Anne Smythe

Randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic anterior versus posterior fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

Background:  The aim of the study was to compare the effect of laparoscopic anterior and posterior fundoplication on gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease by means of a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic Nissen versus Lind fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

Objective. To compare the effect of laparoscopic Nissen and Lind fundoplication on gastro-oesophageal reflux disease by means of a prospective randomized controlled trial. Material and methods. One hundred and twenty-one patients were randomized to undergo either Nissen (61) or Lind (60) fundoplication. Initial enrolment and subsequent clinical appointments were undertaken 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the procedure using a standardized questionnaire. Ambulatory pH monitoring and manometry were undertaken both preoperatively and at approximately 3 months post-procedure. Results. The mean operating time was similar in both groups (44.8 versus 45 min). One operation in the Lind group was converted to open surgery. Postoperative dysphagia symptoms at 3 and 6 months were higher in the Nissen fundoplication group than in the Lind group (3 months p=0.003; 6 months p=0.020). The time taken to return to work was statistically longer in the Nissen group: at 1 month, 9 of 40 versus 2 of 45 patients had not returned to full activities (p=0.013). Three individuals required re-operation in the Nissen group and 4 individuals in the Lind group because of dysphagia caused by mechanical obstruction. Both procedures demonstrated good Visick scores at 12 months; the Nissen group having 33 (97%) patients with a Visick score of 1 or 2, and the Lind group having 38 (100%) patients with a Visick score of 1 or 2. Conclusions. Both operations provide good quantitative and qualitative control of gastro-oesophageal reflux. Operation time and postoperative comparators were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups at 1 year.

Detection of duodenal fluid in the oesophagus with a sodium ion selective electrode

The assessment of duodeno‐oesophageal reflux is difficult as, until recently, no technique has been readily available for continuous ambulatory monitoring. A sodium ion selective electrode placed in the stomach has been previously shown to detect duodenogastric reflux by using sodium as a marker. This relies on the difference in sodium concentration between gastric (5–60 mmol/L) and duodenal, biliary and pancreatic (150 mmol/L) fluids. In this pilot study to assess the efficacy of the electrode in the distal oesophagus, eight subjects without symptomatic gastro‐oesophageal reflux and eight subjects with known duodenogastric reflux were studied. Thirty millilitre volumes of varying sodium solutions (40, 80, 100 and 140 mmol/L) were swallowed to assess the response of the electrode to sodium ions. In both groups, this revealed a constant and reproducible rise in response with increasing concentration (P< 0.0001). The stomachs of subjects with duodenogastric reflux were aspirated via a nasogastric tube to obtain 12 different samples of gastric fluid. This was assayed for sodium and bile acid concentration. The fluid was then reinfused as a 30 mL bolus into the oesophagus through a tube to simulate oesophageal reflux. A rise equivalent to 40–72 mmol/L Na+ was recorded by the electrode in response to samples that contained 58–81 mmol/L Na+ and 0.4–16 mmol/L bile acids, recorded by quantitative analysis, and a response of up to 20 mmol/L Na+ was recorded by the electrode to sodium concentrations < 49 mmol/L and bile acid concentrations of 0.005–0.6 mmol/L. The response was appropriate to the assayed bile acid concentration in all but one sample. The sodium ion selective electrode responds to bile containing fluids introduced into the oesophagus. Further investigation is warranted to determine its ability to measure duodeno‐oesophageal reflux continuously.

Continuous Monitoring of Sodium Ion Concentration in the Human Stomach – A New Technique for the Detection of Duodenogastric Reflux

Measurement of sodium ion concentration in gastric juice offers a simple means of detecting duodenogastric reflux (DGR). Using aspirated gastric juice, we measured sodium ion concentration, bile acid levels and phospholipase A2 activity and found that sodium ion levels increase along with these other standard markers during DGR. Following this, using a sodium ion selective electrode and a portable data logger, continuous recordings of sodium ion concentration were made in the human stomach. These studies demonstrated the ability of sodium ion monitoring to detect major DGR episodes in the body of the stomach.

The Ability of Antacids and Cholestyramine to Bind Bile Acids: Effect of pH

Reflux of bile into the stomach may be injurious to the gastric mucosa. The ability of antacids and cholestyramine to bind bile acids is therefore potentially valuable in the treatment of reflux gastritis. The ability of antacids and cholestyramine to remove bile acids from gastric juice, hepatic bile, and solutions of commercially available bile acids was investigated in vitro over a pH range likely to occur in the stomach. The percentage of bile acids removed by antacids decreased with decreasing initial bile acid concentration and usually decreased as the incubation pH was increased from 3.6 to 7.0. Glycine-conjugated bile acids were bound to a greater extent than taurine-conjugated bile acids and dihydroxy to a greater extent than trihydroxy bile acids. Cholestyramine bound 97-100% of all bile acids in solution at pH 3.6 and pH 7.0. The effect of pH on adsorption should therefore be considered when antacids are used to treat gastritis.

Proton pump inhibitor influence on reflux in Barrett's oesophagus.

Objectives It is important to identify factors responsible for the development of Barretts oesophagus (BO). The effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on oesophageal clearance of both acid and alkaline reflux in these patients is uncertain and studies comparing BO patients and healthy controls (HCs) have not been performed earlier. Methods Two groups of patients were studied: 18 HCs and 12 BO patients. Oesophageal motility, acid reflux and duodenogastro-oesophageal reflux (DGOR) were measured using a three-pressure transducer catheter with an antimony pH tip, connected to a sodium ion selective electrode. All patients were studied both on and off PPIs. Results Without PPI therapy, BO patients had significantly more upright and supine acid reflux and upright DGOR compared with HCs. During acid reflux, HC demonstrated more peristalsis than BO [HC, % peristalsis=64 (9), BO=53 (8), P<0.01], but this was not seen during DGOR. [HC, % peristalsis=68 (14), BO=56 (11)]. In Barretts patients, DGOR was significantly reduced with PPIs [off PPI, % upright DGOR=61 (17), on PPIs=19 (15), P&!amp;<0.01], and no oesophageal motility differences were seen compared with results without PPIs. Conclusion HCs demonstrate better oesophageal motility compared with BO patients to prevent acid and alkaline reflux. When acid reflux occurred, HCs had better coordinated motility to remove it. This increased coordination did not occur during DGOR, suggesting different stimulation mechanisms. PPI reduced DGOR in BO patients, without any change in oesophageal motility.