Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Impedance-pH Monitoring for Diagnosis of Reflux Disease: New Perspectives

  • Review
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Heartburn is the most specific symptom of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). In clinical practice, heartburn relief by a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trial does suffice to confirm GERD. However, an objective diagnosis of GERD is required before anti-reflux endoscopic or surgical interventions, independently from PPI response. Thus, since normal findings at upper endoscopy are detected in the majority of patients with heartburn, reflux monitoring is often required. When traditional catheter-based or wireless pH tests are used, reflux episodes are conventionally identified by pH drops below 4.0 units. Combined impedance-pH monitoring has the advantage to provide a comprehensive assessment of both physical and chemical properties of refluxate and the distinction between acid and weakly acidic refluxes, both proven to cause heartburn. Unfortunately, the conventional impedance-pH parameters, namely acid exposure time and number of reflux events, are characterized by suboptimal diagnostic sensitivity, and the reliability of symptom–reflux association indexes remains questionable. Therefore, novel impedance parameters, namely the post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave (PSPW) index and the mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI), have recently been proposed in order to achieve a better diagnostic yield. In fact, they proved to be highly accurate in distinguishing reflux-related from reflux-unrelated heartburn, off- as well as on-PPI therapy. Currently, manual review of impedance-pH tracings is needed because of the modest accuracy of available software tools for automated analysis. PSPW index and MNBI are highly applicable and reproducible, and their calculation requires a few additional minutes during the manual review of impedance-pH tracings. So far, we believe that PSPW index and MNBI are ready for prime time and should become part of the standard analysis of impedance-pH tracings for GERD diagnosis in patients with endoscopy-negative heartburn.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AUC:

Area under the curve

AET:

Acid exposure time

ERD:

Erosive reflux disease

FH:

Functional heartburn

GERD:

Gastroesophageal reflux disease

HE:

Hypersensitive esophagus

MNBI:

Mean nocturnal baseline impedance

NERD:

Non-erosive reflux disease

PSPW:

Post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave

ROC:

Receiver operating characteristic

SAP:

Symptom association probability

SI:

Symptom index

References

  1. Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, Dent J, Jones R, and the Global Consensus Group. The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:1900–1920.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kahrilas P, Shaheen N, Vaezi M. American Gastroenterological Association Institute technical review on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterology. 2008;135:1392–1413.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Katz P, Gerson L, Vela M. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108:308–328.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Savarino E, Zentilin P, Savarino V. NERD: an umbrella term including heterogeneous subpopulations. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;10:371–380.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Galmiche JP, Clouse RE, Balint A, et al. Functional esophageal disorders. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:1459–1465.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Savarino E, De Bortoli N, Bellini M, et al. Practice guidelines on the use of esophageal manometry—a GISMAD-SIGE-AIGO medical position statement. Dig Liver Dis. 2016;48:1124–1135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kahrilas PJ, Quigley EMM. Clinical esophageal pH recording: a technical review for practice guideline development. Gastroenterology. 1996;110:1982–1996.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hila A, Agrawal A, Castell DO. Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH esophageal testing compared to pH alone for diagnosing both acid and weakly acidic gastroesophageal reflux. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:172–177.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Roberts NB. Review article: human pepsins—their multiplicity, function and role in reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006;24:2–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pearson JP, Parikh S. Review article: nature and properties of gastro-oesophageal and extra-oesophageal refluxate. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011;33:2–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Orlando RC. Review article: oesophageal tissue damage and protection. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011;33:8–12.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Frazzoni M, Savarino E, Manno M, et al. Reflux patterns in patients with short segment Barrett’s oesophagus: a study using impedance-pH monitoring off and on proton pump inhibitor therapy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2009;30:508–515.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Frazzoni M, Conigliaro R, Melotti G. Weakly acidic refluxes have a major role in the pathogenesis of proton pump inhibitor-resistant reflux oesophagitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011;33:601–606.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hirano I, Richter JE and the Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. ACG practice guidelines—esophageal reflux testing. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007; 102:668–685.

  15. Gasiorowska A, Navarro-Rodriguez T, Wendel C, et al. Comparison of the degree of duodenogastroesophageal reflux and acid reflux between patients who failed to respond and those who were successfully treated with a proton pump inhibitor once daily. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:2005–2013.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tutuian R, Castell DO. Review article: complete gastro-oesophageal reflux monitoring—combined pH and impedance. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006;24:27–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pace F, Sangaletti O, Pallotta S, et al. Biliary reflux and non-acid reflux are two distinct phenomena: a comparison between 24-hour multichannel intraesophageal impedance and bilirubin monitoring. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2007;42:1031–1039.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bredenoord AJ. Impedance-pH monitoring: new standard for measuring gastro-oesophageal reflux. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2008;20:434–439.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zerbib F, Roman S, Ropert A, et al. Esophageal pH-impedance monitoring and symptom analysis in GERD: a study in patients off and on therapy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:1956–1963.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mainie I, Tutuian R, Shay S, et al. Acid and non-acid reflux in patients with persistent symptoms despite acid suppressive therapy: a multicentre study using combined ambulatory impedance-pH monitoring. Gut. 2006;55:1398–1402.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Sharma N, Agrawal A, Freeman J, Vela M, Castell DO. An analysis of persistent symptoms in acid-suppressed patients undergoing impedance-pH monitoring. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6:521–524.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Savarino E, Zentilin P, Tutuian R, et al. Role of nonacid reflux in NERD: lessons learned from impedance-pH monitoring in 150 patients off therapy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:2685–2693.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Savarino E, Marabotto E, Zentilin P, et al. The added value of impedance-pH monitoring to Rome III criteria in distinguishing functional heartburn from non-erosive reflux disease. Dig Liver Dis. 2011;43:542–547.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Slaughter JC, Goutte M, Rymer JA, et al. Caution about overinterpretation of symptom indexes in reflux monitoring for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9:868–874.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pritchett JM, Aslam M, Slaughter JC, Ness RM, Garrett CG, Vaezi MF. Efficacy of esophageal impedance/pH monitoring in patients with refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease, on and off therapy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:743–748.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Frazzoni M, Conigliaro R, Mirante VG, Melotti G. The added value of quantitative analysis of on-therapy impedance-pH parameters in distinguishing refractory non-erosive reflux disease from functional heartburn. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2012;24:141-e87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Frazzoni M, Conigliaro R, Melotti G. Reflux parameters as modified by laparoscopic fundoplication in 40 patients with heartburn/regurgitation persisting despite PPI therapy. A study using impedance-pH monitoring. Dig Dis Sci. 2011;56:1099–1106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Frazzoni M, Conigliaro R, Manta R, Melotti G. Reflux parameters as modified by EsophyX or laparoscopic fundoplication in refractory GERD. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011;34:67–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Frazzoni M, Piccoli M, Conigliaro R, Manta R, Frazzoni L, Melotti G. Refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease as diagnosed by impedance-pH monitoring can be cured by laparoscopic fundoplication. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:2940–2946.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Helm J, Dodds W, Pelc L, Palmer DW, Hogan WJ, Teeter BC. Effect of esophageal emptying and saliva on clearance of acid from the esophagus. N Engl J Med. 1984;310:284–288.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Shafik A, El-Sibai O, Shafik AA, Mostafa R. Effect of topical esophageal acidification on salivary secretion: identification of the mechanism of action. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005;20:1935–1939.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Conchillo J, Smout A. Review article: intra-oesophageal impedance monitoring for the assessment of bolus transit and gastro-oesophageal reflux. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2009;29:3–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Gyawali CP. Redeeming clinical value of esophageal pH impedance monitoring. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:47–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Woodley FW, Fernandez F, Mousa H. Diurnal variation in the chemical clearance of acid gastroesophageal reflux in infants. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:37–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Frazzoni M, Manta R, Mirante VG, Conigliaro R, Frazzoni L, Melotti G. Esophageal chemical clearance is impaired in gastro-esophageal reflux disease—a 24 h impedance-pH monitoring assessment. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2013;25:399-e295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Bredenoord AJ, Weusten BLAM, Timmer R, Smout AJPM. Reproducibility of multichannel intraluminal electrical impedance monitoring of gastroesophageal reflux. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:265–269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Frazzoni M, Bertani H, Manta R, et al. Impairment of chemical clearance is relevant to the pathogenesis of refractory reflux oesophagitis. Dig Liver Dis. 2014;46:596–612.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Frazzoni M, Bertani H, Conigliaro R, Frazzoni L, Losi L, Melotti G. Neoplastic progression in short-segment Barrett’s oesophagus is associated with impairment of chemical clearance, but not inadequate acid suppression by proton pump inhibitor therapy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2014;40:835–842.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kessing BF, Bredenoord AJ, Weijenborg PW, Hemmink GJ, Loots CM, Smout AJ. Esophageal acid exposure decreases intraluminal baseline impedance. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:2093–2097.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Farrè R, Blondeau K, Clement D, et al. Evaluation of oesophageal mucosa integrity by the intraluminal impedance technique. Gut. 2011;60:885–892.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Martinucci I, De Bortoli N, Savarino E, et al. Esophageal baseline impedance levels in patients with pathophysiological characteristics of functional heartburn. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2014;26:546–555.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. De Bortoli N, Martinucci I, Savarino E, et al. Association between baseline impedance values and response proton pump inhibitors in patients with heartburn. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;13:1082–1088.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Frazzoni M, Savarino E, De Bortoli N, et al. Analyses of the post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index and nocturnal baseline impedance parameters increase the diagnostic yield of patients with reflux disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:40–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Aziz Q, Fass R, Gyawali CP, Miwa H, Pandolfino JE, Zerbib F. Functional esophageal disorders. Gastroenterology. 2016;150:1368–1379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Dent J, Vakil N, Jones R, et al. Accuracy of the diagnosis of GORD by questionnaire, physicians and a trial of proton pump inhibitor treatment: the diamond study. Gut. 2010;59:714–721.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Vela MF, Craft BM, Sharma N, Freeman J, Hazen-Martin D. Refractory heartburn: comparison of intercellular space diameter in documented GERD vs. functional heartburn. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:844–850.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Savarino E, Zentilin P, Mastracci L, et al. Microscopic esophagitis distinguishes patients with non-erosive reflux disease from those with functional heartburn. J Gastroenterol. 2013;48:473–482.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Frazzoni M, de Bortoli N, Frazzoni L, et al. Impairment of chemical clearance and mucosal integrity distinguishes hypersensitive esophagus from functional heartburn. J Gastroenterol. 2017;52:444–451.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Patel A, Wang D, Salnani N, Sayuk GS, Gyawali CP. Distal mean nocturnal baseline impedance on pH-impedance monitoring predicts reflux burden and symptomatic outcome in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2016;44:890–898.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Frazzoni M, De Bortoli N, Frazzoni L, et al. The added diagnostic value of postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index and nocturnal baseline impedance in refractory reflux disease studied with on-therapy impedance-pH monitoring. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2017;29:e12947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Sifrim D, Zerbib F. Diagnosis and management of patients with reflux symptoms refractory to proton pump inhibitors. Gut. 2012;61:1340–1354.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Zerbib F, Sifrim D, Tutuian R, Attwood S, Lundell L. Modern medical and surgical management of difficult-to-treat GORD. United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2013;1:21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Savarino V, Dulbecco P, Savarino E. Are proton pump inhibitors really so dangerous? Dig Liver Dis. 2016;48:851–859.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Ravi K, Katzka DA. Esophageal impedance monitoring: clinical pearls and pitfalls. Am J Gastroenterol. 2016;111:1245–1256.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Zhong C, Duan L, Wang K, et al. Esophageal intraluminal baseline impedance is associated with severity of acid reflux and epithelial structural abnormalities in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Gastroenterol. 2013;48:601–610.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Kandulski A, Weigt J, Caro C, et al. Esophageal intraluminal baseline impedance differentiates gastroesophageal reflux disease from functional heartburn. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;13:1075–1081.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Cho YK, Lee JS, Lee TH, et al. The relationship of the post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index and esophageal baseline impedance with gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms. J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2017;23:237–244.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Roman S, Bruley Des Varannes S, Pouderoux P, et al. Ambulatory 24-h oesophageal impedance—pH recordings: reliability of automatic analysis for gastro-oesophageal reflux assessment. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2006;18:978–986.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Ravi K, DeVault KR, Murray JA, Bouras EP, Francis D. Inter-observer agreement for multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH testing. Dis Esophagus. 2010;23:540–544.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Hemmink GJ, Bredenoord AJ, Aanen MC, Weusten BL, Timmer R, Smout AJ. Computer analysis of 24-h esophageal impedance signals. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2011;46:271–276.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The manuscript was prepared without any financial or technical support.

Author's contributions

MF wrote the manuscript. N de B, LF, ST, VS, ES critically revised the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Digestive Pathophysiology Unit, Baggiovara Hospital, Viale Giardini 1355, 41100, Modena, Italy

    Marzio Frazzoni & Leonardo Frazzoni

  2. Department of Translational Research and New Technology in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy

    Nicola de Bortoli

  3. Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Leonardo Frazzoni

  4. General and Bariatric Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery, 2nd University of Napoli, Naples, Italy

    Salvatore Tolone

  5. Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Genova, Genoa, Italy

    Vincenzo Savarino

  6. Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padua, Italy

    Edoardo Savarino

Authors
  1. Marzio Frazzoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicola de Bortoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Leonardo Frazzoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Salvatore Tolone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Vincenzo Savarino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Edoardo Savarino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marzio Frazzoni.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Frazzoni, M., de Bortoli, N., Frazzoni, L. et al. Impedance-pH Monitoring for Diagnosis of Reflux Disease: New Perspectives. Dig Dis Sci 62, 1881–1889 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-017-4625-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-017-4625-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation