How to differentiate non-erosive reflux disease from functional heartburn

Proton pump inhibitor for non-erosive reflux disease: A meta-analysis

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy, safety and influential factors of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment for non-erosive reflux disease (NERD).

METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched up to April 2013 to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that probed into the efficacy, safety and influential factors of PPI treatment for NERD. The rates of symptomatic relief and adverse events were measured as the outcomes. After RCT selection, assessment and data collection, the pooled RRs and 95%CI were calculated. This meta-analysis was performed using the Stata 12.0 software (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas, United States). The level of evidence was estimated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

RESULTS: Seventeen RCTs including 6072 patients met the inclusion criteria. The results of the meta-analysis showed that PPI treatment was significantly superior to H₂ receptor antagonists (H₂RA) treatment (RR = 1.629, 95%CI: 1.422-1.867, P = 0.000) and placebo (RR = 1.903, 95%CI: 1.573-2.302, P = 0.000) for the symptomatic relief of NERD. However, there were no obvious differences between PPI and H₂RA (RR = 0.928, 95%CI: 0.776-1.110, P = 0.414) or PPI and the placebo (RR = 1.000, 95%CI: 0.896-1.116, P = 0.997) regarding the rate of adverse events. The overall rate of symptomatic relief of PPI against NERD was 51.4% (95%CI: 0.433-0.595, P = 0.000), and relief was influenced by hiatal hernia (P = 0.030). The adverse rate of PPI against NERD was 21.0% (95%CI: 0.152-0.208, P = 0.000), and was affected by hiatal hernia (P = 0.081) and drinking (P = 0.053).

CONCLUSION: PPI overmatched H₂RA on symptomatic relief rate but not on adverse rate for NERD. Its relief rate and adverse rate were influenced by hiatal hernia and drinking.

The value of early wireless esophageal pH monitoring in diagnosing functional heartburn in refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

It is difficult to differentiate functional heartburn from proton pump inhibitor (PPI) failure. The aims of this study were to assess the role of early wireless esophageal pH monitoring in patients referred with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and to identify differences in the clinical spectrum among GERD subtypes.

METHODS

We enrolled consecutive referred patients with suspected GERD. After endoscopy on the first visit, all underwent wireless esophageal pH monitoring when off the PPI.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty patients were enrolled. These patients were classified into a reflux esophagitis group (20, 8.7 %) and a normal endoscopic findings group (210, 91.3 %). Among the 210 patients in the normal endoscopic findings group, 63 (27.4 %) were diagnosed with pathological reflux, 35 (15.2 %) with hypersensitive esophagus, 87 (37.8 %) with normal acid exposure with negative symptom association, and 25 (10.9 %) with test failure. These groups did not differ in age, body mass index, smoking habit, alcohol consumption, symptom severity, quality of life, presence of atypical symptoms, overlap with irritable bowel syndrome, and the frequency of somatization, depression, and anxiety. PPI responses were evaluated in 135 patients. Fifty patients (37.0 %) were not responsive to the 4-week treatment; 26 (19.3 %) were diagnosed with refractory non-erosive gastroesophageal disease, and 24 (17.8 %) with functional heartburn. The demographics and clinical and psychological characteristics did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Demographic characteristics and symptom patterns alone cannot differentiate functional heartburn from various subtypes of GERD. Wireless esophageal pH monitoring should be considered for the initial evaluation of GERD in the tertiary referral setting.

Association of sleep dysfunction and emotional status with gastroesophageal reflux disease in Korea

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Sleep disturbances and emotional dysfunction are commonly associated with gastroeophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aims of this study were to evaluate GERD symptoms and disturbance in erosive reflux disease (ERD) and nonerosive reflux disease (NERD) patients, and to compare sleep dysfunction, depressive mood, anxiety and quality of life (QOL) among the control, ERD and NERD patients in Korea.

METHODS

The Korean subjects were enrolled between 2010 and 2012, classified into 3 groups; the control group with no symptom and normal endoscopic findings, the ERD group with erosive esophagitis and the NERD group with more than one episode of heartburn or acid regurgitation per week, positive response to proton pump inhibitor, and normal endoscopic findings. Questionnaire included GERD symptoms, GERD impact scale (GIS) and daytime pathological sleepiness (Epworth sleepiness scale), sleep dysfunction (Pittsburgh sleep quality index, PSQI), depression and anxiety (Hospital anxiety and depression scale, HADS) and QOL (WHO quality of life scale abbreviated version, WHOQOL-BREF).

RESULTS

A total of 217 subjects were enrolled as follows; control (n = 70), ERD (n = 70) and NERD (n = 77). Impact of symptom of GIS score was higher in the NERD (9.2 ± 0.4) than in the ERD (6.5 ± 0.3) group (P < 0.001). Sleep dysfunctions were more frequent in GERD than the control group (PSQI score [P = 0.021]). Anxiety subscale of HAD score was higher in NERD (7.0 ± 0.5, P = 0.002) and ERD (6.2 ± 0.7, P = 0.004) groups than control (4.3 ± 0.7) group. WHOQOL-BREF scores in NERD (54.9 ± 2.3) and ERD (57.8 ± 2.4) groups were significantly lower than those in the control group (63.8 ± 2.4) (P = 0.002; P = 0.014, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The patients with NERD than ERD suffered more from the symptoms and disturbance in Korea. Sleep dysfunction and anxiety mood were higher and QOL was decreased in GERD, especially in NERD, suggesting that those factors might affect the severity of NERD.