The combination of pH monitoring in the most distal esophagus and symptom association analysis markedly improves the clinical value of esophageal pH tests

References

• Locke GR, 3rd, Talley NJ, Fett SL, Zinsmeister AR, Melton LJ, 3rd. Prevalence and clinical spectrum of gastroesophageal reflux: a population-based study in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Gastroenterology 1997;112:1448–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandler RS, Everhart JE, Donowitz M, Adams E, Cronin K, Goodman C, et al. The burden of selected digestive diseases in the United States. Gastroenterology 2002;122:1500–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirano I, Richter JE. ACG practice guidelines: esophageal reflux testing. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:668–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venables TL, Newland RD, Patel AC, Hole J, Wilcock C, Turbitt ML. Omeprazole 10 milligrams once daily, omeprazole 20 milligrams once daily, or ranitidine 150 milligrams twice daily, evaluated as initial therapy for the relief of symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in general practice. Scand J Gastroenterol 1997;32:965–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenner J, Johansson J, Johnsson F, Öberg S. Optimal thresholds and discriminatory power of 48-h wireless esophageal pH monitoring in the diagnosisof GERD. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:1862–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pandolfino JE, Richter JE, Ours T, Guardino JM, Chapman J, Kahrilas PJ. Ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring using a wireless system. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:740–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider NI, Plieschnegger W, Geppert M, Wigginghaus B, Hoess GM, Eherer A, et al. Validation study of the Esohisto consensus guidelines for the recognition of microscopic esophagitis (histoGERD Trial). Hum Pathol 2014;45:994–1002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiocca R, Mastracci L, Riddell R, Takubo K, Vieth M, Yerian L, et al. Development of consensus guidelines for the histologic recognition of microscopic esophagitis in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease: the Esohisto project. Hum Pathol 2010;41:223–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahrilas PJ, Lin S, Chen J, Manka M. The effect of hiatus hernia on gastro-oesophageal junction pressure. Gut 1999;44:476–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aksglaede K, Funch-Jensen P, Thommesen P. Intra-esophageal pH probe movement during eating and talking. A videoradiographic study. Acta Radiol 2003;44:131–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahrilas PJ, Wu S, Lin S, Pouderoux P. Attenuation of esophageal shortening during peristalsis with hiatus hernia. Gastroenterology 1995;109:1818–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenner J, Hall M, Höglund P, Johansson J, Johnsson F, Öberg S. Wireless pH recording immediately above the squamocolumnar junction improves the diagnostic performance of esophageal pH studies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:2977–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenner J, Johnsson F, Johansson J, Öberg S. Wireless oesophageal pH monitoring: feasibility, safety and normal values in healthy subjects. Scand J Gastroenterol 2005;40:768–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenner J, Johnsson F, Johansson J, Öberg S. Acid reflux immediately above the squamocolumnar junction and in the distal esophagus: simultaneous pH monitoring using the wireless capsule pH system. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:1734–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiener GJ, Richter JE, Copper JB, Wu WC, Castell DO. The symptom index: a clinically important parameter of ambulatory 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring. Am J Gastroenterol 1988;83:358–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breumelhof R, Smout AJ. The symptom sensitivity index: a valuable additional parameter in 24-hour esophageal pH recording. Am J Gastroenterol 1991;86:160–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weusten BL, Roelofs JM, Akkermans LM, Van Berge-Henegouwen GP, Smout AJ. The symptom-association probability: an improved method for symptom analysis of 24-hour esophageal pH data. Gastroenterology 1994;107:1741–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metz CE. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 1978;8:283–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greiner M, Pfeiffer D, Smith RD. Principles and practical application of the receiver-operating characteristic analysis for diagnostic tests. Prev Vet Med 2000;45:23–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundell LR, Dent J, Bennett JR, Blum AL, Armstrong D, Galmiche JP, et al. Endoscopic assessment of oesophagitis: clinical and functional correlates and further validation of the Los Angeles classification. Gut 1999;45:172–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez SD, Malagon IB, Garewal HS, Cui H, Fass R. Non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) – acid reflux and symptom patterns. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2003;17:537–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bansal A, Wani S, Rastogi A, Rastogi K, Goyal A, Hall S, et al. Impact of measurement of esophageal acid exposure close to the gastroesophageal junction on diagnostic accuracy and event-symptom correlation: a prospective study using wireless dual pH monitoring. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:2918–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domingues GR, Moraes-Filho JP, Domingues AG. Impact of prolonged 48-h wireless capsule esophageal pH monitoring on diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease and evaluation of the relationship between symptoms and reflux episodes. Arq Gastroenterol 2011;48:24–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Swidnicka-Siergiejko A, Dabrowski A. Prolonged 2-day esophageal pH-metry with impedance monitoring improves symptom-reflux association analysis. Dig Dis Sci 2013;58:2556–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kushnir VM, Sayuk GS, Gyawali CP. The effect of antisecretory therapy and study duration on ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring. Dig Dis Sci 2011;56:1412–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tseng D, Rizvi AZ, Fennerty MB, Jobe BA, Diggs BS, Sheppard BC, et al. Forty-eight-hour pH monitoring increases sensitivity in detecting abnormal esophageal acid exposure. J Gastrointest Surg 2005;9:1043–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aanen MC, Weusten BL, Numans ME, de Wit NJ, Baron A, Smout AJ. Diagnostic value of the proton pump inhibitor test for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in primary care. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006;24:1377–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taghavi SA, Ghasedi M, Saberi-Firoozi M, Alizadeh-Naeeni M, Bagheri-Lankarani K, Kaviani MJ, et al. Symptom association probability and symptom sensitivity index: preferable but still suboptimal predictors of response to high dose omeprazole. Gut 2005;54:1067–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aanen MC, Bredenoord AJ, Numans ME, Samson M, Smout AJ. Reproducibility of symptom association analysis in ambulatory reflux monitoring. Am J Gastroenterol 2008;103:2200–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, Dent J, Jones R. The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:1900–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahrilas PJ, Shaheen NJ, Vaezi MF. American Gastroenterological Association Institute technical review on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterology 2008;135:1392–413.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pace F, Bazzoli F, Fiocca R, Di Mario F, Savarino V, Vigneri S, et al. The Italian validation of the Montreal Global definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009;21:394–408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flook N, Jones R, Vakil N. Approach to gastroesophageal reflux disease in primary care: Putting the Montreal definition into practice. Can Fam Physician 2008;54:701–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar