Pandolfino J E, Zhang Q, Schreiner M A, Ghosh S, Roth M P, Kahrilas P J
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Suite 1400, Chicago, Illinois 60611, USA.
Gut. 2005 Dec;54(12):1687-92. doi: 10.1136/gut.2005.064691. Epub 2005 May 28.
This study analysed the relative accuracy of the Bravo wireless and the Slimline catheter-Mark III Digitrapper pH systems in the detection of acid reflux events.
Twenty five asymptomatic subjects were studied. A Bravo capsule was placed 6 cm above the squamocolumnar junction (SCJ), marked by an endoclip, and a Slimline pH catheter was placed 5 cm above the manometrically localised lower oesophageal sphincter. The distance between the SCJ and each pH electrode was measured fluoroscopically. An in vivo pH reference was established using swallows of orange juice (pH 3.88). Concurrent pH data from the two systems were analysed in Excel spreadsheets.
Significantly more acid reflux events were reported by the Digitrapper system than the Bravo system (117.0 v 41.8). This was not explained by electrode position as there was no difference in median distance between the SCJ and either pH electrode (7.25 cm v 7.08 cm). The dominant source of discrepancy between systems was inaccuracy in electrode calibration and, after adjustment using the in vivo orange juice pH measurement, the discrepancy improved by 40%. However, discrepancy still existed and was most pronounced with short reflux events (1-15 s for the catheter, 1-17 s for the Bravo) associated with minimal intraoesophageal acidity and poor concordance between systems.
Substantially more reflux events were reported by the Digitrapper system compared with the Bravo system; 40% of excess events were attributable to a flawed software scheme for electrode thermal calibration while most of the remainder were brief events with poor reproducibility between systems.
本研究分析了Bravo无线pH监测系统和Slimline导管式Mark III Digitrapper pH监测系统在检测酸反流事件方面的相对准确性。
对25名无症状受试者进行研究。在距鳞柱状上皮交界处(SCJ)上方6 cm处放置一枚Bravo胶囊,用一个内镜夹标记,在经测压定位的食管下括约肌上方5 cm处放置一根Slimline pH导管。通过荧光透视测量SCJ与每个pH电极之间的距离。使用橙汁(pH 3.88)吞咽建立体内pH参考值。在Excel电子表格中分析来自两个系统的同步pH数据。
Digitrapper系统报告的酸反流事件明显多于Bravo系统(117.0对41.8)。这不能用电极位置来解释,因为SCJ与任一pH电极之间的中位距离没有差异(7.25 cm对7.08 cm)。系统之间差异的主要来源是电极校准不准确,在使用体内橙汁pH测量进行调整后,差异改善了40%。然而,差异仍然存在,在与食管内酸度最小且系统之间一致性差相关的短反流事件(导管为1 - 15秒,Bravo为1 - 17秒)中最为明显。
与Bravo系统相比,Digitrapper系统报告的反流事件明显更多;40%的额外事件归因于电极热校准的软件方案存在缺陷,而其余大部分是系统之间再现性差的短暂事件。