Suppr超能文献

无线pH监测与传统食管pH监测:不适、日常活动受限及并发症的比较研究

WIRELESS PH MONITORING AND CONVENTIONAL ESOPHAGEAL PH MONITORING: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DISCOMFORT, LIMITATIONS IN DAILY ACTIVITIES AND COMPLICATIONS.

作者信息

Azzam Rimon Sobhi, Azzam Gabriela Barge, Nasi Ary

机构信息

Hospital das Clínicas, Department of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

Faculty of Medicine, University of Santo Amaro, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

出版信息

Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2021 May 14;34(1):e1566. doi: 10.1590/0102-672020210001e1566. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The catheter of the esophageal pH monitoring is associated with nasal and throat discomfort, and different behave in patients. The capsule of the wireless pH monitoring may cause chest pain and complications.

AIM

To compare the wireless and conventional pH monitoring concerning the degree of discomfort and limitations in daily activities, complications, ability to diagnose pathological reflux, and costs.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux were prospectively submitted, in a simultaneous initial period, to 24-hour catheter esophageal pH monitoring and 48-hour wireless system. After removing each system, patients underwent a specific clinical questionnaire.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (60%) pointed a higher discomfort in the introduction of the capsule (p=0.327). Discomfort and limitations in daily activities were lower on 2nd day (p<0.05); however, continued to be expressive (32% to 44%). Chest pain occurred in 13 (52%) patients. The diagnostic gain of pathological reflux was 12% with the wireless system (p=0.355).

CONCLUSIONS

  1. There is no significant difference between the discomfort mentioned in the introduction of the capsule and the catheter; 2) during reflux monitoring, the wireless system provides significant less discomfort and limitations in daily activities; 3) there is no significant difference between the two methods in the ability to diagnose pathological reflux; 4) wireless pH monitoring has higher cost.
摘要

背景

食管pH监测导管会导致鼻和咽喉不适,且在患者中表现各异。无线pH监测胶囊可能会引起胸痛及并发症。

目的

比较无线和传统pH监测在不适程度、日常活动受限情况、并发症、诊断病理性反流的能力及成本方面的差异。

方法

25例有胃食管反流症状的患者在同一初始阶段前瞻性地接受了24小时导管食管pH监测和48小时无线系统监测。在移除每个系统后,患者接受一份特定的临床问卷。

结果

15例患者(60%)指出胶囊置入时不适程度更高(p = 0.327)。第二天日常活动中的不适和受限情况较低(p < 0.05);然而,仍较为明显(32%至44%)。13例(52%)患者出现胸痛。无线系统对病理性反流的诊断增益为12%(p = 0.355)。

结论

1)胶囊置入和导管置入时提及的不适无显著差异;2)在反流监测期间,无线系统在日常活动中带来的不适和受限显著更少;3)两种方法在诊断病理性反流的能力上无显著差异;4)无线pH监测成本更高。

相似文献

4
Wireless esophageal pH monitoring is better tolerated than the catheter-based technique: results from a randomized cross-over trial.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Feb;102(2):239-45. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00939.x. Epub 2006 Nov 13.
6
Wireless esophageal pH capsule for patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease: a multicenter clinical study.
World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Oct 28;20(40):14865-74. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i40.14865.
7
Current applications of evolving methodologies in gastroesophageal reflux disease testing.
Dig Liver Dis. 2011 May;43(5):353-7. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2011.01.007. Epub 2011 Feb 15.
8
Wireless capsule pH monitoring: does it fulfil all expectations?
Digestion. 2007;76(3-4):235-40. doi: 10.1159/000112796. Epub 2007 Dec 21.
9
24 Versus 48-hour bravo pH monitoring.
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2012 Mar;46(3):197-200. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e31822f3c4f.
10
Wireless pH capsule--yield in clinical practice.
Endoscopy. 2012 Mar;44(3):270-6. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1291541. Epub 2012 Jan 24.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
Does weight gain, throughout 15 years follow-up after Nissen laparoscopic fundoplication, compromise reflux symptoms control?
Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2020;33(1):e1488. doi: 10.1590/0102-672020190001e1488. Epub 2020 May 18.
2
FAILURE AFTER FUNDOPLICATION: RE-FUNDOPLICATION? IS THERE A ROOM FOR GASTRECTOMY? IN WHICH CLINICAL SCENARIES?
Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2019 Aug 26;32(2):e1440. doi: 10.1590/0102-672020190001e1440.
3
PROLONGED GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX MONITORING BY IMPEDANCE-PHMETRY: A REVIEW OF THE SUBJECT PONDERED WITH OUR EXPERIENCE WITH 1,200 CASES.
Arq Gastroenterol. 2018 Nov;55Suppl 1(Suppl 1):76-84. doi: 10.1590/S0004-2803.201800000-47. Epub 2018 Oct 4.
4
Bravo® Capsule Aspiration: A Rare Case Report.
Cureus. 2017 Aug 9;9(8):e1556. doi: 10.7759/cureus.1556.
5
Presentation and Epidemiology of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.
Gastroenterology. 2018 Jan;154(2):267-276. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.07.045. Epub 2017 Aug 3.
6
Utilization of wireless pH monitoring technologies: a summary of the proceedings from the esophageal diagnostic working group.
Dis Esophagus. 2013 Nov-Dec;26(8):755-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-2050.2012.01384.x. Epub 2012 Aug 7.
9
Two-year retention of Bravo capsule in a giant colonic diverticulum.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 Apr;104(4):1062. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2008.176. Epub 2009 Mar 10.
10
Attachment disorder: a decline in the performance of the Bravo pH system.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2008 Oct;103(10):2663. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.02074_12.x.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验