455. SHOULD THE DIAGNOSTIC THRESHOLD FOR PH MONITORING IN GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE DIFFER BETWEEN THE EAST AND THE WEST?

Abstract Background The Montreal definition's reliance on troublesome typical symptoms alone is inadequate for diagnosing 'actionable' Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD). Lyon consensus 2.0 updated conclusive evidence of GERD, incorporating Los Angeles grade B or above esophagitis and Acid Exposure Time (AET) exceeding 6% in ambulatory reflux monitoring. The Seoul Consensus 2020 presents varied opinions on applying the same standards to the Asian population. A meta-analysis determined the Asian upper limit of AET as 3.2%. This study aims to compare Lyon 1.0 and 2.0 consensus compositions and assess the sensitivity and specificity of different AET thresholds in predicting Grade B or above esophagitis. Methods Patients with refractory GERD symptoms or considering anti-reflux surgery underwent objective GERD workup, including 24-hour catheter-based or 96-hour wireless ambulatory pH monitoring, High-Resolution Manometry, and upper endoscopy. This retrospective cohort study analyzed patient data from 2011-2023, excluding those with prior anti-reflux surgery, bariatric surgery, or myotomy for achalasia. Patients were categorized based on Lyon Consensus 1.0 and 2.0 as 'Non-GERD,' 'Borderline GERD,' 'Borderline GERD with evidence,' and 'Conclusive GERD.' Sensitivity, specificity, and Area-Under-Curve (AUC) were calculated using AET thresholds of 3.2%, 4%, 6%, and 7.2% to predict Grade B or above esophagitis. Results Between July 2011 and August 2023, 257 patients underwent pH monitoring and were included in the analysis, with 247 (93.8%) being ethnic Chinese. The number of patients categorized as conclusive GERD was significantly higher in Lyon 2.0 (134, 52.1%) compared to Lyon 1.0 (109, 42.4%), p < 0.001. Sensitivity and specificity for predicting Grade B or above esophagitis were as follows: AET 3.2% (83.3%, 48.8%), AET 4% (65.3%, 52.4%), AET 6% (73.8%, 66%), AET 7.2% (69.0, 72.1%). AET 7.2% demonstrated the highest AUC of 70.6% (Figure 1). Among patients classified as conclusive GERD, 67 (50%) underwent antireflux surgery. Conclusion Using the Asian threshold of AET 3.2% yields the highest sensitivity for detecting Grade B or above esophagitis. Additionally, the AUC is higher compared to using AET 4.0%. However, it is important to note that AET alone should not be the sole parameter for diagnosing actionable GERD, as even with the lowest AET threshold of 3.2%, 16.7% of patients with Grade B or above esophagitis would be missed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Diseases of the Esophagus
Published
2024-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doae057.203
Primary Topic
Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

455. SHOULD THE DIAGNOSTIC THRESHOLD FOR PH MONITORING IN GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE DIFFER BETWEEN THE EAST AND THE WEST?

Desmond Kwan‐Kit Chan, Simon Law, Ian Chi Kei Wong, Fion Siu‐Yin Chan et al.
Diseases of the Esophagus
Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
article

455. SHOULD THE DIAGNOSTIC THRESHOLD FOR PH MONITORING IN GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE DIFFER BETWEEN THE EAST AND THE WEST?

Desmond Kwan‐Kit Chan, Simon Law, Ian Chi Kei Wong, Fion Siu‐Yin Chan, Claudia Wong, Ben Ka-Pan Yam, Ryan Chun-Lok Kwok, Betty Tsz-Ting Law, Steven Ka-Chun Tsang
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background The Montreal definition's reliance on troublesome typical symptoms alone is inadequate for diagnosing 'actionable' Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD). Lyon consensus 2.0 updated conclusive evidence of GERD, incorporating Los Angeles grade B or above esophagitis and Acid Exposure Time (AET) exceeding 6% in ambulatory reflux monitoring. The Seoul Consensus 2020 presents varied opinions on applying the same standards to the Asian population. A meta-analysis determined the Asian upper limit of AET as 3.2%. This study aims to compare Lyon 1.0 and 2.0 consensus compositions and assess the sensitivity and specificity of different AET thresholds in predicting Grade B or above esophagitis. Methods Patients with refractory GERD symptoms or considering anti-reflux surgery underwent objective GERD workup, including 24-hour catheter-based or 96-hour wireless ambulatory pH monitoring, High-Resolution Manometry, and upper endoscopy. This retrospective cohort study analyzed patient data from 2011-2023, excluding those with prior anti-reflux surgery, bariatric surgery, or myotomy for achalasia. Patients were categorized based on Lyon Consensus 1.0 and 2.0 as 'Non-GERD,' 'Borderline GERD,' 'Borderline GERD with evidence,' and 'Conclusive GERD.' Sensitivity, specificity, and Area-Under-Curve (AUC) were calculated using AET thresholds of 3.2%, 4%, 6%, and 7.2% to predict Grade B or above esophagitis. Results Between July 2011 and August 2023, 257 patients underwent pH monitoring and were included in the analysis, with 247 (93.8%) being ethnic Chinese. The number of patients categorized as conclusive GERD was significantly higher in Lyon 2.0 (134, 52.1%) compared to Lyon 1.0 (109, 42.4%), p < 0.001. Sensitivity and specificity for predicting Grade B or above esophagitis were as follows: AET 3.2% (83.3%, 48.8%), AET 4% (65.3%, 52.4%), AET 6% (73.8%, 66%), AET 7.2% (69.0, 72.1%). AET 7.2% demonstrated the highest AUC of 70.6% (Figure 1). Among patients classified as conclusive GERD, 67 (50%) underwent antireflux surgery. Conclusion Using the Asian threshold of AET 3.2% yields the highest sensitivity for detecting Grade B or above esophagitis. Additionally, the AUC is higher compared to using AET 4.0%. However, it is important to note that AET alone should not be the sole parameter for diagnosing actionable GERD, as even with the lowest AET threshold of 3.2%, 16.7% of patients with Grade B or above esophagitis would be missed.

Diseases of the EsophagusVol. 37(Supplement_1)
Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.