in preliminary trials in extraesophageal manifestations of GERD. Several recent meta-analyses reevaluated the value of the PPI test in patients with classic GERD-related symptoms and noncardiac chest pain. Although the results were conflicting, the PPI test remains a popular tool for determining the presence of GERD. Attempts to challenge the PPI test without offering attractive alternatives are unlikely to alter clinical practice.

Is a barium swallow complementary to endoscopy essential in the preoperative assessment of laparoscopic antireflux and hiatal hernia surgery?

BACKGROUND

Barium swallow is considered essential in the preoperative assessment of gastroesophaeal reflux disease and hiatal hernias. The objective of this study was to investigate the effective value of a barium swallow if complementary to the commonly recommended endoscopy before laparoscopic antireflux and hiatal hernia surgery.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated 40 consecutive patients who were tested with preoperative barium swallow and endoscopy before laparoscopic surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease and/or symptomatic hiatal hernia. Results regarding the presence and the type of hiatal hernia found by barium swallow and endoscopy were correlated with the intraoperative finding as the reference standard.

RESULTS

Intraoperative findings revealed 21 axial, 7 paraesophageal, and 12 mixed hiatal hernias. Barium swallow and endoscopy allowed the diagnosis of hiatal hernia in 75% and 97.5%, respectively (p = 0.003). The correct classification of hiatal hernia was confirmed in 50% by barium swallow and 80% by endoscopy (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Although barium swallow is recommended as an important diagnostic tool in the workup before surgical antireflux and hiatal hernia therapy, our results suggest that if mandatory endoscopy is performed preoperatively, a barium swallow does not provide any further essential information. It seems that barium swallow can be omitted as a basic diagnostic test before primary laparoscopic antireflux and hiatal hernia surgery.

Short-term treatment with proton pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists and prokinetics for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-like symptoms and endoscopy negative reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Approximately 25% of adults experience heartburn, the cardinal feature of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), at least monthly. The evaluation and treatment of patients with suspected GORD is associated with a substantial economic burden. Most patients are treated empirically (without specific diagnostic evaluation). They include a wide range of underlying oesophageal injury. The severity of oesophageal injury can only be established in those who have undergone upper endoscopy. Patients without visible damage to the oesophagus have been referred to as having endoscopy negative reflux disease (ENRD). The pathogenesis of ENRD as well as its response to treatment may differ from GORD with oesophagitis.

OBJECTIVES

Summarise, quantify and compare the efficacy of the short-term use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), H2-receptor antagonists (H2RA) and prokinetics in adults with GORD, treated empirically and in those with endoscopy negative reflux disease (ENRD).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2005), MEDLINE (January 1966 to December 2005), EMBASE (January 1988 to December 2005).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials focussing on symptomatic outcome after short-term treatment for GORD using proton pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists or prokinetic agents. Studies were included provided that participants could be classified in the empirical treatment group (no endoscopy used in treatment allocation) or in the endoscopy negative reflux disease group (no endoscopic signs of erosive oesophagitis).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-one trials (9457 participants) were included: fifteen in the empirical treatment group, twelve in the ENRD group and four in both. In empirical treatment of GORD the relative risk (RR) for heartburn remission (the primary efficacy variable) in placebo-controlled trials for PPI was 0.37 (two trials, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32 to 0.44), for H2RAs 0.77 (two trials, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.99) and for prokinetics 0.86 (one trial, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01). In a direct comparison PPIs were more effective than H2RAs (seven trials, RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.73) and prokinetics (two trials, RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.87). In treatment of ENRD, the RR for heartburn remission for PPI versus placebo was 0.69 (seven trials, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.78) and for H2RA versus placebo was 0.84 (two trials, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.95). The RR for PPI versus H2RA was 0.78 (three trials, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.97) and for PPI versus prokinetic 0.72 (one trial, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.92).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PPIs are more effective than H2RAs in relieving heartburn in patients with GORD who are treated empirically and in those with ENRD, although the magnitude of benefit is greater for those treated empirically.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease: clinical features

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic disease affecting up to 40% of people in the Western world. Risk factors associated with GERD include age and lifestyle habits, although the clinically relevant contribution of many of these factors is unclear. In GERD, refluxed gastric acid damages the oesophageal mucosa, generally when the pH falls below 4. GERD patients present a variety of symptoms, most commonly heartburn and regurgitation. Oesophageal complications associated with GERD include erosions, ulcers, peptic strictures, and Barrett's oesophagus which is implicated in the development of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Diagnosis of GERD is problematic due to the range of symptoms which may be presented to the physician and symptom severity is frequently unrelated to disease severity. While endoscopic monitoring may be used to assess the presence and severity of GERD, a lack of visible damage does not necessarily indicate an absence of GERD. Techniques used to diagnose GERD include addition of an acid solution into the oesophagus in order to replicate symptoms (Bernstein test) or 24-hour intra-oesophageal pH monitoring. Proton pump inhibitors are effective in the treatment of GERD, acting to reduce the acidity of the gastric juice and hence reduce oesophageal damage and symptoms associated with GERD. Symptoms most indicative of GERD are those associated with erosive oesophagitis, including heartburn and acid regurgitation. Less common GERD-associated symptoms include chest pain, a range of ear, nose and throat conditions, and asthma. In contrast to perceptions of the disease as 'merely' heartburn, the impact on patients' quality of life can be profound. Increasing awareness of GERD by health care professionals has led to improved diagnosis and a greater appreciation of the need for maintenance therapy.

An evidence-based, Latin-American consensus on gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

In recognition of the high prevalence of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) and its importance in Latin America, the InterAmerican Association of Gastroenterology and the InterAmerican Society of Digestive Endoscopy organized a Latin-American Consensus on GORD in Cancun, Mexico in September 2004. The main objectives of the consensus meeting were to provide evidence-based guidance with respect to the diagnosis and treatment of GORD, relevant to all countries in the region. The methodology, results and recommendations of the consensus are described in detail.

Diagnostic value of potent acid inhibition in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) is defined as 'Chronic symptoms or mucosal damage produced by abnormal reflux of gastric contents into the esophagus'. The Genval Workshop Report defines that GORD exists when the frequency of heartburn is equal to or greater than 2 days/week and that it is one of the most common gastrointestinal conditions in the general population. Endoscopy is the most recommendable exploratory procedure in a patient with symptoms of GORD, fundamentally heartburn and regurgitation. However, 50-75% of the patients with symptoms compatible with GORD have normal endoscopy. Thus, endoscopy does not appear to be indispensable in a large group of patients with GORD. Endoscopy is therefore the gold standard for the diagnosis of reflux oesophagitis (histopathological changes in the oesophageal mucosa), but there is no gold standard for the diagnosis of non-erosive GORD. Twenty-four-hour pH monitoring has come to be considered the most sensitive and specific test in the diagnosis of GORD, but a significant proportion of patients (about 25%) have symptoms compatible with GORD and have 24-h pH monitoring results that can be considered normal. Besides, demonstrating the presence of acid reflux alone does not prove that it is the cause of suspected GORD-related signs or symptoms. Therefore, despite 'positive' pH studies, there is a significant number of patients failing to respond to therapy, mainly ear, nose and throat complaints, supposed as manifestations of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Despite 24-h oesophageal pH testing being an excellent diagnostic tool, it has no utility in routine clinical settings and hence its availability should be limited to tertiary care settings. With the demonstration that antisecretory treatment with high doses of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for 1 week or 2 weeks achieves significant improvement or even remission of the symptoms of GORD, it not surprising that it has been proposed as a diagnostic test for the disease. For patients with symptoms compatible with GORD without alarm symptoms or other suspected complications of GORD, a short course of empiric PPI therapy gives valuable information about the presence of GORD. The PPI test is a simple, sensitive and cost-effective tool, but it has insufficient specificity for use as an objective criterion alone. The use of PPIs both as a diagnostic test (1-2 weeks) and as a diagnostic-therapeutic test (1-4 months) has a moderate usefulness and may be used especially in those environments in which there are difficulties in performing the objective test.

[Correct diagnosis for indication in gastroesophageal reflux disease]

For diagnosis and quantitation of gastroesophageal reflux disease, a number of different examinations are available. The simplest are the patient's history and complaints as well as the proton pump inhibitor test; both methods have a positive predictive value of 65% to 70%. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy is the gold standard for differentiation between erosive and nonerosive reflux disease. Biopsy does not enhance the significance of endoscopy except for proof of Barrett's epithelium or malignant degeneration. Twenty-four-hour pH monitoring has the highest sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Barium swallow provides only additional information concerning hiatal hernia or stenosis. Manometry can clarify lower esophageal sphincter insufficiency or motility disorders of the tubular esophagus. However, the available studies show that manometry has no influence on postoperative outcome after fundoplication. The indication for medical therapy can primarily be based only on the history and complaints of the patient. As surgical therapy affords a high degree of diagnostic accuracy, at least endoscopy and 24-h pH monitoring are necessary for indication.

Short-term treatment with proton pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists and prokinetics for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-like symptoms and endoscopy negative reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Heartburn affects 25% of the adult population on a monthly basis and represents the core symptom of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). Treatment is readily available and puts a large demand on healthcare budgets. A majority of GORD patients show no endoscopic abnormalities and in daily practice most patients are treated empirically.

OBJECTIVES

Summarise, quantify and compare the efficacy of the short-term use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), H2-receptor antagonists (H2RA) and prokinetics in adults with GORD and endoscopy negative reflux disease (ENRD).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2003), MEDLINE (January 1966 to December 2003), EMBASE (January 1988 to December 2003).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials focussing on symptomatic outcome after short-term treatment for GORD using proton pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists or prokinetic agents. Participants had to be classifiable in the empirical treatment group (no endoscopy used in treatment allocation) or in the endoscopy negative reflux disease group (no endoscopic signs of erosive oesophagitis).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-seven trials (8402 participants) were included: thirteen in the empirical treatment group, ten in the ENRD group and four in both. In empirical treatment of GORD the relative risk (RR) for heartburn remission in placebo-controlled trials for PPI was 0.37 (two trials, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32 to 0.44), for H2RAs 0.77 (two trials, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.99) and for prokinetics 0.86 (one trial, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01). In a direct comparison PPIs were significantly (p < 0.05) more effective than H2RAs (five trials, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.77) and prokinetics (two trials, RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.87). In treatment of ENRD, RR for heartburn remission for PPI versus placebo was 0.68 (six trials, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.78) and for H2RA versus placebo was 0.84 (two trials, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.95). The RR for PPI versus H2RA was 0.74 (three trials, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.03) and for PPI versus prokinetic 0.72 (one trial, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.92).

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings in this review suggest that antisecretory drugs are effective in the empirical treatment of complaints likely to originate from GORD and in treatment of ENRD and furthermore that PPIs are superior to H2RAs in empirical treatment of typical GORD symptoms.

Reproducibility of a symptom response to omeprazole therapy in functional dyspepsia evaluated by a random-starting-day trial design

BACKGROUND

Satisfactory treatment options for functional dyspepsia are lacking. Single subject trial designs may identify subgroups of patients with a uniform response to therapy.

AIM

To test reproducibility of response in a new random-starting-day trial design developed to identify acid-related symptoms in functional dyspepsia.

METHODS

One hundred and nineteen patients with functional dyspepsia completed a 12-day, double-blind random-starting-day trial with an initial placebo run-in followed by switch to omeprazole on a randomized and blinded day (between days 5 and 9) with active treatment continuing for the rest of the trial. Response was defined as a sustained > or =50% reduction of a daily symptom-score within 3 days of active treatment. Fifty-nine patients repeated the random-starting-day trial at relapse of symptoms.

RESULTS

After exclusion of placebo responders, 14% (15 of 106) were classified as responders in the first and 20% (10 of 50) in the subsequent random-starting-day trial series. Sixty-eight per cent (40 of 59) of the patients reproduced their initial response with a chance-corrected agreement of 0.29. Comparing response patterns using different symptom rating-scales showed good correlation (kappa 0.60).

CONCLUSION

Reproducibility of response in a random-starting-day trial was imperfect, mainly because of the low response rates and strict response criteria. Lack of symptom stability impairs the value of the random-starting-day trial and only patients with frequent and stable symptoms should be evaluated in this design.