Wenner Jörgen, Johnsson Folke, Johansson Jan, Oberg Stefan
Department of Surgery, Lund University Hospital, SE-221 85 Lund, Sweden.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Feb;102(2):239-45. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00939.x. Epub 2006 Nov 13.
Esophageal pH monitoring using a wireless pH capsule has been suggested to generate less adverse symptoms resulting in improved patient acceptance compared with the catheter-based method although evidence to support this assumption is lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the subjective experience of patients undergoing both techniques for esophageal pH monitoring.
Using a randomized study design, patients referred for esophageal pH testing underwent both wireless and traditional catheter-based 24-h pH recording with a 7-day interval. The wireless pH capsule was placed during endoscopy and followed by 48-h pH recording. All patients answered a questionnaire, including a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS), which described the perceived severity of symptoms and the degree of interference with normal daily activities during the pH tests.
Thirty-one patients, 16 women and 15 men, were included in the analysis. The severity of all adverse symptoms associated with the wireless technique was significantly lower compared with the catheter-based technique (median VAS 2.1 vs 5.1, P < 0.001). Wireless pH recording was associated with less interference with off-work activities and normal daily life, median VAS 0.6 and 0.7 compared with 5.0 and 5.7, respectively, for the catheter-based technique (P < 0.0001). Patients actively working during both tests reported less interference with normal work during the capsule-based test than during the catheter-based pH test (median VAS 0.3 vs 6.8, P= 0.005). Twenty-seven patients (87%) stated that, if they had to undergo esophageal pH monitoring again, they preferred the wireless test over the catheter-based pH test (P < 0.0001).
This randomized study showed that a significant majority of patients undergoing esophageal pH monitoring preferred the wireless pH capsule over the traditional catheter-based technique because of less adverse symptoms and less interference with normal daily life.
尽管缺乏支持这一假设的证据,但有人提出,与基于导管的方法相比,使用无线pH胶囊进行食管pH监测产生的不良症状更少,从而提高了患者的接受度。本研究的目的是评估和比较接受这两种食管pH监测技术的患者的主观体验。
采用随机研究设计,接受食管pH检测的患者分别接受无线和传统的基于导管的24小时pH记录,间隔7天。在内镜检查期间放置无线pH胶囊,随后进行48小时pH记录。所有患者都回答了一份问卷,包括一个10厘米的视觉模拟量表(VAS),该量表描述了pH测试期间症状的感知严重程度以及对正常日常活动的干扰程度。
分析纳入了31例患者,其中16例女性和15例男性。与基于导管的技术相比,与无线技术相关的所有不良症状的严重程度均显著降低(VAS中位数2.1对5.1,P<0.001)。无线pH记录对非工作活动和正常日常生活的干扰较小,VAS中位数分别为0.6和0.7,而基于导管的技术分别为5.0和5.7(P<0.0001)。在两项测试期间均积极工作的患者报告,基于胶囊的测试期间对正常工作的干扰比基于导管的pH测试期间小(VAS中位数0.3对6.8,P=0.005)。27例患者(87%)表示,如果他们必须再次接受食管pH监测,他们更喜欢无线测试而不是基于导管的pH测试(P<0.0001)。
这项随机研究表明,接受食管pH监测的绝大多数患者更喜欢无线pH胶囊而不是传统的基于导管的技术,因为不良症状更少,对正常日常生活的干扰更小。