I NTRODUÇÃO: A refratariedade aos inibidores da bomba de prótons (IBP) tem sido o grande desafio dos gastroenterologistas. Este trabalho visa caracterizar os pacientes que persistem com sintomas típicos de doença do refluxo gastroesofágico (DRGE), em uso de inibidores de bomba de prótons em doses de, pelo menos 40mg/dia, quanto aos aspectos demográficos, clínicos e laboratoriais, determinando-se a freqüência da persistência de refluxo ácido pela pH-metria esofágica de 24h. Secundariamente procurouse determinar a freqüência da esofagite eosinofílica nessa população. MÉTODO: Foram entrevistados 110 pacientes que apresentavam persistência de sintomas de pirose e/ou regurgitação em uso de pelo menos 40 mg de IBP por pelo menos 6 semanas. Os mesmos foram submetidos à endoscopia digestiva alta (EDA) com biópsia esofágica, manometria, pHmetria esofágica de duplo canal e exames laboratoriais. RESULTADOS: Dos pacientes avaliados, 77,3% eram do sexo feminino, com média de 46 anos e predomínio de baixa escolaridade. Apenas 10,9% eram tabagistas, 55% apresentavam índice de massa corpórea (IMC) acima de 25Kg/m2, sendo o IMC médio de 27Kg/m2. Entre as comorbidades, as mais freqüentes foram: alergias (72,7%); hipertensão arterial (34,5%), asma (18,2%), depressão (29,1%) e fibromialgia (8,2%), sendo estas duas últimas maiores que a encontrada na população geral. Observou-se freqüência elevada de sintomas dispépticos (70% dos pacientes relataram epigastralgia e 70% plenitude pós-prandial), disfagia (60,9%); globus (37,3%), tosse (37,3%) e dor torácia não cardíaca (30,9%). Apenas 16,4% evidenciavam à endoscopia, lesão em corpo esofágico e 23,6% hérnia de hiato. A maioria dos pacientes (61,8%) apresentava alguma alteração à manometria esofágica. Encontrou-se, entre os pacientes estudados, 24,6% com pHmetria positiva (8,1% no canal distal e 16,45% no proximal) e 75,4% com pH-metria normal. Comparando-se os resultados desses dois grupos de pacientes (pH-metria positiva e normal), segundo as variáveis estudadas, apenas a presença de lesão no corpo esofágico à endoscopia e a elevada escolaridade evidenciaram associação com persistência de pH-metria positiva (p: 0,0061 OR: 4,11 IC: 1,43:11,84 e p: 0,0237 OR: 2,74 IC: 1,13: 6,67 respectivamente). Ao se comparar presença de sintomas atípicos com a presença de refluxo ácido (no esôfago proximal versus distal), apenas globus apresentou associação com pH-metria positiva no canal proximal. Foi diagnosticado um único caso de esofagite eosinofílica entre os pacientes com sintomas típicos de DRGE refratários ao IBP. CONCLUSÃO: DRGE refratária predomina em mulheres de meia idade, associada à alta freqüência de história de alergia, depressão, fibromialgia e sintomas dispépticos. Segundo os resultados da pH-metria, a presença de esofagite erosiva em uso do IBP ou elevada escolaridade foram os únicos fatores de risco para a persistência de refluxo ácido nos dois canais, e globus no canal proximal. Não se observou diferença entre os pacientes com pH-metria positiva ou normal quanto às demais variáveis, até mesmo sintomas dispépticos. É baixa a freqüência de esofagite eosinofílica entre pacientes com pirose e/ou regurgitação refratários ao inibidor da bomba de próton / BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) refractory patients have been a big challenge to gastroenterologists. The aim of this study was to characterize the patients that had gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) persistent typical symptoms, undergoing PPI medication, administered at a dose of at least 40 mg/day, according to demographic, clinical and laboratory aspects. The primary outcome was to determine the frequency of acid reflux persistence based on the 24-hour esophageal pH-metry result. The secondary outcome was to determine, the frequency of eosinophilic esophagitis in the same population. METHODS: We interviewed 110 patients that presented persistence of heartburn and/or regurgitation symptoms and were undergoing treatment with PPI at a minimum dose of 40 mg/day for at least six weeks. They underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with esophageal mucosa biopsy, esophageal manometry and double probe 24- hour esophageal pH-metry, as well as laboratory tests. RESULTS: 77.3% of the evaluated patients were female, with mean age of 46 years old, and most of them with low educational level. Only 10.9% were tobacco smokers and 55% had body mass index (BMI) greater than 25Kg/m2, showing mean BMI of 27Kg/m2. The most frequent comorbidities were allergy (72.7%), arterial systemic hypertension (34.5%), asthma (18.2%), depression (29.1%) and fibromyalgia (8.2%). Comparing the general population and the group of patients, a higher frequency of depression and fibromyalgia was observed. Some symptoms were found in high frequency: dyspeptic symptoms (70% associated with epigastric pain and 70% with postprandial fullness), dysphagia (60.9%), globus and cough (37.3% each) and no-cardiac chest pain (30.9%). By endoscopy, only 16.4% showed esophageal body lesion and 23.6% hiatal hernia. Most patients (61.8%) presented some alteration in esophageal manometry. Among studied patients, 24.6% had abnormal pHmetry (8.1% in distal probe and 16.45% in the upper probe) and 75.4%, a normal result. When comparing normal to abnormal pH-metry patients according to studied variables only the presence of esophageal body lesion, observed by endoscopy, and high educational level were associated to the persistence of abnormal pH-metry (p: 0.0061; OR: 4.11; IC: 1.43:11.84; and p: 0.0237; OR: 2.74; IC: 1.13: 6.67; respectively). When comparing atypical symptoms with the presence of acid reflux (proximal versus distal esophagus) only globus was associated with abnormal upper probe pHmetry. Only one patient was diagnosed with eosinophilic esophagitis among the total sample with typical gastroesophageal reflux symptoms refractory to PPI treatment. CONCLUSION: Refractory GERD was predominant in middleaged females, associated with high frequency of previous allergy, depression, fibromyalgia and dyspeptics symptoms. The risk factors to the persistence of acid reflux in the two pH-metry probes and to the symptom of globus in the upper pH-metry probe were the persistence of erosive esophagitis in patients undergoing treatment with PPI an a higher educational level. No differences between abnormal or normal pH-metry results patients were found regarding the other variables, such as dyspeptic symptoms. The frequency of eosinophilic esophagitis was low in heartburn and/or regurgitation in PPI refractory patients

No description available.

Gastrointestinal symptoms have a prevalence of 20-40% in the general adult population in the Western world. These symptoms are generally considered to be poor predictors of organic findings [e.g. peptic ulcer disease (PUD) or malignancy]. Approximately 50% of patients seeking care for such symptoms have no organic explanation for these upon investigation. When other organic or other functional conditions are excluded [e.g. PUD, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)] the remaining patients are labelled as having functional dyspepsia (persistent or recurrent pain and/or discomfort centred in the upper abdomen). Management of functional dyspepsia remains a challenge, reflecting the heterogeneity of the patients and the uncertain role of drug treatment. Also, prognostic factors for treatment success are largely unknown. I have therefore performed a series of studies to shed light on these issues: The first study (Paper I) was performed in a randomly selected adult population (n=1,001) assessing upper and lower gastrointestinal symptoms at two occasions with 1 to 6 month intervals. The results show that gastrointestinal symptoms are common (57%) and fluctuate to some extent in the shorter term. Troublesome dyspeptic symptoms remain in two out of three individuals. This proportion was similar whether or not organic findings were present. In the second study (Paper II) 799 patients with dyspeptic symptoms were evaluated with regard to whether gastrointestinal symptoms, identified by self-administered questionnaires, correlate with endoscopic diagnoses and discriminate organic from non-organic (functional) dyspepsia. The impact of dyspeptic symptoms on health-related well-being was also evaluated. Approximately 50% of these dyspeptic patients were found to have functional dyspepsia at upper endoscopy. A difference was discovered in the symptom profile between patients with organic and functional dyspepsia. Predicting factors for functional dyspepsia were found. This study shows that use of self-administered symptom questionnaires may aid in clinical decision making for patient management, e.g. by reducing the number of endoscopies, although probabilities of risks for organic dyspepsia are difficult to transfer to management of the individual patient. The results also indicate that the health-related well-being in patients with functional and organic dyspepsia is impaired to the same extent, illustrating the need for effective treatment of patients with functional dyspepsia, a group not well served by currently available treatment modalities. The aim of the third study (Paper III) was to develop and evaluate a selfadministered questionnaire focusing on upper abdominal and reflux complaints to allow for identification of patients with heartburn and factors that might predict symptom relief with omeprazole both in GERD and functional dyspepsia patients. The diagnostic validity of the questionnaire was tested against endoscopy and 24-hour pH monitoring. The questionnaire had a sensitivity of 92%, but a low specificity of 19%. Symptom relief by omeprazole was best predicted by the presence of predominant heartburn described as ‘a burning feeling rising from the stomach or lower chest up towards the neck’ and ‘relief from antacids’. These results indicate that this questionnaire which used descriptive language, appeared to be useful in identifying heartburn and predicting responses to omeprazole in patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms. The fourth study (Paper IV) was a pilot study investigating the symptom response to omeprazole 20 mg twice daily or placebo for a duration of 14 days in 197 patients with functional dyspepsia. We concluded that a subset of patients with functional dyspepsia, with or without heartburn, would respond to therapy with omeprazole. In the final study (Paper V) the aim was to identify prognostic factors for the treatment success to a 4-week course of omeprazole 10 or 20 mg once daily in 826 patients with functional dyspepsia. The most highly discriminating predictor of treatment success was the number of days without dyspeptic symptoms during the first week of treatment. Fewer days with symptoms during the first week indicated higher response rates at four weeks. In addition, positive predictors of treatment response to omeprazole were identified as age >40 years, bothersome heartburn, low scores of bloating and diarrhoea, history of symptoms for <3 months and low impairment of vitality at baseline. The results indicate that early response during the first week to treatment with a proton pump inhibitor seems to predict treatment success after four weeks in patients with functional dyspepsia. Conclusion: These studies have shown that a large proportion of adult individuals in society, both those who seek and those who do not seek medical care, suffer from symptoms located in the upper part of the abdomen regardless of whether an organic cause is present. A subset of patients without organic findings and other functional conditions, i.e. functional dyspepsia, respond to therapy with omeprazole irrespective of the presence or absence of heartburn . An excellent way to predict the response to a full course of omeprazole in functional dyspepsia is to assess the early response (first week) to treatment. These findings allow for better and faster targeting of acid inhibitory therapy in functional dyspepsia, which potentially can result in more effective clinical management of these patients and savings of health care resources.

Μελέτη της αναπνευστικής λειτουργίας με εργοσπιρομετρία σε ασθενείς με γαστροοισοφαγική παλινδρομική νόσο. Εισαγωγή: Η Γαστροοισοφαγική Παλινδρομική Νόσος (ΓΟΠΝ) έχει συσχετισθεί με πλειάδα πνευμονικών εκδηλώσεων αλλά είναι ασαφές εάν η γαστροοισοφαγική παλινδρόμηση προκαλεί οποιαδήποτε δυσλειτουργία στην πνευμονική λειτουργία. Η εργοσπιρομετρία είναι μια εξειδικευμένη μέθοδος η οποία χρησιμοποιείται για να διερευνήσει την αναπνευστική λειτουργία κατά την άσκηση. Σκοπός: Σκοπός της μελέτης ήταν να αποκαλυφθεί οποιαδήποτε ανωμαλία της πνευμονικής λειτουργίας σε ασθενείς με ΓΟΠΝ και αναπνευστικά συμπτώματα. Μέθοδος: Μελετήσαμε 34 ασθενείς με ΓΟΠΝ (ηλικίας 21-63, 24 άνδρες/10 γυναίκες) και εξωοισοφαγικά αναπνευστικά συμπτώματα (συριγμός ή/και βήχας) πριν και μετά από 12 εβδομάδες θεραπεία με διπλή δόση ομεπραζόλης. Κανείς ασθενής δεν παρουσίασε παθολογική σπιρομέτρηση. Εργομετρία διενεργήθηκε σε όλους του ασθενείς πριν την θεραπεία και μετά την θεραπεία. Γαστροσκόπηση διενεργήθηκε σε όλους τους ασθενείς πριν την θεραπεία και σε αυτούς με οισοφαγίτιδα επανελήφθη μετά την θεραπεία. Καταγραφήκαν οι ακόλουθες εργομετρικές παράμετροι: VO2rest, VO2max, VCO2rest, VCO2max, O2–puls rest, O2–puls max, HR (heart rate) rest, HRmax, PETCO2rest, PETCO2max, VE/VCO2 SLOPE πριν και μετά την θεραπεία. Αποτελέσματα: Είκοσι τέσσερις ασθενείς (70.6%) είχαν οισοφαγίτιδα (βαθμού Α-D), 16 ασθενείς είχαν διαφραγματοκήλη (47.1%), και σε 13 ασθενείς (38.23 %) ανιχνεύθηκε Helicobacter pylori.Οι εργομετρικές παράμετροι ήταν εντός φυσιολογικών ορίων σε όλους τους ασθενείς, κανείς ασθενής δεν παρουσίασε οποιαδήποτε ανωμαλία κατά την άσκηση. Είκοσι οκτώ ασθενείς επανελέγχθηκαν. Καμία βελτίωση σε οποιαδήποτε εργομετρική παράμετρο μετά την θεραπεία δεν παρατηρήθηκε παρά την ύφεση των οισοφαγικών και των εξωοισοφαγικών συμπτωμάτων σε όλους τους ασθενείς. Καμία στατιστικώς σημαντική διαφορά δεν παρατηρήθηκε πριν και μετά την θεραπεία μεταξύ ασθενών μεγαλύτερων των 40 ετών και νεότερων των 40 ετών, καπνιστών και μη καπνιστών, Hp(+) και Hp(-) ασθενών, όπως επίσης και μεταξύ ασθενών με και χωρίς οισοφαγίτιδα, και μεταξύ ασθενών με και χωρίς διαφραγματοκήλη. Συμπεράσματα: Ασθενείς με ΓΟΠΝ, αναπνευστικές εκδηλώσεις και φυσιολογική σπιρομέτρηση, δεν παρουσιάζουν διαταραχές κατά την εργομετρία (δοκιμασία άσκησης). Επίσης δεν παρατηρείται καμιά κλινικά αξιόλογη μεταβολή στις εργομετρικές τιμές μετά την θεραπεία ούτε διαφορά στις εργομετρικές τιμές σύμφωνα με την ηλικία, το κάπνισμα, την παρουσία H.pylori, οισοφαγίτιδας ή διαφραγματοκήλης. / Evaluation of respiratory function with cardiopulmonary exercise test in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Introduction: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been associated with a variety of pulmonary manifestations but it is unclear if gastroesophageal reflux causes any abnormality in pulmonary function. Cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) is a specialized method which is used to evaluate respiratory function during exercise. Aim: The aim of this study was to reveal any abnormality of pulmonary function in patients with GERD and respiratory symptoms. Method: We evaluated 34 patients with GERD (age 21-63, 24 men) and extraesophageal respiratory symptoms (wheezing and/or cough) before therapy and after twelve weeks treatment with double dose omeprazole. No patient presented abnormal spirometry. CPET was performed in all patients at baseline and after completion of 12 week treatment. The following CPET parameters: VO2rest, VO2max, VCO2rest, VCO2max, O2–pulse rest, O2–pulse max, HR (heart rate) rest, HRmax, PETCO2rest, PETCO2max, VE/VCO2 slope were recorded pre-treatment and post-treatment. Results: Twenty four patients (70.6%) had esophagitis (grade I-IV), 16 patients had hiatal hernia (47.1%) and in 13 patients (38,2%) Helicobacter pylori was positive. All patients completed the CPET. No one presented shortness of breath or respiratory symptoms. CPET parameters were within normal limits in all patients. Twenty eight patients were reevaluated. No improvement in any CPET parameter post treatment was observed despite remission of esophageal and extraesophageal symptoms in all patients. No statistically significant difference was observed pre and post-treatment, between older and younger than 40 year old patients, smokers and non smokers, Hp(+) and Hp(-) patients and those with and without hiatal hernia and esophagitis. Conclusions: Patients with GERD and respiratory manifestations and normal spirometry present no pulmonary dysfunction during CPET. Also no alterations in CPET values post-treatment neither differences in CPET values according to age, smoking, Hp status, presence of oesophagitis or hiatal hernia were observed.

Introdução: A fisiopatologia da Doença do Refluxo Gastroesofágico (DRGE) é multifatorial, sendo a motilidade esofágica um dos fatores implicados na sua gênese. Todavia, ainda não há consenso sobre a existência de associação entre dismotilidade e Hérnia Hiatal (HH) em pacientes com DRGE. Esse estudo tem como objetivo estabelecer a prevalência de Dismotilidade Esofágica (DE) em pacientes com HH e avaliar se a herniação é fator relacionado à DE. Métodos: Foram estudados 356 pacientes com diagnóstico clínico de DRGE submetidos à Endoscopia Digestiva Alta e Manometria Esofágica. Hérnia Hiatal foi definida endoscopicamente por uma distância igual ou maior que 2 cm entre o pinçamento diafragmático e a junção escamo-colunar e Dismotilidade Esofágica quando a ME identificou amplitude das ondas peristálticas no esôfago distal < 30 mmHg e/ou menos de 80% de contrações efetivas. Foi feita a divisão dos pacientes para a análise estatística em 2 grupos, com e sem HH. Resultados: Pacientes com DRGE portadores de HH tiveram prevalência de DE igual a 14,8% e os sem HH, prevalência de 7,7% (p = 0,041). O grupo de pacientes com HH apresentou também maior frequência de esofagite erosiva (47,5% contra 24,2%, p <0,001), menor valor de pressão no EEI (10,4 versus 13,10; p < 0,001) e maior frequência de indivíduos com valores de pH-metria anormais (p < 0,001). A razão bruta de prevalências de DE, segundo a presença de HH, foi 1,92 (IC: 1,04 - 3,53; p = 0,037), porém essa associação não persistiu quando controlada por idade, esofagite, pH-metria alterada e EEI alterado (RP ajustada: 1,69; IC: 0,68 – 4,15; p = 0,257). Conclusão: Apesar da prevalência de DE no grupo HH ter sido maior do que no grupo sem HH, a associação entre HH e DE em indivíduos com DRGE desaparece ao se controlar por co-variáveis relevantes, levando a crer que neste tipo de paciente, HH não é fator de risco independente destas variáveis. / Introduction: The pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease is multifactorial, where esophageal motility is one of the factors implicated in its genesis. However, there is still no consensus on the existence of an association between esophageal dysmotility and hiatal hernia in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. The objective of this study was to establish the prevalence of esophageal dysmotility in patients with hiatal herina and to determine if herniation is a factor related to esophageal dysmotility. Methods: The study included 356 patients with a clinical diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease submitted to upper digestive endoscopy and esophageal functional dagnostics. Hiatal Hernia was defined endoscopically by a distance equal to or greater than 2 cm between the diaphragmatic constriction and the squamo-columnar junction and esophageal dysmoyility when the esophageal manometry identified the amplitude of the peristaltic waves in the distal esophagus are < 30 mmHg and/or less than 80% of effective contractions. For statistical analysis, the patients were divided into 2 grups: with and without HH. Results: Gastroesophageal reflux disease patients with hiatal hernia had a prevalence of esophageal dysmotility equal to 14.8% and those without hiatal hernia, a prevalence of 7.7% (p = 0.041). The group of patients with hiatal hernia also showed a greater frequency of erosive esophagitis (47.5% versus 24.2%, p <0.001), lower low esophageal sphincter pressure (10.4 versus 13.10; p < 0.001) and greater frequency of individuals with abnormal pH-metry values (p < 0.001). The crude prevalence ratios for esophageal dysmotility, according to the presence of hiatal hernia, was 1.92 (CI: 1.04 - 3.53; p = 0.037), but this association did not persist when controlled for age, esophagitis, altered pH-metry and altered low esophageal sphincter (adjusted PR: 1.69; CI: 0.68 – 4.15; p = 0.257). Conclusion: Despite the prevalence of esophageal dysmotility in the hiatal hernia group being higher than that in the group without hiatal hernia, the association between hiatal hernia and esophageal dysmotility in individuals with gastroesophageal reflux disease disappeared on controlling for relevant co-variables, leading us to believe that in this type of patient, hiatal hernia is not a risk factor independent of these variables.

Objetivos: Avaliar a associação entre a dismotilidade esofágica, caracterizada como Motilidade Esofágica Ineficaz (MEI), com a presença de refluxo ácido patológico avaliado pela pH-metria de 24 horas, controlando por Esfíncter Esofágico Inferior (EEI) estruturalmente defeituoso, Hérnia Hiatal (HH) e Esofagite, em pacientes em investigação de Doença do Refluxo Gastroesofágico. Métodos: Foram estudados 311 pacientes referenciados para investigação de DRGE em laboratório de motilidade esofágica. Os pacientes foram submetidos à Endoscopia Digestiva Alta (EDA), Manometria Esofágica, pHmetria Esofágica de 24 horas e a uma entrevista sobre os sintomas clínicos apresentados. Foram comparados os grupos de pH-metria negativa com o de pH-metria positiva quanto à presença dos fatores de risco – MEI, EEI defeituoso, HH e Esofagite. A associação entre MEI e pH-metria positiva foi primeiramente avaliada através de análise univariada e, posteriormente, através de análise de regressão logística (multivariada). Resultados: Do total de 311 pacientes estudados, 208 preencheram os critérios de inclusão. A idade média foi 47 anos, com 88 pacientes apresentando pH-metria normal e 120 pH-metria positiva. Após a análise univariada, foi observado que a ocorrência de MEI, EEI defeituoso e HH foi significativamente maior no grupo de pH-metria positiva. Após análise de regressão logística, a ocorrência de MEI e EEI defeituoso permaneceram significativamente maior no grupo de pH-metria positiva. Conclusões: MEI está associada à presença de refluxo ácido anormal, avaliado através de pH-metria esofágica de 24 horas, independentemente da presença de EEI defeituoso, HH ou Esofagite. / Objectives: To assess the association between esophageal dysmotility, characterized as inefficient esophageal motility (IEM), and the presence of pathological acid reflux due to a structurally defective lower esophageal sphincter (LES), hiatus hernia (HH), or esophagitis in patients suspected of having gastroesophageal Reflux reflux disease (GERD). Methods: Three hundred and eleven patients referred for GERD diagnostic procedures in a gastroesopahgeal motility laboratory were included in the study. Patients underwent upper endoscopy (UE), esophageal manometry, 24-hour esophageal pH-metry and an interview regarding their clinical symptoms. The following risk factors of patients in the negative pH-metry group were compared to those in the positive pH-metry group: IEM, defective LES, HH, and esophagitis. The association between IEM and positive pH-metry results was first assessed by means of univariate analysis and later determined with logistic regression analysis (multivariate). Results: Of the total 311 patients studied, 208 met the inclusion criteria (mean age 47 years); 88 had normal pH-metry reslults and 120 had positive pH-metry results. Univariate analysis revealed that the occurrence of IEM, defective LES, and HH was significantly greater in the positive pH-metry group. Following logistic regression analysis, the occurrence of IEM remained significantly greater in the positive pH-metry group. Conclusions: IEM is associated with the presence of abnormal acid reflux, as assessed by 24-hour esophageal pH-metry, regardless of the presence of defective LES, HH, or esophagitis.

Objetivos: Avaliar a associação entre a dismotilidade esofágica, caracterizada como Motilidade Esofágica Ineficaz (MEI), com a presença de refluxo ácido patológico avaliado pela pH-metria de 24 horas, controlando por Esfíncter Esofágico Inferior (EEI) estruturalmente defeituoso, Hérnia Hiatal (HH) e Esofagite, em pacientes em investigação de Doença do Refluxo Gastroesofágico. Métodos: Foram estudados 311 pacientes referenciados para investigação de DRGE em laboratório de motilidade esofágica. Os pacientes foram submetidos à Endoscopia Digestiva Alta (EDA), Manometria Esofágica, pHmetria Esofágica de 24 horas e a uma entrevista sobre os sintomas clínicos apresentados. Foram comparados os grupos de pH-metria negativa com o de pH-metria positiva quanto à presença dos fatores de risco – MEI, EEI defeituoso, HH e Esofagite. A associação entre MEI e pH-metria positiva foi primeiramente avaliada através de análise univariada e, posteriormente, através de análise de regressão logística (multivariada). Resultados: Do total de 311 pacientes estudados, 208 preencheram os critérios de inclusão. A idade média foi 47 anos, com 88 pacientes apresentando pH-metria normal e 120 pH-metria positiva. Após a análise univariada, foi observado que a ocorrência de MEI, EEI defeituoso e HH foi significativamente maior no grupo de pH-metria positiva. Após análise de regressão logística, a ocorrência de MEI e EEI defeituoso permaneceram significativamente maior no grupo de pH-metria positiva. Conclusões: MEI está associada à presença de refluxo ácido anormal, avaliado através de pH-metria esofágica de 24 horas, independentemente da presença de EEI defeituoso, HH ou Esofagite. / Objectives: To assess the association between esophageal dysmotility, characterized as inefficient esophageal motility (IEM), and the presence of pathological acid reflux due to a structurally defective lower esophageal sphincter (LES), hiatus hernia (HH), or esophagitis in patients suspected of having gastroesophageal Reflux reflux disease (GERD). Methods: Three hundred and eleven patients referred for GERD diagnostic procedures in a gastroesopahgeal motility laboratory were included in the study. Patients underwent upper endoscopy (UE), esophageal manometry, 24-hour esophageal pH-metry and an interview regarding their clinical symptoms. The following risk factors of patients in the negative pH-metry group were compared to those in the positive pH-metry group: IEM, defective LES, HH, and esophagitis. The association between IEM and positive pH-metry results was first assessed by means of univariate analysis and later determined with logistic regression analysis (multivariate). Results: Of the total 311 patients studied, 208 met the inclusion criteria (mean age 47 years); 88 had normal pH-metry reslults and 120 had positive pH-metry results. Univariate analysis revealed that the occurrence of IEM, defective LES, and HH was significantly greater in the positive pH-metry group. Following logistic regression analysis, the occurrence of IEM remained significantly greater in the positive pH-metry group. Conclusions: IEM is associated with the presence of abnormal acid reflux, as assessed by 24-hour esophageal pH-metry, regardless of the presence of defective LES, HH, or esophagitis.

Introdução: A fisiopatologia da Doença do Refluxo Gastroesofágico (DRGE) é multifatorial, sendo a motilidade esofágica um dos fatores implicados na sua gênese. Todavia, ainda não há consenso sobre a existência de associação entre dismotilidade e Hérnia Hiatal (HH) em pacientes com DRGE. Esse estudo tem como objetivo estabelecer a prevalência de Dismotilidade Esofágica (DE) em pacientes com HH e avaliar se a herniação é fator relacionado à DE. Métodos: Foram estudados 356 pacientes com diagnóstico clínico de DRGE submetidos à Endoscopia Digestiva Alta e Manometria Esofágica. Hérnia Hiatal foi definida endoscopicamente por uma distância igual ou maior que 2 cm entre o pinçamento diafragmático e a junção escamo-colunar e Dismotilidade Esofágica quando a ME identificou amplitude das ondas peristálticas no esôfago distal < 30 mmHg e/ou menos de 80% de contrações efetivas. Foi feita a divisão dos pacientes para a análise estatística em 2 grupos, com e sem HH. Resultados: Pacientes com DRGE portadores de HH tiveram prevalência de DE igual a 14,8% e os sem HH, prevalência de 7,7% (p = 0,041). O grupo de pacientes com HH apresentou também maior frequência de esofagite erosiva (47,5% contra 24,2%, p <0,001), menor valor de pressão no EEI (10,4 versus 13,10; p < 0,001) e maior frequência de indivíduos com valores de pH-metria anormais (p < 0,001). A razão bruta de prevalências de DE, segundo a presença de HH, foi 1,92 (IC: 1,04 - 3,53; p = 0,037), porém essa associação não persistiu quando controlada por idade, esofagite, pH-metria alterada e EEI alterado (RP ajustada: 1,69; IC: 0,68 – 4,15; p = 0,257). Conclusão: Apesar da prevalência de DE no grupo HH ter sido maior do que no grupo sem HH, a associação entre HH e DE em indivíduos com DRGE desaparece ao se controlar por co-variáveis relevantes, levando a crer que neste tipo de paciente, HH não é fator de risco independente destas variáveis. / Introduction: The pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease is multifactorial, where esophageal motility is one of the factors implicated in its genesis. However, there is still no consensus on the existence of an association between esophageal dysmotility and hiatal hernia in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. The objective of this study was to establish the prevalence of esophageal dysmotility in patients with hiatal herina and to determine if herniation is a factor related to esophageal dysmotility. Methods: The study included 356 patients with a clinical diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease submitted to upper digestive endoscopy and esophageal functional dagnostics. Hiatal Hernia was defined endoscopically by a distance equal to or greater than 2 cm between the diaphragmatic constriction and the squamo-columnar junction and esophageal dysmoyility when the esophageal manometry identified the amplitude of the peristaltic waves in the distal esophagus are < 30 mmHg and/or less than 80% of effective contractions. For statistical analysis, the patients were divided into 2 grups: with and without HH. Results: Gastroesophageal reflux disease patients with hiatal hernia had a prevalence of esophageal dysmotility equal to 14.8% and those without hiatal hernia, a prevalence of 7.7% (p = 0.041). The group of patients with hiatal hernia also showed a greater frequency of erosive esophagitis (47.5% versus 24.2%, p <0.001), lower low esophageal sphincter pressure (10.4 versus 13.10; p < 0.001) and greater frequency of individuals with abnormal pH-metry values (p < 0.001). The crude prevalence ratios for esophageal dysmotility, according to the presence of hiatal hernia, was 1.92 (CI: 1.04 - 3.53; p = 0.037), but this association did not persist when controlled for age, esophagitis, altered pH-metry and altered low esophageal sphincter (adjusted PR: 1.69; CI: 0.68 – 4.15; p = 0.257). Conclusion: Despite the prevalence of esophageal dysmotility in the hiatal hernia group being higher than that in the group without hiatal hernia, the association between hiatal hernia and esophageal dysmotility in individuals with gastroesophageal reflux disease disappeared on controlling for relevant co-variables, leading us to believe that in this type of patient, hiatal hernia is not a risk factor independent of these variables.

The Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) and the symptoms of the Pharyngeal Bolus can make the subject show complaints of impairments of swallowing. The goal of this study was to analyze the dynamics of swallowing in subjects that showed GERD and/or Pharyngeal Bolus through videofluoroscopy in young adults and old people. The reports of 34 subjects between 18 and 85 years old from both genders from the Radiology and Image Service of the Gastroenterological Institute of São Paulo were analyzed and categorized in groups: G1 - with GERD; G2 - with Pharyngeal Bolus; G3 - with Pharyngeal Bolus and GERD; and in sub-groups GA - elderly and GB - adults, with an average age of 74.9 and 43.8 years respectively, in order to study if the effects of ageing would represent an impact on the swallowing physiology. The analyses of the characteristics of the oral an pharyngeal phases of swallowing were carried out in percentages through the spreadsheets and based on the Ott et al. scales, (1996) to the oropharyngeal swallowing dysphagia, in slight, moderate and severe dysphagia -, and based on the Martin-Harris et al. scale, (2007) to the pharyngeal swallowing. The analysis of the pharyngeal phase was realized on the percentages of the most evident characteristics and also with the examination of the statistics of dependant variables. The chi-square test was used, with the level of significance p < 0,05 among the groups, so as to analyze a possible association among the variables. The results showed delay in the control and transportation of the food bolus and intraoral stasis with higher percentage on G3 and in tongue base on G2. There was a predominance of early pharyngeal swallowing in vallecula and piriform recesses in all groups. The laryngeal penetration occurred in all groups, but the incidence was higher in G1 and 1 subject breathed. The cleaning maneuvers were performed in all of them, with the most evident DS in higher levels to the pudding consistency. The harshness degree ranged from normal swallowing to slight dysphagia for all. The study of the relations among the characteristics of the pharyngeal phase presented significant results (p < 0,05) to the relation of the variables beginning of pharyngeal swallowing with laryngeal penetration and the beginning place of the pharyngeal swallowing with the harshness degree of the oropharyngeal dysphagia in young adults. / A Doença do Refluxo Gastroesofageano (DRGE) e o sintoma do Glóbus Faríngeo podem levar o sujeito a apresentar queixas de distúrbios da deglutição. O objetivo do estudo foi analisar a dinâmica da deglutição em sujeitos que apresentaram DRGE e / ou Glóbus Faríngeo por meio da videofluoroscopia em adultos jovens e idosos. Foram interpretados laudos de 34 sujeitos com idade entre 18 e 85 anos, de ambos os sexos, do Serviço de Radiologia e Imagem do Instituto Gastroenterológico de São Paulo, caracterizados como: G1 - Grupo com DRGE; G2 - Grupo com Glóbus Faríngeo; G3 - Grupo com Glóbus Faríngeo e DRGE; e criados os subgrupos GA adultos idosos e GB - adultos jovens com média de idade de 74,9 e 43,8 anos respectivamente, para estudar se os efeitos da idade apresentariam impacto na fisiologia da deglutição. As análises das características das fases oral e faríngea da deglutição foram realizadas em percentuais através de planilhas e baseadas nas escalas de Ott et al. (1996) para disfagias orofaríngeas em disfagia leve, moderada e grave e na escala de Martin-Harris et al. (2007) para a deglutição faríngea. A análise da fase faríngea foi realizada diante dos percentuais das características de maior evidência e analisada a estatística de variáveis dependentes. Foi utilizado o teste Qui - quadrado, com nível de significância p < 0,05 nos grupos, para avaliar possível associação entre as variáveis. Os resultados mostraram atraso no controle e transporte do bolo alimentar e estase intraoral com maior percentual no G3 e em base de língua para o G2. Houve predomínio de início de deglutição faríngea em valécula e recessos piriformes para todos os grupos. A penetração laríngea ocorreu em todos grupos, mas a maior incidência foi em G1. Nas manobras de limpeza a deglutição seca apresentou maior evidência em níveis mais elevados para a consistência pudim. O grau de severidade variou entre deglutição normal e disfagia leve para todos os grupos estudados. O estudo da relação entre as características da fase faríngea apresentou resultados significativos (p < 0,05) para a relação das variáveis início de deglutição faríngea com penetração laríngea e com grau de severidade das disfagias orofaríngeas para todos os grupos.

Introdução: A fisiopatologia da Doença do Refluxo Gastroesofágico (DRGE) é multifatorial, sendo a motilidade esofágica um dos fatores implicados na sua gênese. Todavia, ainda não há consenso sobre a existência de associação entre dismotilidade e Hérnia Hiatal (HH) em pacientes com DRGE. Esse estudo tem como objetivo estabelecer a prevalência de Dismotilidade Esofágica (DE) em pacientes com HH e avaliar se a herniação é fator relacionado à DE. Métodos: Foram estudados 356 pacientes com diagnóstico clínico de DRGE submetidos à Endoscopia Digestiva Alta e Manometria Esofágica. Hérnia Hiatal foi definida endoscopicamente por uma distância igual ou maior que 2 cm entre o pinçamento diafragmático e a junção escamo-colunar e Dismotilidade Esofágica quando a ME identificou amplitude das ondas peristálticas no esôfago distal < 30 mmHg e/ou menos de 80% de contrações efetivas. Foi feita a divisão dos pacientes para a análise estatística em 2 grupos, com e sem HH. Resultados: Pacientes com DRGE portadores de HH tiveram prevalência de DE igual a 14,8% e os sem HH, prevalência de 7,7% (p = 0,041). O grupo de pacientes com HH apresentou também maior frequência de esofagite erosiva (47,5% contra 24,2%, p <0,001), menor valor de pressão no EEI (10,4 versus 13,10; p < 0,001) e maior frequência de indivíduos com valores de pH-metria anormais (p < 0,001). A razão bruta de prevalências de DE, segundo a presença de HH, foi 1,92 (IC: 1,04 - 3,53; p = 0,037), porém essa associação não persistiu quando controlada por idade, esofagite, pH-metria alterada e EEI alterado (RP ajustada: 1,69; IC: 0,68 – 4,15; p = 0,257). Conclusão: Apesar da prevalência de DE no grupo HH ter sido maior do que no grupo sem HH, a associação entre HH e DE em indivíduos com DRGE desaparece ao se controlar por co-variáveis relevantes, levando a crer que neste tipo de paciente, HH não é fator de risco independente destas variáveis. / Introduction: The pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease is multifactorial, where esophageal motility is one of the factors implicated in its genesis. However, there is still no consensus on the existence of an association between esophageal dysmotility and hiatal hernia in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. The objective of this study was to establish the prevalence of esophageal dysmotility in patients with hiatal herina and to determine if herniation is a factor related to esophageal dysmotility. Methods: The study included 356 patients with a clinical diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease submitted to upper digestive endoscopy and esophageal functional dagnostics. Hiatal Hernia was defined endoscopically by a distance equal to or greater than 2 cm between the diaphragmatic constriction and the squamo-columnar junction and esophageal dysmoyility when the esophageal manometry identified the amplitude of the peristaltic waves in the distal esophagus are < 30 mmHg and/or less than 80% of effective contractions. For statistical analysis, the patients were divided into 2 grups: with and without HH. Results: Gastroesophageal reflux disease patients with hiatal hernia had a prevalence of esophageal dysmotility equal to 14.8% and those without hiatal hernia, a prevalence of 7.7% (p = 0.041). The group of patients with hiatal hernia also showed a greater frequency of erosive esophagitis (47.5% versus 24.2%, p <0.001), lower low esophageal sphincter pressure (10.4 versus 13.10; p < 0.001) and greater frequency of individuals with abnormal pH-metry values (p < 0.001). The crude prevalence ratios for esophageal dysmotility, according to the presence of hiatal hernia, was 1.92 (CI: 1.04 - 3.53; p = 0.037), but this association did not persist when controlled for age, esophagitis, altered pH-metry and altered low esophageal sphincter (adjusted PR: 1.69; CI: 0.68 – 4.15; p = 0.257). Conclusion: Despite the prevalence of esophageal dysmotility in the hiatal hernia group being higher than that in the group without hiatal hernia, the association between hiatal hernia and esophageal dysmotility in individuals with gastroesophageal reflux disease disappeared on controlling for relevant co-variables, leading us to believe that in this type of patient, hiatal hernia is not a risk factor independent of these variables.