BACKGROUND: Gastro-esophageal reflux (GORD) following sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a central challenge, and precise indications for revisional surgery or the physiology have not been precisely defined. We aimed to determine whether OAGB performed for reflux post-SG (1) accelerates gastric emptying half-time, (2) reduces the frequency and severity of reflux events, and (3) improves reflux symptoms.
METHODS: We undertook a prospective trial (ACTRN12616001089426). There were 22 participants who underwent measurement before and after revisional surgery with 29 optimal SG (patients with optimal outcome from their primary surgery) as controls. All participants underwent a protocolized nuclear scintigraphy, 24-h pH monitoring, and gastroscopy and completed objective questionnaires.
RESULTS: Trial patients were 90.9% female, age 44.4 years. Conversion from SG to OAGB was at a median of 45.2 ± 19.6 months. Scintigraphy showed an increased rate of gastric emptying post-OAGB 34 (IQR 14) vs 24 (IQR 10.3) min, p-value 0.008, with decreased number of reflux events post-prandially (39 (IQR 13) vs 26 (IQR 7), p-value 0.001). This data correlated with the pH analysis; total acid events substantially reduced post-OAGB 58.5 (IQR 88) vs 12 (IQR 9.4) events, p-value 0.017. Endoscopic findings indicated a reduction in incidence of bile stasis 72.7% vs 40.9% post-OAGB, p-value < 0.00010. Post-OAGB, patients experienced less frequent regurgitation (12 ± 4.1 vs. 5.5 ± 3, p-value 0.012) and reflux (37.1 ± 15.7 vs. 16.8 ± 12.6, p-value 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: We found OAGB is an effective treatment for reflux associated with delayed gastric emptying post-SG. The likely mechanisms is by, an increase in the rate of gastric clearance and reduced reflux events and overall esophageal acid exposure. This suggests that some forms of post-SG reflux are driven by slower emptying of the residual stomach and are amenable to treatment with drainage above the incisura.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease often undergo a 24-hour pH test to confirm pathologic reflux before surgery. However, a negative pH test can occur in some individuals with reflux, and a case might still be made for antireflux surgery based on symptoms of reflux even in the absence of endoscopic esophagitis. The long-term outcomes in patients who underwent antireflux surgery despite negative preoperative test results were determined.
METHODS: Patients were selected from a prospective database. A total of 745 patients met the inclusion criteria, which included typical esophageal reflux symptoms, absence of a large hiatus hernia, preoperative 24-hour pH study performed, endoscopy, and postoperative symptom and satisfaction follow-up available at 5 years. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on 24-hour pH study and endoscopy results: negative pH and negative endoscopy (n = 65), negative pH and positive endoscopy (n = 72), and positive pH (n = 608). The negative pH and negative endoscopy group underwent surgery based on clinical assessment and typical esophageal reflux symptoms. Baseline and follow-up outcomes at 5 years were evaluated using 0 to 10 analog scores, which assessed heartburn, dysphagia, and satisfaction with the overall outcome. Data were analyzed to compare the groups.
RESULTS: The groups were well matched for demographics and preoperative symptom scores. At the median 5-year follow-up, clinical outcome scores were similar among the groups for heartburn, dysphagia, and overall satisfaction. The mean heartburn scores were 1.80 in the negative pH and negative endoscopy group, 1.88 in the negative pH and positive endoscopy group, and 1.91 in the positive pH group (P = .663). The mean satisfaction scores were high in all groups: 8.13, 7.31, and 7.72, respectively (P = .293).
CONCLUSIONS: No difference in clinical outcome scores was observed. The negative pH and negative endoscopy group had high satisfaction scores and low heartburn and dysphagia scores. Our findings support antireflux surgery in well-selected symptomatic patients with a negative preoperative pH test.

The diagnosis of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) based on otolaryngologist\'s assessment of laryngoscopic findings remains contentious in terms of sensitivity and specificity.
To evaluate GERD prevalence, applying Lyon 2.0 Consensus criteria, in patients with extra-oesophageal symptoms undergoing laryngoscopic examination and impedance-pH monitoring.
In this retrospective assessment, we included 470 patients with extra-oesophageal symptoms, either isolated or combined with typical symptoms, who had been referred to six tertiary Italian Gastroenterology Units between January and December 2020. Of these, 274 underwent 24-h impedance-pH monitoring and laryngoscopy off PPI therapy. GERD diagnosis followed Lyon Consensus 2.0 criteria, incorporating mean nocturnal baseline impedance when pH-impedance monitoring was inconclusive.
Laryngoscopic examination revealed pathological findings (predominantly posterior laryngitis) in 71.2% (195/274). GERD was diagnosed in 29.2% (80/274) via impedance-pH monitoring. The prevalence of GERD in patients with positive or negative laryngoscopy was similar (32.3% vs. 21.5%, p = 0.075). No significant difference in proximal reflux occurrences was noted between positive and negative laryngoscopy groups (33.3% vs. 24.1%, p = 0.133). Laryngoscopy demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 78.8% and 32.0%, respectively, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 32.3% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 28.4%. In contrast, a threshold of four concurrent laryngoscopic signs, identified in only eight patients, demonstrated a PPV of 93.8% and a NPV of 73.6% (sensitivity 25.4%, specificity 99.2%).
This study underscores the limited diagnostic accuracy of laryngoscopy, emphasising the necessity of impedance-pH monitoring for confirming GERD diagnoses using Lyon 2.0 criteria in patients with suspected extra-oesophageal symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the digestive enzymes and biomarkers in the saliva of patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and asymptomatic individuals.
METHODS: Prospective controlled study.
METHODS: Multicenter study.
METHODS: Patients with LPR at the hypopharyngeal-esophageal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH) and asymptomatic individuals were consecutively recruited from January 2020 to April 2023 from 2 University Hospitals. The saliva of patients (off PPIs) and asymptomatic individuals was collected to measure pH, elastase, bile salts, cholesterol, gastric, and pancreatic lipases. Anxiety, symptoms, and findings were studied through perceived stress scale (PSS), reflux symptom score (RSS), and reflux sign assessment (RSA).
RESULTS: Sixty-seven LPR patients and 57 asymptomatic individuals completed the evaluations. LPR patients reported higher PSS, RSS, and RSA than asymptomatic individuals. The mean saliva pH was more alkaline in LPR patients (7.23: 95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.08, 7.38) compared to controls (6.13; 95% CI: 5.95, 6.31; P = .001). The mean concentration of elastase was higher in patients (51.65 µg/mL; 95% CI: 44.47, 58.83 µg/mL) versus asymptomatic individuals (25.18 µg/mL; 95% CI: 21.64, 28.72 µg/mL; P = .001). The saliva cholesterol reported higher concentration in healthy individuals (3.43 mg/dL; 95% CI: 3.21, 3.65 mg/dL) compared to patients (1.16 mg/dL; 95% CI: 1.05, 1.27 mg/dL; P = .001). The saliva pH, and elastase concentration were significantly associated with the baseline RSS, while saliva cholesterol was negatively associated with the severity of RSS and RSA.
CONCLUSIONS: Cholesterol, bile salts, and elastase are biomarkers of LPR and should be considered to develop future non-invasive saliva device for the detection of LPR.

Overweight and obesity are a public health problem and in 1997 obesity was recognized as a global epidemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). Overweight and obesity affect almost 60% of adults and one in three children in Europe according to the most recent WHO report. Objectively, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is defined as the presence of characteristic esophageal mucosal damage assessed by endoscopy and/or the demonstra-tion of pathological acid exposure by reflux monitoring studies. The prevalence of GERD is increased in obese patients In overweight and obese patients, the clinical symptoms of GERD are especially present in the supine position and this correlates with more frequent episodes of nocturnal reflux in the 24-h pH monitoring, there is also an increase in the number of refluxes with content acid. In the population with symptoms, digestive endoscopy detects data of erosive esophagitis in 50% of patients, while 24-h pH-impedanciometry diagnoses 92% of patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) The presence of persistent GERD in the mucosa affects esophageal motility and patients may develop ineffective esophageal motility-type disorders, so we will review the interpre-tation of the functional tests that determine motility, which is esophageal manometry, and those that determine reflux gastroesophageal, acid and non-acid, which is the pH measure-ment with or without 24-h impedanciometry.

The 4th iteration of the Chicago Classification (CC v4.0) for esophageal motility disorders offers more restrictive criteria for the diagnosis of Ineffective Esophageal Motility (IEM) compared to version 3.0 (CC v3.0). In light of the updated criteria for IEM, we aimed to characterize and compare the patients who retained their IEM diagnosis to those who were reclassified as normal motility, and to evaluate the clinical impact of the newly introduced CC v4.0. We performed a retrospective case-control study. We included all individuals who underwent a high-resolution manometry (HRM) between 2020 and 2021 at two centers. Consecutive studies reported as IEM according to the CC v3.0 were reanalyzed according to the CC v4.0. We compared demographics, clinical, manometry, and pH-monitoring parameters. Out of 452 manometry studies, 154 (34%) met criteria for IEM as per the CC v3.0 (CC v3.0 IEM group). Of those, 39 (25%) studies were reclassified as normal studies according to the CC v4.0 (CC v4.0 normal group), while the remaining 115 studies (25% of the overall cohort) retained an IEM diagnosis (CC v4.0 IEM group). The CC v4.0 normal group had more recovered contractions during solid swallows (p = 0.01), less ineffective swallows (p = 0.04), and lower acid exposure time (p = 0.02) compared to the CC4.0 IEM group. Under CC v4.0 criteria, fewer patients are diagnosed with IEM. Those diagnosed with IEM had worse esophageal function and higher acid burden. Though further studies are needed to confirm these findings, our results indicate that CC v4.0 criteria restrict the IEM diagnosis to a more clinically meaningful population.

OBJECTIVE: Anti-reflux mucosectomy (ARMS) is an emerging and promising endoscopic treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). In the current study we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ARMS in treating Chinese GERD patients.
METHODS: This was a single-center prospective cohort study. ARMS was performed in GERD patients by an experienced endoscopist. The patients were required to undergo symptom assessment as well as endoscopic examination, high-resolution manometry (HRM), and impedance-pH monitoring before and after ARMS.
RESULTS: Twelve patients were enrolled. Follow-up was completed by all patients at 3 and 6 months, 11 patients at 1 year, and 8 patients at 2 years after ARMS, respectively. Symptom improvement was achieved in 66.7%, 75.0%, 72.7%, and 50.0% of the patients at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after ARMS, respectively. Postoperative dysphagia was reported by 25.0%, 25.0%, 27.3%, and 25.0% of patients at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery, none of whom required additional invasive treatment. All patients with preoperative esophagitis healed after ARMS. For impedance-pH monitoring parameters, number of acidic reflux episodes and the proportion of patients with acid exposure time (AET) >4.0% decreased significantly after ARMS.
CONCLUSIONS: ARMS was safe and effective in Chinese GERD patients. The efficacy of ARMS was not short-term and remained evident throughout the 2-year follow-up. Further multicenter studies with larger sample sizes are needed to verify our findings.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic value of symptom questionnaires, sign questionnaires, and the combination of 2 questionnaires for laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD).
METHODS: Prospective, single-centered.
METHODS: Seventy-seven patients who were hospitalized in the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery from October 2022 to April 2023 were included.
METHODS: Included patients completed the RSS, RSI, RSA, and RFS questionnaires and underwent 24-hour hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH). The RSS, RSI, RSA, RFS, RSS+RSA, RSS+RFS, RSI+RSA, RSI+RFS, and RSI+RFS diagnostic value were compared using Cohen\'s k test and receiver operating characteristic analysis.
RESULTS: Based on the 24 hours HEMII-pH results, 52 patients had LPRD, and 25 patients did not have LPRD. The Kappa values of RSS, RSI, RSA, RFS, RSS+RSA,2 RSS+RFS, RSI+RSA, and RSI+RFS with the 24 hours HEMII-pH monitoring results were 0.565, 0.442, 0.318, 0.431, 0.517, 0.631, 0.451, and 0.461, respectively. The RSS+RFS questionnaire had the highest AUC of 0.836 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.762-0.909) and the RSA questionnaire had the lowest AUC (AUC = 0.665, 95% CI 0.560-0.790). The sensitivity of RSS was the highest (98%), the specificities of RSS+RFS and RSI+RFS were the highest (96%), and the specificity of RSS was the lowest (52%). RSS+RFS had a sensitivity of 75%, second only to RSS and RFS (76%).
CONCLUSIONS: Among the 8 methods, the RSS combined with the RFS had the highest concordance with 24 hours HEMII-pH monitoring results and AUC values when screening for LPRD.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal hypersensitivity is associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Since sleep disturbance causes esophageal hypersensitivity, hypnotics may ameliorate GERD. However, zolpidem prolongs esophageal acid clearance. Lemborexant is a new hypnotic with higher efficacy and fewer adverse events than zolpidem. Therefore, the present study investigated the effects of lemborexant on GERD.
METHODS: Patients with heartburn and/or regurgitation and insomnia who did not take acid suppressants or hypnotics in the last month were recruited. Symptom assessments using GerdQ and reflux monitoring were performed before and after a 28-day treatment with 5 mg lemborexant at bedtime. The primary outcome was a change in the total GerdQ score, excluding the score for insomnia. Secondary outcomes were changes in each GerdQ score and the following parameters on reflux monitoring: the acid exposure time (AET), number of reflux events (RE), acid clearance time (ACT), and post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave (PSPW) index.
RESULTS: Sixteen patients (age 45.0 [33.3-56.0], 11 females [68.8%]) completed the intervention (1 patient did not tolerate the second reflux monitoring). The total GerdQ score, excluding the score for insomnia, did not significantly change (8.0 [6.0-9.0] before vs. 7.0 [6.3-9.0] after p = 0.16). GerdQ showed the significant attenuation of regurgitation (2.0 [2.0-3.0] vs. 1.0 [0-2.8] p = 0.0054) but not heartburn (2.5 [1.0-3.0] vs. 1.0 [0.3-2.0] p = 0.175). No significant differences were observed in AET, RE, ACT, or PSPW index before and after the intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: Lemborexant attenuated regurgitation without the worsening of objective reflux parameters. A randomized placebo-controlled study is warranted in the future.

UNASSIGNED: Extended wireless pH monitoring (WPM) is used to investigate gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) as subsequent or alternative investigation to 24-hour catheter-based studies. However, false negative catheter studies may occur in patients with intermittent reflux or due to catheter-induced discomfort or altered behavior. We aim to investigate the diagnostic yield of WPM after a negative 24-hour multichannel intraluminal impedance pH (MII-pH) monitoring study and to determine predictors of GERD on WPM given a negative MII-pH.
UNASSIGNED: Consecutive adult patients (> 18 years) who underwent WPM for further investigation of suspected GERD following a negative 24-hour MII-pH and upper endoscopy between January 2010 and December 2019 were retrospectively included. Clinical data, endoscopy, MII-pH, and WPM results were retrieved. Fisher\'s exact test, Wilcoxon rank sum test, or Student\'s t test were used to compare data. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate predictors of positive WMP.
UNASSIGNED: One hundred and eighty-one consecutive patients underwent WPM following a negative MII-pH study. On average and worst day analysis, 33.7% (61/181) and 34.2% (62/181) of the patients negative for GERD on MII-pH were given a diagnosis of GERD following WPM, respectively. On a stepwise multiple logistic regression analysis, the basal respiratory minimum pressure of the lower esophageal sphincter was a significant predictor of GERD with OR = 0.95 (0.90-1.00, P = 0.041).
UNASSIGNED: WPM increases GERD diagnostic yield in patients with a negative MII-pH selected for further testing based on clinical suspicion. Further studies are needed to assess the role of WPM as a first line investigation in patients with GERD symptoms.