Division of Gastroenterology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Gut. 2018 Jul;67(7):1351-1362. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314722. Epub 2018 Feb 3.
Clinical history, questionnaire data and response to antisecretory therapy are insufficient to make a conclusive diagnosis of GERD in isolation, but are of value in determining need for further investigation. Conclusive evidence for reflux on oesophageal testing include advanced grade erosive oesophagitis (LA grades C and D), long-segment Barrett's mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal oesophageal acid exposure time (AET) >6% on ambulatory pH or pH-impedance monitoring. A normal endoscopy does not exclude GERD, but provides supportive evidence refuting GERD in conjunction with distal AET <4% and <40 reflux episodes on pH-impedance monitoring off proton pump inhibitors. Reflux-symptom association on ambulatory reflux monitoring provides supportive evidence for reflux triggered symptoms, and may predict a better treatment outcome when present. When endoscopy and pH or pH-impedance monitoring are inconclusive, adjunctive evidence from biopsy findings (histopathology scores, dilated intercellular spaces), motor evaluation (hypotensive lower oesophageal sphincter, hiatus hernia and oesophageal body hypomotility on high-resolution manometry) and novel impedance metrics (baseline impedance, postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index) can add confidence for a GERD diagnosis; however, diagnosis cannot be based on these findings alone. An assessment of anatomy, motor function, reflux burden and symptomatic phenotype will therefore help direct management. Future GERD management strategies should focus on defining individual patient phenotypes based on the level of refluxate exposure, mechanism of reflux, efficacy of clearance, underlying anatomy of the oesophagogastric junction and psychometrics defining symptomatic presentations.
临床病史、问卷调查数据和抗分泌治疗的反应不足以单独做出 GERD 的明确诊断,但有助于确定是否需要进一步检查。食管测试中反流的明确证据包括高级别侵蚀性食管炎(洛杉矶分级 C 和 D)、长节段 Barrett 黏膜或内镜下消化性狭窄或动态 pH 或 pH 阻抗监测远端食管酸暴露时间(AET)>6%。正常的内镜检查不能排除 GERD,但与远端 AET<4%和 pH 阻抗监测下质子泵抑制剂停药时<40 次反流事件结合可提供支持性证据来反驳 GERD。动态反流监测中的反流-症状相关性为反流触发症状提供了支持性证据,当存在这种相关性时,可能预示着更好的治疗效果。当内镜检查、pH 或 pH 阻抗监测结果不确定时,活检结果(组织病理学评分、扩张的细胞间隙)、运动评估(低压力性下食管括约肌、食管裂孔疝和高分辨率测压下食管体动力不足)和新的阻抗指标(基础阻抗、反流后吞咽诱发蠕动波指数)等辅助证据可增加 GERD 诊断的可信度;然而,不能仅凭这些发现来诊断。因此,对解剖结构、运动功能、反流负担和症状表型的评估将有助于指导管理。未来的 GERD 管理策略应侧重于根据反流物暴露水平、反流机制、清除效率、胃食管交界处的解剖结构和定义症状表现的心理计量学来定义个体患者的表型。
Gut. 2018-2-3
J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2020-7-30
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2022-6
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2020-5-19
Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2024-3
Singapore Med J. 2025-8-1
Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2025-7-8
J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2025-7-30
J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2025-7-30
Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2017-12-21
Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2017-11-21
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017-9-27
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017-9-12
Gastroenterology. 2017-8-5
Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2017-6-14
Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2017-5-24