Morphometric histology for infant gastroesophageal reflux disease: evaluation of reliability in 497 esophageal biopsies

Symptoms and reflux in infants: Infant Gastroesophageal Reflux Questionnaire Revised (I-GERQ-R)--utility for symptom tracking and diagnosis

Answering a need for a thoroughly validated infant gastroesophageal reflux questionnaire, the Infant Gastroesophageal Reflux Questionnaire Revised (I-GERQ-R) was designed, refined, and validated using state-of-the-art psychometric methods. Diagnostic and evaluative (tracking) validity was identified. However, perplexing results of some clinical trials using the I-GERQ-R for diagnosis prompted analysis of possible reasons, including ambiguities in defining symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and aspects of the validation process. Symptomatic GERD is defined by "troublesomeness" of symptoms and attribution of their causation to reflux--two crucial issues. Methods of quantifying symptom-reflux associations are described and their limitations identified. The location of "symptomatic esophageal GERD" in the continuum of erosive GERD, histologic GERD, and nonerosive reflux disease is indicated, with the last including "suberosive," "premicroscopic," and "functional heartburn" subcategories. Another category is defined solely by surrogate measures of propensity to GERD (e.g., acid exposure thresholds defined on esophageal pH monitoring). During diagnostic validation of the Infant Gastroesophageal Reflux Questionnaire (I-GERQ) instruments, asymptomatic normals were contrasted with symptomatic GERD infants (who also tested positive with esophageal histology and esophageal pH monitoring). However, the diagnostic validation did not attempt to distinguish symptomatic GERD infants from symptomatic infants without GERD. The I-GERQ-R is thus adequately sensitive to be used diagnostically to screen infants for symptom burden, but should probably be supplemented by other, perhaps invasive, testing to assure appropriate specificity. The I-GERQ-R's validation for evaluative properties, however, supports its use for tracking symptoms within clinical trials.

Do eosinophil numbers differentiate eosinophilic esophagitis from gastroesophageal reflux disease?

CONTEXT

Although the healthy esophageal mucosa contains no eosinophils, eosinophilic infiltration is observed in 2 major clinicopathologic settings: gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EE). The prevalence of EE is increasing in many countries, and this increase seems only partly to be due to a better awareness of the pathology, following the relatively recent description of EE. Gastroesophageal reflux disease and EE represent 2 entities that do not respond to the same treatment modalities and, thus, need to be distinguished. However, diagnostic criteria of EE have been defined arbitrarily, and the more recent articles tend to prove that the overlap with GERD is probably greater than initially believed, leading the authors to advise strict exclusion of GERD before considering the diagnosis of EE.

OBJECTIVES

To provide pathologists with the currently proposed histologic criteria of GERD and EE, to stress the need to combine these criteria with clinical data and endoscopic findings, and to outline the remaining controversies.

DATA SOURCES

This review is based on selected articles identified by a PubMed (US National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland) search of the literature in English for GERD and EE, a recent review by the American Gastroenterological Association (Bethesda), the Proceedings of the First International Gastrointestinal Eosinophil Research Symposium, and the authors' experience.

CONCLUSION

Proper identification of the etiology of eosinophilic infiltration of the esophagus allows accurate medical or surgical treatment and follow-up. Eosinophilic esophagitis and GERD diagnoses require integration of the histologic findings with the clinical and endoscopic data.

Redefining the role of lymphocytes in gastroesophageal reflux disease and eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and reflux esophagitis (RE) overlap clinically and histologically. RE is characterized by epithelial infiltration with small numbers of neutrophils and eosinophils, EoE by a prominent eosinophilic infiltrate. Lymphocytic esophagitis (LE), a new entity characterized by peripapillary lymphocytosis, questions the role lymphocytes play in esophageal inflammation. We test the hypothesis that lymphocyte infiltration in RE differs from EoE. One blinded pathologist read esophageal biopsies from 39 RE and 39 EoE patients. Both groups demonstrated significant numbers of lymphocytes (RE 22.7 +/- 2.2/HPF, EoE 19.8 +/- 1.8/HPF). Eosinophils/HPF in RE and EoE were 2.8 +/- 0.7 and 74.9 +/- 8.2, respectively (P < 0.001). Neutrophils were uncommon in RE (0.26 +/- 0.16/HPF) and EoE (0.09 +/- 0.04; P = 0.07). Eight of the 39 RE specimens had >or=50 lymphocytes in >or=1 HPF. Two were consistent with LE. There was an inverse correlation between numbers of eosinophils and lymphocytes in EoE (R = -0.47; P = 0.002), and no correlation between them in RE (R = 0.18; P = 0.36). The patients with EoE who used antireflux medications had fewer lymphocytes (16.3 +/- 1.3 vs 22.2 +/- 2.3/HPF; P = 0.030) and eosinophils (55.6 +/- 5.2 vs 76.0 +/- 8.7/HPF; P = 0.042) than those who did not. The pathological role of lymphocytes in RE and EoE may be underestimated. Our observation that 5% of the RE specimens meet histopathological criteria for LE potentially blurs the line between these entities. The observation that eosinophil counts are lower in EoE when antireflux meds are used supports the notion that reflux plays a role in the clinical expression of EoE.

A global, evidence-based consensus on the definition of gastroesophageal reflux disease in the pediatric population

OBJECTIVES

To develop an international consensus on the definition of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in the pediatric population.

METHODS

Using the Delphi process, a set of statements was developed and voted on by an international panel of eight pediatric gastroenterologists. Statements were based on systematic literature searches using Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Voting was conducted using a six-point scale, with consensus defined, a priori, as agreed by 75% of the group. The strength of each statement was assessed using the GRADE system.

RESULTS

There were four rounds of voting. In the final vote, consensus was reached on 98% of the 59 statements. In this vote, 95% of the statements were accepted by seven of eight voters. Consensus items of particular note were: (i) GERD is present when reflux of gastric contents causes troublesome symptoms and/or complications, but this definition is complicated by unreliable reporting of symptoms in children under the age of approximately 8 years; (ii) histology has limited use in establishing or excluding a diagnosis of GERD; its primary role is to exclude other conditions; (iii) Barrett's esophagus should be defined as esophageal metaplasia that is intestinal metaplasia positive or negative; and (iv) extraesophageal conditions may be associated with GERD, but for most of these conditions causality remains to be established.

CONCLUSIONS

The consensus statements that comprise the Definition of GERD in the Pediatric Population were developed through a rigorous process. These statements are intended to be used for the development of future clinical practice guidelines and as a basis for clinical trials.

Histopathologic features of eosinophilic esophagitis

The pathology of eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) when fully developed in humans is highly characteristic and readily discriminated from the histology of the normal esophagus. The histologic alterations are not pathognomonic for any of the multiple causes of EE, and the correct diagnosis can be made only if the histology is correlated with clinical findings. The histology of the normal esophagus is reviewed and contrasted with the findings in EE. The characteristic findings in EE are illustrated. Selected research in humans and animal models pertinent to EE are briefly reviewed.