Skip to main content

Diagnostic Investigations in GERD

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease
  • 503 Accesses

Abstract

GERD presents with a large diversity of different symptoms. Despite typical symptoms such as heartburn and regurgitation, GERD may cause also a variety of different symptoms such as chest pain, chronic cough, hoarseness, epigastric pain, and/or nausea. The Montréal classification of GERD has described the presence of symptoms in GERD. Other functional and somatoform disorders may also present with “reflux-like” symptoms, creating an overlap with the clinical presentation of GERD. Therefore, symptoms may be in some cases misleading regarding a sufficient diagnosis for therapeutic decision making. As a consequence, diagnostic investigations in GERD are very important. Current technology allows for a very comprehensive assessment and understanding of the morphologic, anatomical, and functional alterations that emerge with the development of GERD. High Resolution Manometry and Dynamic Barium Sandwich videography are very helpful. Endoscopy is especially important in exclusion of malignant disease and in the presence of alarm symptoms such as dysphagia, retrosternal pain, and bleeding. With endoscopy, it is possible to establish the diagnosis of GERD and its grade of severity. For diagnostic workup prior to surgery endoscopy, 24-h-pH-monitoring and manometry are important for the optimal selection for patients.

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 79.99
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 139.99
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. Bradley LA, Richter JE, Pulliam TJ, et al. The relationship between stress and symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux: the influence of psychological factors. Am J Gastroenterol. 1993;88(1):11–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Johnston BT, Lewis SA, Love AH. Stress, personality and social support in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. J Psychosom Res. 1995;39(2):221–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Tack J, Caenepeel P, Arts J, Lee KJ, Sifrim D, Janssens J. Prevalence of acid reflux functional dyspepsia and its association with symptom profile. Gut. 2005;54(10):1370–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Savarino E, Pohl D, Zentilin P, Dulbecco P, Sammito G, Sconfienza L, Vigneri S, Camerini G, Tutuian R, Savarino V. Functional heartburn has more in common with functional dyspepsia than with non-erosive reflux disease. Gut. 2009;58(9):1185–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kahrilas PJ, Jonsson A, Denison H, Wernerson B, Hughes N, Howden CW. Concomitant symptoms itemized in the Reflux Disease Questionnaire are associated with attenuated heartburn response to acid suppression. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107(9):1354–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fuchs KH, Musial F, Ulbricht F, Breithaupt W, Reinisch A, Schulz T, Babic B, Fuchs HF, Varga G. Foregut symptoms, somatoform tendencies, and the selection of patients for antireflux surgery. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30:1–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Broderick R, Fuchs KH, Breithaupt W, Varga G, Schulz T, Babic B, Lee A, Musial F, Horgan S. Clinical presentation of GERD: a prospective study on symptom diversity and modification of questionnaire application. Dig Dis. 2019;12:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1159/000502796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Costantini M, Crookes PF, Bremner RM, Hoeft SF, Ehsan A, Peters JH, Bremner CG, DeMeester TR. Value of physiologic assessment of foregut symptoms in a surgical practice. Surgery. 1993;114(4):780–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jobe BA, Richter JE, Hoppo T, Peters JH, Bell R, Dengler WC, DeVault K, Fass R, Gyawali CP, Kahrilas PJ, Lacy BE, Pandolfino JE, Patti MG, Swanstrom LL, Kurian AA, Vela MF, Vaezi M, DeMeester TR. Preoperative diagnostic workup before antireflux surgery: an evidence and experience-based consensus of the Esophageal Diagnostic Advisory Panel. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217(4):586–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.05.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Genta RM, Spechler SJ, Kielhorn AF. The Los Angeles and Savary-Miller systems for grading esophagitis: utilization and correlation with histology. Dis Esophagus. 2011;24(1):10–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2050.2010.01092.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lundell LR, Dent J, Bennett JR, Blum AL, Armstrong D, Galmiche JP, Johnson F, Hongo M, Richter JE, Spechler SJ, Tytgat GN, Wallin L. Endoscopic assessment of oesophagitis: clinical and functional correlates and further validation of the Los Angeles classification. Gut. 1999;45(2):172–80.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Raskin HF. Barium-burger roentgen study for unrecognized, clinically significant, gastric retention. South Med J. 1971;64(10):1227–35. PMID 5097797

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. DeMeester TR. Etiology and natural history of gastroesophageal reflux disease and predictors of progressive disease. In: Yeo CJ, DeMeester SR, Mc Fadden DW, editors. Shackelford’s surgery of the alimentary tract. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2019. p. 204–20.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Shay S. Esophageal impedance monitoring: the ups and downs of a new test. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99(6):1020–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Zerbib F, des Varannes SB, Roman S, Pouderoux P, Artigue F, Chaput U, Mion F, Caillol F, Verin E, Bommelaer G, Ducrotte P, Galmiche JP, Sifrim D. Normal values and day-to-day variability of 24-h ambulatory oesophageal impedance-pH monitoring in a Belgian French cohort of healthy subjects. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005;22(10):1011–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Stefanidis D, Hope WW, Kohn GP, Reardon PR, Richardson WS, Fanelli RD, SAGES Guideline Committee. Guidelines for surgical treatment of GERD. Surg Endosc. 2010;24(11):2647–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fuchs KH, Babic B, Breithaupt W, Dallemagne B, Fingerhut A, Furnee E, Granderath F, Horvath OP, Kardos P, Pointner R, Savarino E, Van Herwarden-Lindeboom M, Zaninotto G. EAES recommendations for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:1753–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gyawali CP, Fass R. Management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterology. 2018;154(2):302–18. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2017.07.049.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Gyawali CP, Kahrilas PJ, Savarino E, Zerbib F, Mion F, Smout AJPM, Vaezi M, Sifrim D, Fox MR, Vela MP, Tutuian R, Tack J, Bredenoord AJ, Pandolfino J, Roman S. Modern diagnosis of GERD: the Lyon Consensus. Gut. 2018;67(7):1351–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Dent J, Holloway RH, Toouli J, Dodds WJ. Mechanisms of lower oesophageal sphincter incompetence in patients with symptomatic gastro-oesophageal reflux. Gut. 1988;29:1020–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kuster E, Ros E, Toledo-Pimentel V, Pujol A, Bordas JM, Grande IC. Predictive factors of the long term outcome in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: six year follow up of 107 patients. Gut. 1994;35(1):8–14.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Mittal RK, Holloway RH, Penagini R, Blackshaw A, Dent J. Transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations. Gastroenterology. 1995;109:601–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Kahrilas PJ, Sifrim D. High-resolution manometry and impedance-pH/manometry: valuable tools in clinical and investigational esophagology. Gastroenterology. 2008;135(3):756–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mittal RK, Holloway R, Dent J. Effect of atropine on the frequency of reflux and transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation in normal subjects. Gastroenterology. 1995;109:1547.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David C. Kunkel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kunkel, D.C. (2020). Diagnostic Investigations in GERD. In: Horgan, S., Fuchs, KH. (eds) Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48009-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48009-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-48008-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-48009-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics