Omeprazole as a diagnostic tool in gastroesophageal reflux disease

OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic value of empirical treatment with omeprazole in the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: Patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and 24-h esophageal pH monitoring. Patients with reflux esophagitis grade 0 or 1 were included in the study and were randomized to double-blind treatment with either 40 mg omeprazole or placebo o.m. The effect of treatment was evaluated after 1 and 2 wk with a symptom questionnaire with a four-grade Likert scale, and symptomatic response outcome was compared with the results of 24-h pH-metry. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were included; however, 13 were excluded from the final analysis because of protocol violation. Of the remaining 85 patients, 54 had no signs of esophagitis at endoscopy, and 31 had esophagitis grade 1. The pH registration showed pathological gastroesophageal reflux in 47 patients (55%). Forty-one patients were randomized to treatment with omeprazole and 44 to placebo. There was a significant correlation between the pH registration result and response to omeprazole (p = 0.04, chi2), but not to placebo (p = 0.16). With pH-metry as the gold standard, the omeprazole test had positive and negative predictive values of 68% and 63%, respectively, for the diagnosis of GERD. When the omeprazole test was used as the gold standard, the positive and negative predictive values of pH monitoring were 68 % and 63 %, respectively. Similar sensitivity was found when the pH-metry was compared with presence of esophagitis. CONCLUSION: Determination of the symptomatic response to 40 mg of omeprazole for 14 days is a simple and inexpensive tool for the diagnosis of GERD, with a sensitivity and specificity comparable to 24-h pH monitoring.     

Evaluation of laparoscopic Toupet fundoplication as a primary repair for all patients with medically resistant gastroesophageal reflux

BACKGROUND: This prospective study assesses the outcome results in 100 consecutive patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) treated with a laparoscopic Toupet fundoplication. METHODS: GERD was confirmed by 24-h pH study and/or esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Pre- and postoperative symptoms, operative times, and perioperative complications were recorded on standardized data forms. Early follow-up was at 3 months and late follow-up, including 24-h pH, manometry, and EGD was at 22 months. RESULTS: Preoperative symptoms included heartburn (92%), regurgitation (58%), water brash (39%), and dysphagia (39%). Mean operative time was 3.2 hours. There were no conversions to celiotomy and there were no mortalities. The perioperative complication rate was 14%; 6% (5/83) of patients reported heartburn at 3 months and 20% (15/74) at 22 months. Early and late dysphagia was 20% (17/83) and 9% (7/74), respectively; 24-h pH testing was abnormal in 90% of symptomatic patients (9/10), 39% of asymptomatic patients (12/31), and 51% overall. CONCLUSIONS: Despite early improvement in reflux symptoms following laparoscopic Toupet fundoplications, there is a high incidence of recurrent GERD. Symptomatic follow-up underestimates the true incidence of 24-h pH-documented reflux. Based on these results we cannot recommend the laparoscopic Toupet repair for GERD patients with normal esophageal motility.     

Health-related quality of life outcomes of omeprazole versus ranitidine in poorly responsive symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated changes in health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes of once-daily omeprazole compared with ranitidine for the short-term treatment of patients with poorly responsive symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: A double-blind, randomized clinical trial, compared omeprazole versus ranitidine for the treatment of poorly responsive GERD. Eligible patients had a history of predominant heartburn symptoms with symptomatic heartburn after 6 weeks of ranitidine treatment. Patients were randomized to omeprazole 20 mg once daily (n = 156) or ranitidine 150 mg twice daily (n = 161) and followed for 8 weeks. Assessments were completed at baseline and after 8 weeks with physician-rated symptoms: Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS); Psychological General Well-Being (PGWB) Index; Sleep Scale; Impact on Daily Activities Scale, and Overall Treatment Effect. Primary HRQL endpoints were the GSRS reflux scale and PGWB total score. RESULTS: No differences between the 2 treatment groups were observed in baseline demographic, clinical or HRQL measures. After 8 weeks, omeprazole-treated patients had greater improvement in GSRS reflux scale scores (p<0.0001) and PGWB total scores (p = 0. 019) compared with ranitidine-treated patients. Significant between group differences favoring omeprazole were also observed in GSRS total scores (p<0.0001), abdominal pain scale scores (p = 0.003), and indigestion scale scores (p = 0.003), Impact on Daily Activities (p = 0.001), PGWB positive well-being (p = 0.015), anxiety (p = 0. 030), and general health scale scores (p = 0.010). Patient ratings of overall treatment effect demonstrated the significantly (p<0. 0001) greater benefits of omeprazole (mean = 5.26) compared with ranitidine treatment (mean = 3.83). CONCLUSIONS: Omeprazole treatment significantly reduced persistent reflux-related symptoms and normalized psychological well-being compared with ranitidine in poorly responsive symptomatic patients with GERD.     

Maintenance treatment for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. A placebo-controlled evaluation of 10 milligrams omeprazole once daily in general practice

BACKGROUND: Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) is a frequent cause for consultation in general practice and is a chronically relapsing disease. METHODS: This general practice study was a 6-month randomized, double-blind parallel-group placebo-controlled assessment of the efficacy and safety of continuous treatment with 10 mg omeprazole every morning after initial symptom control in 495 patients with GORD but without erosive oesophagitis. RESULTS: On the basis of life-table estimates for cumulative relapse rates, patients in the placebo group (52%) were almost twice as likely as those in the omeprazole group (27%) to discontinue therapy before 24 weeks because of inadequate relief of heartburn or for other reasons including adverse events (all-patients-treated analysis, log rank test, P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown that 10 mg omeprazole once daily is an effective and well-tolerated treatment strategy in general practice for the long-term management of symptoms of GORD in patients without erosive oesophagitis.     

Omeprazole 10 milligrams once daily, omeprazole 20 milligrams once daily, or ranitidine 150 milligrams twice daily, evaluated as initial therapy for the relief of symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in general practice

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of omeprazole, 20 mg once daily, in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis and the therapeutic advantages over the histamine H2 receptor antagonists are well documented. This study assessed 20 mg omeprazole daily (OM20), 10 mg omeprazole daily (OM10), and 150 mg ranitidine (RAN) twice daily for symptom relief in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). METHODS: Patients (n = 994) presenting with heartburn to their general practitioner underwent endoscopy to exclude peptic ulcer disease and were randomized into a UK, multicentre, parallel-group, double-blind comparison of the three treatments for 4 weeks. Symptoms were assessed at clinic visits after 2 and 4 weeks. RESULTS: Symptom relief after 4 weeks was achieved by 61% (OM20), 49% (OM10), and 40% (RAN) patients (OM20 versus OM10, P < 0.0167; OM20 versus RAN, P < 0.0001; OM10 versus RAN, P < 0.01). Among the patients (32%) with erosive reflux oesophagitis, symptom relief was achieved in 79% (OM20), 48% (OM10), and 33% (RAN) (OM20 versus OM10, P < 0.0001; OM20 versus RAN, P < 0.0001; OM1O versus RAN, NS). CONCLUSION: Omeprazole, 20 mg, is the most effective initial therapy for relief of GORD symptoms.     

Treating the symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a double-blind comparison of omeprazole and cisapride

BACKGROUND: Few studies have specifically addressed the management of the symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, and there are no comparative data in this respect for acid pump inhibitors and prokinetic agents. METHODS: Following endoscopy 424 patients presenting with heartburn as the predominant symptom of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease were randomized to treatment with omeprazole 20 or 10 mg once daily, or cisapride 10 mg four times daily, in a double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group, multicentre study. Symptoms and quality of life were assessed at 4 weeks. Patients still experiencing heartburn continued therapy for a further 4 weeks and the assessments were repeated. RESULTS: At 4 weeks, heartburn was resolved in 65% (95% CI: 57-73%), 56% (48-64%) and 41% (32%-49%) of patients treated, respectively, with omeprazole 20 mg and 10 mg once daily, and cisapride. Both omeprazole doses were significantly more effective than cisapride (P < 0.01). The same order of efficacy was observed regardless of the presence of erosive oesophagitis. Regurgitation and epigastric pain also improved to a greater degree with omeprazole than with cisapride. Quality of life was improved in all treatment groups, and the improvement in the reflux dimension of the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) score was significantly different between groups (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Omeprazole 20 or 10 mg once daily is significantly more effective than cisapride in the resolution of heartburn, regardless of the presence of erosive oesophagitis, and this is accompanied by an improvement in patient quality of life.     

Effect of short- and long-term treatment with omeprazole on the absorption and serum levels of cobalamin

AIMS: To evaluate absorption of protein-bound and unbound cyanocobalamin before and during treatment with omeprazole, and cobalamin levels in patients on long-term treatment with omeprazole. METHODS: In eight former duodenal ulcer patients absorption of unbound and protein-bound cobalamin was determined by measuring 24-h urinary excretion of unbound 58Co-cyancobalamin or protein-bound 57Co-cyanocobalamin during a modified Schilling test. Tests were performed before and during treatment with 20 mg and 40 mg omeprazole daily for 9 days. Serum cobalamin levels were assessed in 25 patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) before and during long-term maintenance therapy with omeprazole. Mean treatment duration was 56 months (range 36-81 months). RESULTS: Urinary excretion of unbound cobalamin was unchanged with both dosages of omeprazole. Excretion of 57Co-cyanocobalamin, however, decreased significantly during treatment with both 20 mg omeprazole (mean +/- S.E.M.: 1.31 +/- 0.20 vs. 0.54 +/- 0.17%; P < 0.02) and 40 mg omeprazole (1.25 +/- 0.26 vs. 0.29 +/- 0.06%; P < 0.02). Mean serum cobalamin levels (+/- S.E.M.) before and during therapy with omeprazole in GERD patients were 298 +/- 27 and 261 +/- 16 pg/mL (normal range 180-900 pg/mL), respectively (P = N.S.). CONCLUSIONS: Absorption of protein-bound, but not unbound, cyanocobalamin is decreased when measured by a modified Schilling test during treatment with omeprazole. However, no change in serum cobalamin levels was observed in patients with GERD after treatment with omeprazole for up to 7 years.     

Systemic clotting activation by low-grade endotoxaemia in liver cirrhosis: a potential role for endothelial procoagulant activation

Laparoscopic fundoplication is technically feasible in treating gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Although medication is the primary treatment for GERD, not all patients respond completely or are able to adhere to a medical regimen. In the present series, 59 patients were laparoscopically treated for GERD at three centers using a standardized technique. All patients had been medically treated prior to referral, although 84 per cent had heartburn and 2 per cent had laryngitis despite 20 to 40 mg/day of omeprazole. Fifteen per cent of patients were intolerant of or would no longer take omeprazole. Patients were evaluated by esophageal manometry (in 100%) and 24-hour pH studies (in 66%). Seventy-six per cent of patients had lower-esophageal sphincter pressure <15 mm Hg. Five patients had low esophageal body peristaltic pressures (<35 mm Hg). These patients underwent Toupet partial fundoplication, whereas 54 patients underwent Nissen fundoplication. Mean operative time was 158 +/- 7 minutes, and three patients (5%) were converted to an open procedure. Operative complications were minor and occurred in 13 per cent. In 45 patients evaluated 1 year after surgery, heartburn had resolved in 98 per cent. Thirty-nine of 56 patients (70%) had mild early (<1 month postoperatively) dysphagia, and 9 (19%) had severe early dysphagia, which improved in 7 after nonoperative dilatation. Two of these had continued mild dysphagia. Two patients had severe dysphagia and were laparoscopically converted from Nissen to Toupet fundoplications, which resulted in marked improvement. Early gas bloat symptoms occurred in 45 per cent and dropped to 5 per cent at 1 year. Laparoscopic treatment of GERD is safe and effective in preventing reflux symptoms. Although mild dysphagia occurs after the procedure, this is transient in most patients. Patients with severe dysphagia can be treated with nonoperative dilatation or laparoscopic partial fundoplication and maintain the antireflux characteristics of the wrap.     

Are frequent short gastro-oesophageal reflux episodes the cause of symptoms in patients with non-ulcer dyspepsia responding to treatment with ranitidine?

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-ulcer dyspepsia (NUD) responding to treatment with H2-receptor antagonists have no clinically useful characteristics. This trial compares the gastro-oesophageal reflux pattern as measured by 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring in patients responding to ranitidine with that of non-responders. METHODS: Thirty-one patients with NUD were randomized to 6 weeks' double-blind alternating treatment with 150 mg ranitidine twice daily or placebo and classified as responders or non-responders. RESULTS: Pathologic gastro-oesophageal reflux was seen in 3 of the 13 responders and 4 of the 18 no-responders (NS). The responders had frequent short reflux episodes (< 1 min in duration). When 4 patients with > or = 5 reflux episodes longer than 5 min were excluded, the number of short reflux episodes (median) in responders and non-responders was 32 and 14, respectively. The difference is statistically significant (p = 0.025). There were no other differences between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study patients with NUD responding to ranitidine were characterized by frequent short reflux episodes in the absence of numerous long reflux episodes.     

Role of gastric acid in the aetiology of dyspeptic disease and dyspepsia

The main diseases associated with dyspepsia are peptic ulcer disease, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and non-ulcer dyspepsia. Increased gastric acid secretion is a characteristic of most duodenal ulcer patients and of a small minority of non-ulcer dyspepsia and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients. Although acid secretion is normal in most gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients, the condition is mainly the result of excess exposure of the distal oesophagus to acid refluxing from the stomach. Increased mucosal sensitivity to acid is involved in the aetiology of dyspeptic symptoms in the majority of patients with peptic ulcer disease and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, and in a minority of non-ulcer dyspepsia subjects. Gastric acid, therefore, plays an important role in both the aetiology of dyspeptic diseases and in the aetiology of dyspeptic symptoms.     

The utility of endoscopy in the management of patients with gastroesophageal reflux symptoms

OBJECTIVE: The utility of endoscopy in the management of patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is unclear. The purpose of this prospective study was to assess the impact of endoscopy on the subsequent management of patients with uncomplicated reflux symptoms. METHODS: A total of 742 patients underwent endoscopy for symptoms of GERD. Endoscopists recorded the therapy before endoscopy, the findings of endoscopy, and the treatment recommendations after endoscopy. RESULTS: There was no difference in pre-endoscopy therapy or grade of esophagitis in subjects undergoing endoscopy for failed therapy versus GERD symptoms alone. After endoscopy, the most common strategy for patients taking omeprazole was to maintain or increase the dose. For those taking an H2 blocker before endoscopy, the most common outcome was to switch the patient to omeprazole, independent of the grade of esophagitis. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients undergoing endoscopy for symptoms of GERD were switched to omeprazole regardless of the endoscopic findings. No esophageal cancer was identified and the incidence of Barrett's esophagus was low. It appears that endoscopy itself did not change the management of patients receiving H2-blocker therapy. A trial of a proton pump inhibitor before endoscopy should be considered.     

A randomised controlled trial of care of the perineum during second stage of normal labour

BACKGROUND: Several attempts to classify dyspepsia into subgroups have been proposed as a basis for empirical treatment and research. However, subgrouping has proved difficult due to overlap of symptoms between subgroups, and the response to empirical therapy is difficult to predict. We aimed to study whether natural symptom combinations occur in patients seeing general practitioners because of dyspepsia and whether symptom presentation could predict the effect of proton pump inhibitor treatment. METHODS: The symptom presentation of 7270 consecutive, unselected patients with dyspepsia in general practice was studied by using principal-components analysis. The relation to the effect of omeprazole was studied in a subsample (n=471) with predominantly reflux-like or ulcer-like dyspepsia being included in a controlled clinical trial of omeprazole versus placebo. RESULTS: Four principal components (factors), explaining 36% of the total variance, were found. They describe four independent dimensions in the symptoms of dyspepsia that can be interpreted meaningfully as representing A) acid-related disease of the upper gastrointestinal tract, B) irritable bowel disorder, C) dysmotility of the stomach/duodenum, and D) dysmotility of the esophagus. In the subsample the response to proton pump inhibition therapy was associated with high component-A scores, low component-B scores, and low component-C scores. A pocket chart was devised to obtain the component scores easily in new patients. CONCLUSION: The analysis identified four characteristic, biologically meaningful dyspepsia components that express independent dimensions in the symptoms of patients with dyspepsia. The symptom scores corresponding to the four components may improve symptom-based diagnosis and thereby empirical therapy. In particular, the association between component scores and the effect of omeprazole suggests that classifying dyspepsia on the basis of these components may focus empirical omeprazole therapy even more.     

Prognostic factors for relapse of reflux oesophagitis and symptoms during 12 months of therapy with lansoprazole

BACKGROUND: Symptom relief and endoscopic healing are both important treatment goals in patients with reflux oesophagitis. Knowledge of predictive factors for treatment success could facilitate choice of treatment in individual patients. AIM: To assess the value of clinical data and data from baseline ancillary investigations in predicting the outcome of maintenance therapy with a proton pump inhibitor. METHODS: After healing and symptom relief had been obtained on open therapy with lansoprazole 30 mg daily, 103 patients with reflux oesophagitis grade 1 or 2 were randomized to maintenance therapy with lansoprazole 15 or 30 mg daily, and time until recurrence of symptoms and/or endoscopic changes was recorded. The predictive value of the following variables was assessed by Cox regression analysis: dose of lansoprazole, symptom severity, grade of reflux oesophagitis. Helicobacter pylori infection status, lower oesophageal sphincter resting tone, percentage of 24 h with an oesophageal pH of <4.0, and median 24 h intragastric pH before start of treatment. RESULTS: Dose of lansoprazole (P = 0.01) and symptom severity (P < 0.05) both significantly predicted time to relapse. Grade of reflux oesophagitis had only a borderline predictive value (P = 0.09), while H. pylori infection status and data from manometry and intraoesophageal 24-hour pH-metry did not predict relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Symptom severity before starting therapy is a significant predictive factor for treatment success during potent antisecretory therapy with lansoprazole, more so than endoscopic grade of reflux oesophagitis. In a group of patients with uncomplicated reflux oesophagitis being considered for maintenance therapy with lansoprazole, ancillary investigations with endoscopy, manometry and 24-hour pH-metry gave very limited prognostic information. H. pylori infected patients relapsed as early as patients who were not infected.     

Lansoprazole. An update of its pharmacological properties and clinical efficacy in the management of acid-related disorders

Lansoprazole is a proton pump inhibitor that reduces gastric acid secretion. It has proved effective in combination regimens for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori and as monotherapy to heal and relieve symptoms of gastric or duodenal ulcers and gastro-oesophageal reflux. After initial healing, it may be used to prevent recurrence of oesophageal erosions or peptic ulcers in patients in whom H. pylori is not the major cause of ulceration and to reduce basal acid output in patients with Zollinger-Ellison syndrome. Usual dosages are 15 to 60 mg/day, although dosages of < or = 180 mg/day have been used in patients with hypersecretory states. In patients with duodenal or gastric ulcer, short term lansoprazole monotherapy was similar to omeprazole and superior to histamine H2 receptor antagonists in achieving healing rates > 90%. Lansoprazole was as effective a component of H. pylori eradication regimens as omeprazole, tripotassium dicitrato bismuthate (colloidal bismuth subcitrate) or ranitidine. Lansoprazole was superior to ranitidine in symptom relief and healing of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and tended to relieve symptoms more rapidly than omeprazole, although initial healing was similar. As maintenance treatment, lansoprazole was similar to omeprazole and superior to ranitidine in relieving symptoms and preventing relapse. Lansoprazole was also superior to ranitidine in healing and relieving symptoms of oesophageal erosions associated with Barrett's oesophagus; healing was maintained for a mean of 2.9 years in > or = 70% of patients. Lansoprazole was also superior to ranitidine in prophylaxis of redilatation of oesophageal strictures. After > or = 4 years of use in patients with Zollinger-Ellison syndrome, lansoprazole 60 to 180 mg/day effectively controlled basal acid output. Dosages may be reduced in some patients once healing and symptom relief has been achieved. Preliminary studies of lansoprazole in patients at risk of aspiration pneumonia or stress ulcers show promise. Although studies show lansoprazole is potentially effective in treating gastrointestinal bleeding, future studies should assess patients' H. pylori status. Lansoprazole has been well tolerated in clinical trials, with headache, diarrhoea, dizziness and nausea appearing to be the most common adverse effects. Tolerability of lansoprazole does not deteriorate with age and the drug is well tolerated in long term use (< or = 4 years) in patients with Zollinger-Ellison syndrome or reflux disease. Thus, lansoprazole is an important alternative to omeprazole and H2 receptor antagonists in acid-related disorders. In addition to its efficacy in healing or maintenance treatment, it may provide more effective symptom relief than other comparator agents.     

Modern diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD)

Typical dominant symptoms such as heartburn and regurgitation are very specific for the diagnosis of GERD. Unfortunately they are relatively insensitive. The diagnosis can be made reliably if mucosal breaks are present at endoscopy. In endoscopy-negative patients with atypical symtoms, the most accurate investigation is 24-hour pH-monitoring with symptom analysis. Another alternative which may prove more cost-effective is to start with a PPI-test (e.g. omeprazole 20 or 40 mg bid for one or two weeks) and to use the symptomatic response as a diagnostic test.     

Circulating transferrin receptor assay--coming of age

Gastro-oesophageal reflux (GOR) occurs frequently in children with cystic fibrosis (CF) but has not been studied in adult CF. We surveyed such symptoms by structured questionnaire in 50 adult CF patients (mean age 26 years, range 16-50; 24 male) and performed oesophageal manometry and 24-hour pH recording in 10 who had reflux symptoms (mean age 28 years, range 21-35; 8 men). 47 patients (94%) had upper gastrointestinal symptoms: 40 (80%) heartburn (27 worse when supine); 26 (52%) regurgitation; and 28 (56%) dyspepsia. At oesophageal manometry, lower oesophageal sphincter barrier pressure (LOSBP) was subnormal in 6 of the 10 patients and 3 had uncoordinated peristalsis in the mid oesophagus. 8 patients had raised DeMeester scores, indicating significant GOR. Those patients with a LOSBP < 5mm Hg had a higher DeMeester score (mean 81.0, range 47.9-128.8) than the patients with a normal LOSBP (26.9, 8.7-56.5; p < 0.002). These results show that adult CF patients have high rates of GOR symptoms, diminished LOSBP, and acid reflux.     

Axonal and dendritic transport in Purkinje cells of cerebellar slice cultures studied by microinjection of horseradish peroxidase

BACKGROUND: The pathophysiological mechanisms in non-ulcer dyspepsia are incompletely understood. AIMS: To compare gastric motor and sensory functions in Helicobacter pylori positive or negative patients with non-ulcer dyspepsia. PATIENTS: Seventeen patients with non-ulcer dyspepsia and 16 asymptomatic controls. METHODS: The following were evaluated: gastrointestinal symptoms; gastric emptying and orocaecal transit of solids; abdominal vagal function; gastric compliance; fasting and postprandial gastric tone and phasic contractions; symptoms during ingestion of cold water and during the distension of an intragastric bag; and somatic sensitivity and personality profile (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, MMPI). RESULTS: Gastric accommodation was reduced in H pylori negative dyspeptics relative to controls; the degree of accommodation was unrelated to H pylori status in dyspeptics. Increased postprandial gastric sensation was more frequent among H pylori positive patients (4/5 H pylori positive versus 4/12 H pylori negative patients). Intragastric meal distribution and orocaecal transit were normal; gastric emptying at four hours was abnormal in 4/17 patients. Vagal dysfunction was rare. Eight of 17 patients had somatisation or depression on MMPI. CONCLUSION: Impaired gastric accommodation is frequent in non-ulcer dyspepsia and seems to be unrelated to vagal efferent dysfunction. H pylori infection does not seem to influence gastric accommodation, but is associated with heightened sensitivity in dyspeptics. Therapeutic approaches that restore normal postprandial accommodation and gastric sensitivity should be tested in non-ulcer dyspepsia.     

Production of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) by macrophages and T-lymphocytes of rodents as affected by acute gamma-irradiation

BACKGROUND: The current classification dividing patients with functional gastrointestinal symptoms into subgroups remains controversial. AIMS: To determine whether distinct symptom groupings exist in the community. METHODS: A random sample of Sydney residents in Penrith, Australia was mailed a validated self report questionnaire. Gastrointestinal symptoms including the Rome criteria for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and dyspepsia were measured. RESULTS: Among 730 respondents, the 12 month age and gender adjusted prevalence (adjusted to the Australian population) of IBS, dyspepsia, and gastro-oesophageal reflux were 11.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 9.3 to 14.3%), 11.5% (95% CI 9.6 to 14.6%), and 17.5% (95% CI 14.2 to 19.9%), respectively. In total, 60% of the population reported four or more gastrointestinal symptoms. There was considerable overlap of IBS with dyspepsia and among the dyspepsia subgroups by application of the Rome criteria. Independently, 10 symptom groupings were identified by factor analysis. The underlying constructs measured by these factors were generally the major abdominal syndromes recognised by the Rome classification: dyspepsia, IBS, reflux, painless constipation, painless diarrhoea, and bloating, in addition to a number of more specific symptom groupings. CONCLUSION: Gastrointestinal symptoms are common and overlap in the community, but distinct upper and lower abdominal symptom groupings can be identified.     

Recognizing atypical manifestations of GERD. Asthma, chest pain, and otolaryngologic disorders may be due to reflux

The presence of common symptoms, such as heartburn and regurgitation, usually make the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) fairly straightforward. However, extraesophageal symptoms of GERD, such as asthma, noncardiac chest pain, and hoarseness, are often not recognized and therefore are poorly managed. This article sheds light on the atypical manifestations of GERD as well as current approaches to diagnosis and treatment.     

Effect of pneumatic dilation on gastroesophageal reflux in achalasia

The aims of this study were to assess the effect of pneumatic dilation on gastroesophageal reflux in achalasia, differentiate esophageal acid due to lactate from acid due to gastroesophageal reflux, and determine if chest pain and heartburn are reliable indicators of gastroesophageal reflux. Eight untreated achalasia patients underwent pre- and postdilation esophageal fluid/food residue lactate and pH analysis, esophageal manometry, 24-hr pH monitoring, and symptom assessment. All patients had a successful clinical outcome and a decrease in lower esophageal sphincter pressure from 29.1 +/- 12.7 to 14.7 +/- 3.8 mm Hg (mean +/- SD; P = 0.04). Abnormal acid exposure was present in two patients before and two patients after dilation. Postdilation acid exposure was mild. Lactate was detected before dilation in all patients. A lactate concentration >2 mmol/liter was associated with acidic residue and one abnormal 24-hr pH profile. There was no correlation between an abnormal 24-hr pH test and age, lower esophageal sphincter pressure, or duration of symptoms prior to treatment. Chest pain and heartburn were unrelated to drops in pH. Gastroesophageal reflux is rare in untreated achalasia and esophageal acidity may result from ingestion of acidic foods or production of lactate. Mild gastroesophageal reflux occurs after dilation but is of no clinical significance. Chest pain and heartburn are not indicators of acid reflux in achalasia.