Department of Gastroenterology, St. Luke's International Hospital, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Kanagawa, Japan.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Nov 5;100(44):e27672. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000027672.
The similarities and differences between acute esophageal necrosis and severe reflux esophagitis have not been elucidated. We compared Los Angeles classification Grade C reflux esophagitis, Grade D reflux esophagitis, and acute esophageal necrosis to consider the similarities and differences between acute esophageal necrosis and severe reflux esophagitis.We retrospectively reviewed records of patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy at a tertiary referral center from January 2012 to December 2019. Data on patients diagnosed as Grade C reflux, Grade D reflux, or acute esophageal necrosis for the first time were extracted for analysis.A total of 213 patients were enrolled in the study, composed of 130 Grade C reflux, 74 Grade D reflux, and 9 acute esophageal necrosis patients. Compared to Grade C reflux patients, Grade D reflux and acute esophageal necrosis patients were more likely to be transfused (P = .013 and P = .011, respectively), to have duodenal ulcers (P = .025 and P = .049, respectively), and to have psychiatric illnesses (P = .022 and P = .018, respectively). Compared to both Grade C and D reflux, acute esophageal necrosis patients were more likely to present with shock (P = .003 and P < .001, respectively), have type 1 diabetes (P = .030 and P = .004, respectively), and present in winter (P < .001 and P < .001, respectively). Significant step-wise differences (Grade C < Grade D < acute esophageal necrosis) were observed in the need for admission (P < .001 and P = .009), coffee ground emesis (P < .001 and P = .022), and stigmata of hemorrhage on endoscopy (P = .002 and P < .001). Admission (P = .003) and coffee ground emesis (P = .003) independently predicted either Grade D reflux or acute esophageal necrosis over Grade C reflux on multivariate analysis.Shock, type 1 diabetes, and winter may predict acute esophageal necrosis, while the need for admission and coffee ground emesis may predict Grade D reflux or acute esophageal necrosis.
急性食管坏死与重度反流性食管炎的异同尚未阐明。我们比较了洛杉矶分类 C 级反流性食管炎、D 级反流性食管炎和急性食管坏死,以探讨急性食管坏死与重度反流性食管炎的异同。我们回顾性分析了 2012 年 1 月至 2019 年 12 月在一家三级转诊中心接受上消化道内镜检查的患者的记录。提取首次诊断为 C 级反流、D 级反流或急性食管坏死的患者的数据进行分析。共纳入 213 例患者,其中 C 级反流 130 例,D 级反流 74 例,急性食管坏死 9 例。与 C 级反流患者相比,D 级反流和急性食管坏死患者更有可能需要输血(P=0.013 和 P=0.011),更有可能患有十二指肠溃疡(P=0.025 和 P=0.049),更有可能患有精神疾病(P=0.022 和 P=0.018)。与 C 级和 D 级反流相比,急性食管坏死患者更有可能出现休克(P=0.003 和 P<0.001),患有 1 型糖尿病(P=0.030 和 P=0.004),并且在冬季发病(P<0.001 和 P<0.001)。在需要住院(P<0.001 和 P=0.009)、咖啡渣样呕吐(P<0.001 和 P=0.022)和内镜下出血征象(P=0.002 和 P<0.001)方面,观察到明显的逐步差异(C 级< D 级<急性食管坏死)。多变量分析显示,住院(P=0.003)和咖啡渣样呕吐(P=0.003)独立预测 C 级反流以上的 D 级反流或急性食管坏死。休克、1 型糖尿病和冬季可能预测急性食管坏死,而住院和咖啡渣样呕吐可能预测 D 级反流或急性食管坏死。