Melany R. Guzzo

Asthma and gastroesophageal reflux : Acid suppressive therapy improves asthma outcome

PURPOSE To determine (1) the appropriate omeprazole (Prilosec) dose required for adequate acid suppression in asthmatics with gastroesophageal reflux, (2) whether aggressive acid suppressive therapy of gastroesophageal reflux improves asthma outcome in asthmatics with gastroesophageal reflux, (3) the time course of asthma improvement, and (4) demographic, esophageal, or pulmonary predictors of a positive asthma response to antireflux therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Thirty nonsmoking adult asthmatics with gastroesophageal reflux (asthma defined by American Thoracic Society criteria and reflux defined by symptoms and abnormal 24-hour esophageal pH testing) were recruited from the outpatient clinics of a 900-bed university hospital. Patients underwent baseline studies including a demographic questionnaire, esophageal manometry, dual-probe 24-hour esophageal pH test, barium esophogram, and pulmonary spirometry. During the 4-week pretherapy phase, patients recorded reflux and asthma symptom scores and peak expiratory flow rates (PEFs) upon awakening, 1 hour after dinner, and at bedtime. Patients began 20 mg/d omeprazole, and the dose was titrated until acid suppression was documented by 24-hour pH test. Patients remained on this acid suppressive dose for 3 months. Responders were identified by a priori definitions: asthma symptom reduction by >20% and/or PEF increase by >20%. Asthma symptom scores, PEFs baseline and posttherapy pulmonary spirometry were analyzed. RESULTS Twenty-two (73%) patients were asthma symptom and /or PEF responders: 20 (67%) were asthma symptom responders, and 6 (20%) were PEF responders. Responders reduced their asthma symptoms by 57% (P<0.001), improved their morning and night PEFs by 8% and 9% (both P <0.005), and had improvement in forced expiratory volume at 1 second (P <0.02), mean forced expiratory flow during the middle half (25% to 75%) of the forced vital capacity (P <0.04), and peak expiratory flow (P <0.01) with acid suppressive therapy. Mean acid suppressive dose of omeprazole was 27 mg/d (+/-2.2) with 27% (8) patients requiring more than 20 mg/d. The presence of regurgitation or excessive proximal esophageal reflux predicted asthma response with 100% sensitivity, 100% negative predictive value, specificity of 44% and a positive predictive value of 79%. CONCLUSIONS Acid suppressive therapy with omeprazole improves asthma symptoms and/or PEFs by >20% and improves pulmonary function in 73% of asthmatics with gastroesophageal reflux after 3 months of acid suppressive therapy. Many asthmatics (27%) required >20 mg/d of omeprazole to suppress acid. The presence of regurgitation and/or excessive proximal esophageal reflux predicts a positive asthma outcome.

24-h Esophageal pH Testing in Asthmatics: Respiratory Symptom Correlation with Esophageal Acid Events

BACKGROUND Gastroesophageal reflux (GER) may be a trigger for asthma and may be clinically silent. Twenty-four-hour esophageal pH testing accurately diagnoses GER in asthmatics. There are no reports correlating respiratory symptoms with esophageal acid events. This study examines the prevalence and severity of GER in asthmatics with and without reflux symptoms and examines respiratory symptom correlation with esophageal acid. METHODS All esophageal manometry and 24-h esophageal pH tests performed were reviewed in asthmatics who met entrance criteria from July 1, 1989, through November 1, 1994. GER was present if esophageal pH tests were abnormal. Results of esophageal tests were compared for asthmatics with reflux symptoms and GER and asthmatics without reflux symptoms and GER. Respiratory symptoms correlated with esophageal acid events if the esophageal pH was < 4 simultaneously with the respiratory event or within 5 min before its onset. RESULTS Of 199 asthmatics who qualified for analysis, 164 (82%) had reflux symptoms. The results of 24-h esophageal pH tests were abnormal in 118 of 164 asthmatics with reflux symptoms (72%), compared with 10 of 35 asthmatics without reflux symptoms (29%). Among asthmatics with GER, 119 of 151 respiratory symptoms (78.8%) were associated with esophageal acid. Seventy-six of 84 reported coughs (90.5%) were associated with esophageal acid. Theophylline did not alter esophageal parameters. CONCLUSIONS There is a strong correlation between esophageal acid events and respiratory symptoms in asthmatics with GER. Respiratory symptom correlation with esophageal acid events further supports that GER may be a trigger for asthma.

Clinical InvestigationsAsthma24-h Esophageal pH Testing in Asthmatics: Respiratory Symptom Correlation with Esophageal Acid Events

BACKGROUND Gastroesophageal reflux (GER) may be a trigger for asthma and may be clinically silent. Twenty-four-hour esophageal pH testing accurately diagnoses GER in asthmatics. There are no reports correlating respiratory symptoms with esophageal acid events. This study examines the prevalence and severity of GER in asthmatics with and without reflux symptoms and examines respiratory symptom correlation with esophageal acid. METHODS All esophageal manometry and 24-h esophageal pH tests performed were reviewed in asthmatics who met entrance criteria from July 1, 1989, through November 1, 1994. GER was present if esophageal pH tests were abnormal. Results of esophageal tests were compared for asthmatics with reflux symptoms and GER and asthmatics without reflux symptoms and GER. Respiratory symptoms correlated with esophageal acid events if the esophageal pH was < 4 simultaneously with the respiratory event or within 5 min before its onset. RESULTS Of 199 asthmatics who qualified for analysis, 164 (82%) had reflux symptoms. The results of 24-h esophageal pH tests were abnormal in 118 of 164 asthmatics with reflux symptoms (72%), compared with 10 of 35 asthmatics without reflux symptoms (29%). Among asthmatics with GER, 119 of 151 respiratory symptoms (78.8%) were associated with esophageal acid. Seventy-six of 84 reported coughs (90.5%) were associated with esophageal acid. Theophylline did not alter esophageal parameters. CONCLUSIONS There is a strong correlation between esophageal acid events and respiratory symptoms in asthmatics with GER. Respiratory symptom correlation with esophageal acid events further supports that GER may be a trigger for asthma.

Gastroesophageal Reflux-Induced Bronchoconstriction: Is Microaspiration a Factor?

STUDY OBJECTIVE To evaluate the role of microaspiration in gastroesophageal reflux-induced bronchoconstriction. DESIGN Prospective study blinded to the subject. SETTING Outpatient laboratory of a 908-bed university hospital. PARTICIPANTS Thirty nonsmoking adults divided into two groups: asthmatics with reflux (AR), 20; and subjects with gastroesophageal reflux (R), 10. INTERVENTIONS Dual esophageal pH probe placed. Esophageal infusions of normal saline solution, 0.1N hydrochloric acid, then normal saline solution, each lasting 18 min, were followed by two 20-min recovery periods. Subjects remained in the supine position throughout. Spirometry and specific airway resistance (SRaw) performed at baseline, after each esophageal infusion and recovery period. Proximal esophageal acid exposure, a requirement for microaspiration, was assessed by the proximal esophageal pH probe. RESULTS Peak expiratory flow rate (PEF) decreased with esophageal acid in the AR group and did not recover immediately despite esophageal acid clearance with a significant main effect of subject groups (p < 0.021) by repeated measures analysis of covariance. This decrease in PEF was not associated with the presence of proximal esophageal acid exposure (p = 0.618). Specific airway resistance increased in the AR group with esophageal acid and worsened despite acid clearance, especially during the second recovery phase, with a significant phase (p < 0.009) and group by treatment effect (p < 0.009). The presence of proximal esophageal acid exposure was not associated with this deterioration in SRaw (p = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS Esophageal acid infusions given in the supine position caused a decrease in PEF and an increase in SRaw in the asthma with reflux group, which did not improve despite acid clearance. These responses were not dependent on proximal esophageal acid exposure. Also, SRaw continued to worsen during the recovery phase in the AR group, which may represent a delayed bronchoconstrictor effect. These data suggest that microaspiration does not play a significant role in esophageal acid-induced bronchoconstriction.

Gastroesophageal Reflux-induced Bronchoconstriction

STUDY OBJECTIVE To evaluate the role of microaspiration in gastroesophageal reflux-induced bronchoconstriction. DESIGN Prospective study blinded to the subject. SETTING Outpatient laboratory of a 908-bed university hospital. PARTICIPANTS Thirty nonsmoking adults divided into two groups: asthmatics with reflux (AR), 20; and subjects with gastroesophageal reflux (R), 10. INTERVENTIONS Dual esophageal pH probe placed. Esophageal infusions of normal saline solution, 0.1N hydrochloric acid, then normal saline solution, each lasting 18 min, were followed by two 20-min recovery periods. Subjects remained in the supine position throughout. Spirometry and specific airway resistance (SRaw) performed at baseline, after each esophageal infusion and recovery period. Proximal esophageal acid exposure, a requirement for microaspiration, was assessed by the proximal esophageal pH probe. RESULTS Peak expiratory flow rate (PEF) decreased with esophageal acid in the AR group and did not recover immediately despite esophageal acid clearance with a significant main effect of subject groups (p < 0.021) by repeated measures analysis of covariance. This decrease in PEF was not associated with the presence of proximal esophageal acid exposure (p = 0.618). Specific airway resistance increased in the AR group with esophageal acid and worsened despite acid clearance, especially during the second recovery phase, with a significant phase (p < 0.009) and group by treatment effect (p < 0.009). The presence of proximal esophageal acid exposure was not associated with this deterioration in SRaw (p = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS Esophageal acid infusions given in the supine position caused a decrease in PEF and an increase in SRaw in the asthma with reflux group, which did not improve despite acid clearance. These responses were not dependent on proximal esophageal acid exposure. Also, SRaw continued to worsen during the recovery phase in the AR group, which may represent a delayed bronchoconstrictor effect. These data suggest that microaspiration does not play a significant role in esophageal acid-induced bronchoconstriction.

Clinical Investigations: Airways ObstructionGastroesophageal Reflux-Induced Bronchoconstriction: Is Microaspiration a Factor?

STUDY OBJECTIVE To evaluate the role of microaspiration in gastroesophageal reflux-induced bronchoconstriction. DESIGN Prospective study blinded to the subject. SETTING Outpatient laboratory of a 908-bed university hospital. PARTICIPANTS Thirty nonsmoking adults divided into two groups: asthmatics with reflux (AR), 20; and subjects with gastroesophageal reflux (R), 10. INTERVENTIONS Dual esophageal pH probe placed. Esophageal infusions of normal saline solution, 0.1N hydrochloric acid, then normal saline solution, each lasting 18 min, were followed by two 20-min recovery periods. Subjects remained in the supine position throughout. Spirometry and specific airway resistance (SRaw) performed at baseline, after each esophageal infusion and recovery period. Proximal esophageal acid exposure, a requirement for microaspiration, was assessed by the proximal esophageal pH probe. RESULTS Peak expiratory flow rate (PEF) decreased with esophageal acid in the AR group and did not recover immediately despite esophageal acid clearance with a significant main effect of subject groups (p < 0.021) by repeated measures analysis of covariance. This decrease in PEF was not associated with the presence of proximal esophageal acid exposure (p = 0.618). Specific airway resistance increased in the AR group with esophageal acid and worsened despite acid clearance, especially during the second recovery phase, with a significant phase (p < 0.009) and group by treatment effect (p < 0.009). The presence of proximal esophageal acid exposure was not associated with this deterioration in SRaw (p = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS Esophageal acid infusions given in the supine position caused a decrease in PEF and an increase in SRaw in the asthma with reflux group, which did not improve despite acid clearance. These responses were not dependent on proximal esophageal acid exposure. Also, SRaw continued to worsen during the recovery phase in the AR group, which may represent a delayed bronchoconstrictor effect. These data suggest that microaspiration does not play a significant role in esophageal acid-induced bronchoconstriction.