We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Comparison of esophageal motility in gastroesophageal reflux disease with and without globus sensation.
Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas 2017 December
BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS: This study aimed to compare the esophageal motility between gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients with typical symptoms but without globus sensation and GERD patients only with globus symptoms.
METHODS: A total of 57 consecutive GERD patients diagnosed by endoscopy or by 24-hour pH monitoring between May 2013 and September 2015 were included retrospectively into the study. The patients were grouped based on the presence or absence of globus. Thirty patients presented with typical reflux symptoms but without globus were assigned to the typical GERD group and 27 patients only with globus symptom were assigned to the globus GERD group. All patients underwent esophageal high resolution manometry (HRM) and the differences in esophageal motility between the two groups were analyzed.
RESULTS: The globus GERD group showed a significantly greater lower esophageal sphincter (LES) length, LES basal pressure and upper esophageal sphincter (UES) residual pressure than that of the typical GERD group (3.47 ± 0.76 vs. 2.65 ± 0.62 cm, 21.71 ± 9.68 vs. 16.04 ± 8.49 mmHg, 7.30 ± 4.42 vs. 4.12 ± 2.92 mmHg, all p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the distal wave amplitude, mean wave duration, distal contractile integral (DCI), contractile front velocity (CFV), distal latency (DL), integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) and UES basal pressure. The incidence of esophageal dysmotility in the globus GERD group (33.3%) was higher than in the typical GERD group (23.3%). There was no significant difference in esophageal acid exposure of the non-erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (NERD) patients between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Globus GERD patients have a higher UES residual pressure, longer LES length, higher LES basal pressure and greater esophageal dysmotility than typical GERD patients. HRM is useful in evaluating esophageal motility of GERD patients.
METHODS: A total of 57 consecutive GERD patients diagnosed by endoscopy or by 24-hour pH monitoring between May 2013 and September 2015 were included retrospectively into the study. The patients were grouped based on the presence or absence of globus. Thirty patients presented with typical reflux symptoms but without globus were assigned to the typical GERD group and 27 patients only with globus symptom were assigned to the globus GERD group. All patients underwent esophageal high resolution manometry (HRM) and the differences in esophageal motility between the two groups were analyzed.
RESULTS: The globus GERD group showed a significantly greater lower esophageal sphincter (LES) length, LES basal pressure and upper esophageal sphincter (UES) residual pressure than that of the typical GERD group (3.47 ± 0.76 vs. 2.65 ± 0.62 cm, 21.71 ± 9.68 vs. 16.04 ± 8.49 mmHg, 7.30 ± 4.42 vs. 4.12 ± 2.92 mmHg, all p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the distal wave amplitude, mean wave duration, distal contractile integral (DCI), contractile front velocity (CFV), distal latency (DL), integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) and UES basal pressure. The incidence of esophageal dysmotility in the globus GERD group (33.3%) was higher than in the typical GERD group (23.3%). There was no significant difference in esophageal acid exposure of the non-erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (NERD) patients between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Globus GERD patients have a higher UES residual pressure, longer LES length, higher LES basal pressure and greater esophageal dysmotility than typical GERD patients. HRM is useful in evaluating esophageal motility of GERD patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app