Skip to main content

Diagnostic Tests and Interpretations Before Anti-reflux Surgery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Laparoscopic Antireflux Surgery
  • 295 Accesses

Abstract

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common and chronic disease. The prevalence of the GERD was 17.1%, 15.4%, and 10.0% in Europe, North America, and Asia, respectively. Although its prevalence has been relatively low in Asia, the increasing trend has been remarkable recently. GERD patients usually use proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for symptoms control through reducing acid production, which results in increased medical expenditures. However, up to 40% of patients complain persistent symptoms despite PPI therapy. Although most patients are initially treated with acid-suppressive therapy, many require diagnostic testing to objectively assess for the presence and degree of esophageal acid exposure. Furthermore, the recent increase in prevalence of patients with partial response or lack of response to aggressive acid suppression has raised questions about the role of less acidic refluxate in esophageal injury as well as patient symptoms. Esophageal function testing for GERD has evolved greatly to detect esophageal acid reflux and abnormal esophageal movement. Ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring is an essential method in patients with GERD to make an objective diagnosis before surgical interventions. With the help of the wireless capsule pH monitoring, measurements can be made under more physiological conditions as well as longer recordings can be performed because the examination can be better tolerated by patients. Multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH technology has been developed and currently the most sensitive tool to evaluate patients with reflux symptoms. The use of esophageal manometry is suitable for the detection of esophageal movement patterns and motility abnormalities such as achalasia. Therefore, esophageal ambulatory pH monitoring and manometry are often used in assessments prior to laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery and in patients with reflux symptoms refractory to medical treatment. Taking these recent advances into consideration, this chapter focuses primarily on the indications, technique, equipment, and interpretation of esophageal ambulatory reflux monitoring and manometry in the evaluation of esophageal symptoms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, Dent J, Jones R, Global Consensus Group. The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101(8):1900–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. El-Serag HB, Sweet S, Winchester CC, et al. Update on the epidemiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review. Gut. 2014;63:871–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Dhiman RK, Saraswat VA, Naik SR. Ambulatory esophageal ph monitoring: technique, interpretations, and clinical indications. Dig Dis Sci. 2002;47(2):241–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Johnson LF, DeMeester TR. Twenty-four-hour pH monitoring of the distal esophagus. A quantitative measure of gastroesophageal reflux. Am J Gastroenterol. 1974;62(4):325–32.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lam HG, Breumelhof R, Roelofs JM, Van Berge Henegouwen GP, Smout AJ. What is the optimal time window in symptom analysis of 24-h esophageal pressure and ph data? Dig Dis Sci. 1994;39(2):402–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wiener GJ, Richter JE, Copper JB, Wu WC, Castell DO. The symptom index: a clinically important parameter of ambulatory 24-h esophageal ph monitoring. Am J Gastroenterol. 1988;83(4):358–61.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Vitale GC, Cheadle WC, Sadek S, Michel ME, Cuschieri A. Computerized 24-h ambulatory esophageal ph monitoring and esophagogastroduodenoscopy in the reflux patient. A comparative study. Ann Surg. 1984;200(6):724–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kahrilas PJ, Quigley EM. Clinical esophageal ph recording: a technical review for practice guideline development. Gastroenterology. 1996;110(6):1982–96.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Booth MI, Stratford J, Dehn TC. Patient self-assessment of test-day symptoms in 24-h pH-metry for suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2001;36(8):795–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Yadlapati R, Vaezi MF, Vela MF, et al. Management options for patients with GERD and persistent symptoms on proton pump inhibitors: recommendations from an expert panel. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018;113(7):980–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gyawali CP, Kahrilas PJ, Savarino E, et al. Modern diagnosis of GERD: the Lyon consensus. Gut. 2018;67(7):1351–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Yadlapati R, Kahrilas PJ, Fox MR, et al. Esophageal motility disorders on high-resolution manometry: Chicago classification version 4.0. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2021;33(1):e14058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Laing P, Bress AP, Fang J, Peterson K, Adler DG, Gawron AJ. Trends in diagnoses after implementation of the Chicago classification for esophageal motility disorders (v3.0) for high-resolution manometry studies. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30:1–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Fox MR, Pandolfino JE, Sweis R, et al. Inter-observer agreement for diagnostic classification of esophageal motility disorders defined in high-resolution manometry. Dis Esophagus. 2015;28:711–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Soudagar AS, Sayuk GS, Gyawali CP. Learners favour high resolution oesophageal manometry with better diagnostic accuracy over conventional line tracings. Gut. 2012;61:798–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Beom Jin Kim .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kim, B.J. (2023). Diagnostic Tests and Interpretations Before Anti-reflux Surgery. In: Park, S., Burch, M., Park, JM. (eds) Laparoscopic Antireflux Surgery. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7173-0_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7173-0_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-19-7172-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-19-7173-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics