Kenneth R. DeVault

Updated Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were published in 1995 and updated in 1999. These and other guidelines undergo periodic review. Advances continue to be made in the area of GERD, leading us to review and revise previous guideline statements. GERD is defined as symptoms or mucosal damage produced by the abnormal reflux of gastric contents into the esophagus. These guidelines were developed under the auspices of the American College of Gastroenterology and its Practice Parameters Committee, and approved by the Board of Trustees. Diagnostic guidelines address empiric therapy and the use of endoscopy, ambulatory reflux monitoring, and esophageal manometry in GERD. Treatment guidelines address the role of lifestyle changes, patient directed (OTC) therapy, acid suppression, promotility therapy, maintenance therapy, antireflux surgery, and endoscopic therapy in GERD. Finally, there is a discussion of the rare patient with refractory GERD and a list of areas in need of additional study.

Updated guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology.

Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were published in 1995 and updated in 1999. These and other guidelines undergo periodic review. Advances continue to be made in the area of GERD, leading us to review and revise previous guideline statements. GERD is defined as symptoms or mucosal damage produced by the abnormal reflux of gastric contents into the esophagus. These guidelines were developed under the auspices of the American College of Gastroenterology and its Practice Parameters Committee, and approved by the Board of Trustees. Diagnostic guidelines address empiric therapy and the use of endoscopy, ambulatory reflux monitoring, and esophageal manometry in GERD. Treatment guidelines address the role of lifestyle changes, patient directed (OTC) therapy, acid suppression, promotility therapy, maintenance therapy, antireflux surgery, and endoscopic therapy in GERD. Finally, there is a discussion of the rare patient with refractory GERD and a list of areas in need of additional study.

Prospective, Controlled Tandem Endoscopy Study of Narrow Band Imaging for Dysplasia Detection in Barrett's Esophagus

BACKGROUND & AIMS High-resolution endoscopy with narrow band imaging (NBI) enhances the visualization of mucosal glandular and vascular structures. This study assessed whether narrow band targeted biopsies could detect advanced dysplasia using fewer biopsy samples compared with standard resolution endoscopy. METHODS We conducted a prospective, blinded, tandem endoscopy study in a tertiary care center with 65 patients with Barretts esophagus undergoing evaluation for previously detected dysplasia. Standard resolution endoscopy was used first to detect visible lesions. Narrow band endoscopy was then used by another gastroenterologist to detect and biopsy areas suspicious for dysplasia. The lesions initially detected by standard resolution endoscopy were then disclosed and biopsied, after biopsy of the lesions targeted with NBI. Finally, random 4-quadrant biopsies were taken throughout the segment of Barretts mucosa. RESULTS Higher grades of dysplasia were found by NBI in 12 patients (18%), compared with no cases (0%) in whom standard resolution white light endoscopy with random biopsy detected a higher grade of histology (P < .001). Correspondingly, narrow band directed biopsies detected dysplasia in more patients (n = 37; 57%) compared with biopsies taken using standard resolution endoscopy (n = 28; 43%). In addition, more biopsies were taken using standard resolution endoscopy with random biopsy compared with narrow band targeted biopsies (mean 8.5 versus 4.7; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS In patients evaluated for Barretts esophagus with dysplasia, NBI detected significantly more patients with dysplasia and higher grades of dysplasia with fewer biopsy samples compared with standard resolution endoscopy.

Prevention and management of gastroesophageal varices and variceal hemorrhage in cirrhosis

Prevention and Management of Gastroesophageal Varices and Variceal Hemorrhage in Cirrhosis Guadalupe Garcia-Tsao, M.D.,1 Arun J. Sanyal, M.D.,2 Norman D. Grace, M.D., FACG,3 William D. Carey, M.D., MACG,4 the Practice Guidelines Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology 1Section of Digestive Diseases, Yale University School of Medicine and VA-CT Healthcare System, New Haven, Connecticut; 2Division of Gastroenterology, Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center, Richmond, Virginia; 3Division of Gastroenterology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; 4The Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio

Seasonal distribution in newly diagnosed cases of eosinophilic esophagitis in adults.

OBJECTIVES:The etiology of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is not well understood. It has been proposed that eosinophils migrate to the esophagus in response to various ingested and inhaled allergens. Recent reports in children found an increased proportion of cases of EoE during months with higher outdoor aeroallergens. To our knowledge, this has not been evaluated in adults. We aimed to determine whether there is a seasonal distribution in the number of newly diagnosed cases of EoE in an adult population.METHODS:We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive adult cases newly diagnosed with EoE in 1 year. Cases were grouped based on the index month when the diagnosis was made at endoscopy. To test the consistency of the observations, a second cohort of consecutive cases of similar sample size diagnosed at a different period in time was also analyzed.RESULTS:In total, 41 patients were diagnosed with EoE at our center during the study period, providing an annual prevalence of 0.98%. More cases were diagnosed with EoE during the months of April and May than any other month (P<0.001). When patients were grouped seasonally, there was a significant increase of EoE cases in spring and summer months (n=28) when compared with the fall and winter months (n=13) (P=0.019). Analysis of the second cohort of cases (n=37) from 2002 to 2006 confirmed a similar seasonal diagnostic pattern for EoE during the outdoor seasons.CONCLUSIONS:Our data demonstrate that EoE has a seasonal prevalence in adults. The seasonal variation pattern found in newly diagnosed EoE cases in adults supports the potential role of aeroallergens in the pathogenesis of EoE.

Barrett's esophagus is common in older men and women undergoing screening colonoscopy regardless of reflux symptoms.

BACKGROUND:Although Barretts esophagus (BE) is the precursor of esophageal adenocarcinoma (ACA), most patients with ACA present outside of a BE surveillance program. This could be due to undiagnosed symptomatic GER and BE or BE/ACA occurring in patients without reflux symptoms. We have, therefore, studied the prevalence of BE and symptom status in older patients referred for colonoscopy.METHODSAll patients referred for outpatient colonoscopy were eligible if they were at least 65 yr old and had not previously undergone esophagoscopy. After informed consent, the patients completed detailed GER questionnaires. During the research endoscopy, the endoscopist recorded the squamocolumnar junction (SCJ) as either long-segment BE (LSBE), short-segment BE (SSBE), or normal. If the SCJ was felt to be “irregular” the endoscopist was asked to predict, in their judgment, if BE was present. All patients had biopsies below the SCJ, which were examined by a gastrointestinal pathologist who was blinded to the endoscopic findings.RESULTSBE esophagus was present in 50 of the 300 patients studied (16.7%). BE was more common in men (35 of 161, 21.7%) than in women (15 of 139, 10.8%) (p < 0.025). GERD symptoms were reported in 106 patients (35%) and BE was present in 19.8% of symptomatic and 14.9% of asymptomatic cases (NS). The majority of the BE in this study was less than 3 cm in length (92%). The questionnaires did not predict the presence of BE.CONCLUSIONSBE is common in unscreened male and female patients at least 65 yr of age who are referred for colonoscopy. Men were more likely than women to have BE although it occurred in both sexes. Reflux symptoms were fairly common but a poor predictor of BE.

Successful oesophageal pH monitoring with a catheter-free system.

Background : Traditional catheter‐based oesophageal pH testing is limited by patient discomfort and the tendency for patients to alter their diet and activities during the study. A catheter‐free pH monitoring system (Bravo) designed to avoid these problems has recently become available, but the advantages and limitations of this device have not been fully explored.

Preoperative diagnostic workup before antireflux surgery: An evidence and experience-based consensus of the esophageal diagnostic advisory panel

BACKGROUND Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a very prevalent disorder. Medical therapy improves symptoms in some but not all patients. Antireflux surgery is an excellent option for patients with persistent symptoms such as regurgitation, as well as for those with complete symptomatic resolution on acid-suppressive therapy. However, proper patient selection is critical to achieve excellent outcomes. STUDY DESIGN A panel of experts was assembled to review data and personal experience with regard to appropriate preoperative evaluation for antireflux surgery and to construct an evidence and experience-based consensus that has practical application. RESULTS The presence of reflux symptoms alone is not sufficient to support a diagnosis of GERD before antireflux surgery. Esophageal objective testing is required to physiologically and anatomically evaluate the presence and severity of GERD in all patients being considered for surgical intervention. It is critical to document the presence of abnormal distal esophageal acid exposure, especially when antireflux surgery is considered, and reflux-related symptoms should be severe enough to outweigh the potential side effects of fundoplication. Each testing modality has a specific role in the diagnosis and workup of GERD, and no single test alone can provide the entire clinical picture. Results of testing are combined to document the presence and extent of the disease and assist in planning the operative approach. CONCLUSIONS Currently, upper endoscopy, barium esophagram, pH testing, and manometry are required for preoperative workup for antireflux surgery. Additional studies with long-term follow-up are required to evaluate the diagnostic and therapeutic benefit of new technologies, such as oropharyngeal pH testing, multichannel intraluminal impedance, and hypopharyngeal multichannel intraluminal impedance, in the context of patient selection for antireflux surgery.

Clinical experience of patients undergoing photodynamic therapy for Barrett's dysplasia or cancer

Introduction : Barretts oesophagus is the most important risk factor in the increase in incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Photodynamic therapy using porfimer sodium is the only approved endoscopic treatment for use in patients with Barretts high‐grade dysplasia.

Symptoms Have Modest Accuracy in Detecting Endoscopic and Histologic Remission in Adults With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS It is not clear whether symptoms alone can be used to estimate the biologic activity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to evaluate whether symptoms can be used to identify patients with endoscopic and histologic features of remission. METHODS Between April 2011 and June 2014, we performed a prospective, observational study and recruited 269 consecutive adults with EoE (67% male; median age, 39 years old) in Switzerland and the United States. Patients first completed the validated symptom-based EoE activity index patient-reported outcome instrument and then underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy with esophageal biopsy collection. Endoscopic and histologic findings were evaluated with a validated grading system and standardized instrument, respectively. Clinical remission was defined as symptom score <20 (range, 0-100); histologic remission was defined as a peak count of <20 eosinophils/mm(2) in a high-power field (corresponds to approximately <5 eosinophils/median high-power field); and endoscopic remission as absence of white exudates, moderate or severe rings, strictures, or combination of furrows and edema. We used receiver operating characteristic analysis to determine the best symptom score cutoff values for detection of remission. RESULTS Of the study subjects, 111 were in clinical remission (41.3%), 79 were in endoscopic remission (29.7%), and 75 were in histologic remission (27.9%). When the symptom score was used as a continuous variable, patients in endoscopic, histologic, and combined (endoscopic and histologic remission) remission were detected with area under the curve values of 0.67, 0.60, and 0.67, respectively. A symptom score of 20 identified patients in endoscopic remission with 65.1% accuracy and histologic remission with 62.1% accuracy; a symptom score of 15 identified patients with both types of remission with 67.7% accuracy. CONCLUSIONS In patients with EoE, endoscopic or histologic remission can be identified with only modest accuracy based on symptoms alone. At any given time, physicians cannot rely on lack of symptoms to make assumptions about lack of biologic disease activity in adults with EoE. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT00939263.