Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoring

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Azzam,Rimon Sobhi
Data de Publicação: 2012
Outros Autores: Sallum,Rubens A. A., Brandão,Jeovana Ferreira, Navarro-Rodriguez,Tomás, Nasi,Ary
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032012000200003
Resumo: CONTEXT: Esophageal pH monitoring is considered to be the gold standard for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal acid reflux. However, this method is very troublesome and considerably limits the patient's routine activities. Wireless pH monitoring was developed to avoid these restrictions. OBJECTIVE: To compare the first 24 hours of the conventional and wireless pH monitoring, positioned 3 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter, in relation to: the occurrence of relevant technical failures, the ability to detect reflux and the ability to correlate the clinical symptoms to reflux. METHODS: Twenty-five patients referred for esophageal pH monitoring and with typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease were studied prospectively, underwent clinical interview, endoscopy, esophageal manometry and were submitted, with a simultaneous initial period, to 24-hour catheter pH monitoring and 48-hour wireless pH monitoring. RESULTS: Early capsule detachment occurred in one (4%) case and there were no technical failures with the catheter pH monitoring (P = 0.463). Percentages of reflux time (total, upright and supine) were higher with the wireless pH monitoring (P < 0.05). Pathological gastroesophageal reflux occurred in 16 (64%) patients submitted to catheter and in 19 (76%) to the capsule (P = 0.355). The symptom index was positive in 12 (48%) patients with catheter pH monitoring and in 13 (52%) with wireless pH monitoring (P = 0.777). CONCLUSIONS: 1) No significant differences were reported between the two methods of pH monitoring (capsule vs catheter), in regard to relevant technical failures; 2) Wireless pH monitoring detected higher percentages of reflux time than the conventional pH-metry; 3) The two methods of pH monitoring were comparable in diagnosis of pathological gastroesophageal reflux and comparable in correlating the clinical symptoms with the gastroesophageal reflux.
id IBEPEGE-1_61696d0bb75c0b6bb5ac800f454b3a90
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0004-28032012000200003
network_acronym_str IBEPEGE-1
network_name_str Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoringGastroesophageal refluxEsophagitispepticCONTEXT: Esophageal pH monitoring is considered to be the gold standard for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal acid reflux. However, this method is very troublesome and considerably limits the patient's routine activities. Wireless pH monitoring was developed to avoid these restrictions. OBJECTIVE: To compare the first 24 hours of the conventional and wireless pH monitoring, positioned 3 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter, in relation to: the occurrence of relevant technical failures, the ability to detect reflux and the ability to correlate the clinical symptoms to reflux. METHODS: Twenty-five patients referred for esophageal pH monitoring and with typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease were studied prospectively, underwent clinical interview, endoscopy, esophageal manometry and were submitted, with a simultaneous initial period, to 24-hour catheter pH monitoring and 48-hour wireless pH monitoring. RESULTS: Early capsule detachment occurred in one (4%) case and there were no technical failures with the catheter pH monitoring (P = 0.463). Percentages of reflux time (total, upright and supine) were higher with the wireless pH monitoring (P < 0.05). Pathological gastroesophageal reflux occurred in 16 (64%) patients submitted to catheter and in 19 (76%) to the capsule (P = 0.355). The symptom index was positive in 12 (48%) patients with catheter pH monitoring and in 13 (52%) with wireless pH monitoring (P = 0.777). CONCLUSIONS: 1) No significant differences were reported between the two methods of pH monitoring (capsule vs catheter), in regard to relevant technical failures; 2) Wireless pH monitoring detected higher percentages of reflux time than the conventional pH-metry; 3) The two methods of pH monitoring were comparable in diagnosis of pathological gastroesophageal reflux and comparable in correlating the clinical symptoms with the gastroesophageal reflux.Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE. 2012-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032012000200003Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.49 n.2 2012reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiainstacron:IBEPEGE10.1590/S0004-28032012000200003info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAzzam,Rimon SobhiSallum,Rubens A. A.Brandão,Jeovana FerreiraNavarro-Rodriguez,TomásNasi,Aryeng2015-04-01T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0004-28032012000200003Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/aghttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br1678-42190004-2803opendoar:2015-04-01T00:00Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoring
title Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoring
spellingShingle Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoring
Azzam,Rimon Sobhi
Gastroesophageal reflux
Esophagitis
peptic
title_short Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoring
title_full Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoring
title_fullStr Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoring
title_full_unstemmed Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoring
title_sort Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoring
author Azzam,Rimon Sobhi
author_facet Azzam,Rimon Sobhi
Sallum,Rubens A. A.
Brandão,Jeovana Ferreira
Navarro-Rodriguez,Tomás
Nasi,Ary
author_role author
author2 Sallum,Rubens A. A.
Brandão,Jeovana Ferreira
Navarro-Rodriguez,Tomás
Nasi,Ary
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Azzam,Rimon Sobhi
Sallum,Rubens A. A.
Brandão,Jeovana Ferreira
Navarro-Rodriguez,Tomás
Nasi,Ary
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Gastroesophageal reflux
Esophagitis
peptic
topic Gastroesophageal reflux
Esophagitis
peptic
description CONTEXT: Esophageal pH monitoring is considered to be the gold standard for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal acid reflux. However, this method is very troublesome and considerably limits the patient's routine activities. Wireless pH monitoring was developed to avoid these restrictions. OBJECTIVE: To compare the first 24 hours of the conventional and wireless pH monitoring, positioned 3 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter, in relation to: the occurrence of relevant technical failures, the ability to detect reflux and the ability to correlate the clinical symptoms to reflux. METHODS: Twenty-five patients referred for esophageal pH monitoring and with typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease were studied prospectively, underwent clinical interview, endoscopy, esophageal manometry and were submitted, with a simultaneous initial period, to 24-hour catheter pH monitoring and 48-hour wireless pH monitoring. RESULTS: Early capsule detachment occurred in one (4%) case and there were no technical failures with the catheter pH monitoring (P = 0.463). Percentages of reflux time (total, upright and supine) were higher with the wireless pH monitoring (P < 0.05). Pathological gastroesophageal reflux occurred in 16 (64%) patients submitted to catheter and in 19 (76%) to the capsule (P = 0.355). The symptom index was positive in 12 (48%) patients with catheter pH monitoring and in 13 (52%) with wireless pH monitoring (P = 0.777). CONCLUSIONS: 1) No significant differences were reported between the two methods of pH monitoring (capsule vs catheter), in regard to relevant technical failures; 2) Wireless pH monitoring detected higher percentages of reflux time than the conventional pH-metry; 3) The two methods of pH monitoring were comparable in diagnosis of pathological gastroesophageal reflux and comparable in correlating the clinical symptoms with the gastroesophageal reflux.
publishDate 2012
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2012-06-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032012000200003
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032012000200003
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S0004-28032012000200003
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.49 n.2 2012
reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
instacron:IBEPEGE
instname_str Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
instacron_str IBEPEGE
institution IBEPEGE
reponame_str Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
collection Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br
_version_ 1754193346256961536