TY - JOUR
T1 - Esophagogastroduodenoscopy with conscious sedation does not interfere with catheter-based 24-h pH monitoring
AU - Tsou, Yung Kuan
AU - Lien, Jau Min
AU - Chen, Chin Kuo
AU - Lin, Cheng-Hui
AU - Lee, Mu Shien
AU - Chen, Hsing Yu
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2014 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2013/3/21
Y1 - 2013/3/21
N2 - AIM: To investigate the impact of esophagogastroduo-denoscopy with conscious sedation on the subsequent 24-h catheter-based pH monitoring. METHODS: Fifty patients with extra-esophageal symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease undergoing ambulatory dual-probe 24-h pH monitoring were enrolled from March 2010 to August 2011. All of the data were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Thirty-six patients (72%, group A) underwent pH monitoring shortly after esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with conscious sedation, and 14 patients (28%, group B) underwent pH monitoring without conscious sedation. The 24-h pH data from two time periods were analyzed: the first 4 h (Period I) and the remaining time of the study (Period II). RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 49.6 ± 12.5 years; 20 patients (40%) were men. The baseline data, including age, sex, body mass index, reflux esophagitis, the Reflux Symptom Index, and the Reflux Findings Score, were comparable between the two groups. The percentage of total time with a pH < 4 and the frequency of acid reflux during Period I were not significantly different between the two groups, as measured using both pharyngeal (0.03% ± 0.10% vs 0.07% ± 0.16%, P = 0.32; and 0.07 ± 0.23 episodes/h vs 0.18 ± 0.47 episodes/h, P = 0.33, respectively) and esophageal probes (0.96% ± 1.89% vs 0.42% ± 0.81%, P = 0.59; and 0.74 ± 1.51 episodes/h vs 0.63 ± 0.97 episodes/h, P = 0.49, respectively). The percentage of total time with a pH < 4 and the frequency of acid reflux were also not significantly different between Periods I and II in group A patients, as measured using both pharyngeal (0.03% ± 0.10% vs 0.23% ± 0.85%, P = 0.21; and 0.07 ± 0.23 episodes/h vs 0.29 ± 0.98 episodes/h, P = 0.22, respectively) and esophageal probes (0.96% ± 1.89% vs 1.11% ± 2.57%, P = 0.55; and 0.74 ± 1.51 episodes/h vs 0.81 ± 1.76 episodes/h, P = 0.55, respectively). CONCLUSION: EGD with conscious sedation does not interfere with the results of subsequent 24-h pH monitoring in patients with extra-esophageal symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease.
AB - AIM: To investigate the impact of esophagogastroduo-denoscopy with conscious sedation on the subsequent 24-h catheter-based pH monitoring. METHODS: Fifty patients with extra-esophageal symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease undergoing ambulatory dual-probe 24-h pH monitoring were enrolled from March 2010 to August 2011. All of the data were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Thirty-six patients (72%, group A) underwent pH monitoring shortly after esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with conscious sedation, and 14 patients (28%, group B) underwent pH monitoring without conscious sedation. The 24-h pH data from two time periods were analyzed: the first 4 h (Period I) and the remaining time of the study (Period II). RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 49.6 ± 12.5 years; 20 patients (40%) were men. The baseline data, including age, sex, body mass index, reflux esophagitis, the Reflux Symptom Index, and the Reflux Findings Score, were comparable between the two groups. The percentage of total time with a pH < 4 and the frequency of acid reflux during Period I were not significantly different between the two groups, as measured using both pharyngeal (0.03% ± 0.10% vs 0.07% ± 0.16%, P = 0.32; and 0.07 ± 0.23 episodes/h vs 0.18 ± 0.47 episodes/h, P = 0.33, respectively) and esophageal probes (0.96% ± 1.89% vs 0.42% ± 0.81%, P = 0.59; and 0.74 ± 1.51 episodes/h vs 0.63 ± 0.97 episodes/h, P = 0.49, respectively). The percentage of total time with a pH < 4 and the frequency of acid reflux were also not significantly different between Periods I and II in group A patients, as measured using both pharyngeal (0.03% ± 0.10% vs 0.23% ± 0.85%, P = 0.21; and 0.07 ± 0.23 episodes/h vs 0.29 ± 0.98 episodes/h, P = 0.22, respectively) and esophageal probes (0.96% ± 1.89% vs 1.11% ± 2.57%, P = 0.55; and 0.74 ± 1.51 episodes/h vs 0.81 ± 1.76 episodes/h, P = 0.55, respectively). CONCLUSION: EGD with conscious sedation does not interfere with the results of subsequent 24-h pH monitoring in patients with extra-esophageal symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease.
KW - Conscious sedation
KW - Esophagogastroduodenoscopy
KW - Extraesophageal symptoms
KW - Gastroesophageal refux disease
KW - pH monitoring
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84875396063&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84875396063&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3748/wjg.v19.i11.1805
DO - 10.3748/wjg.v19.i11.1805
M3 - Article
C2 - 23555169
AN - SCOPUS:84875396063
SN - 1007-9327
VL - 19
SP - 1805
EP - 1810
JO - World Journal of Gastroenterology
JF - World Journal of Gastroenterology
IS - 11
ER -