Acid perfusion test and 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring with symptom index

1991 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 565-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel E. Richter ◽  
Edward G. Hewson ◽  
Jane W. Sinclair ◽  
Christine B. Dalton
Keyword(s):  
Ph Monitoring ◽  
Esophageal Ph Monitoring ◽  
Symptom Index ◽  
Acid Perfusion ◽  
Esophageal Ph ◽  
Acid Perfusion Test

scholarly journals Comparative study of two modes of gastroesophageal reflux measuring: conventional esophageal pH monitoring and wireless pH monitoring

2012 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rimon Sobhi Azzam ◽  
Rubens A. A. Sallum ◽  
Jeovana Ferreira Brandão ◽  
Tomás Navarro-Rodriguez ◽  
Ary Nasi
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Ph Monitoring ◽  
Initial Period ◽  
Acid Reflux ◽  
Esophageal Ph Monitoring ◽  
Symptom Index ◽  
Reflux Time ◽  
Esophageal Ph ◽  
Technical Failures

CONTEXT: Esophageal pH monitoring is considered to be the gold standard for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal acid reflux. However, this method is very troublesome and considerably limits the patient's routine activities. Wireless pH monitoring was developed to avoid these restrictions. OBJECTIVE: To compare the first 24 hours of the conventional and wireless pH monitoring, positioned 3 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter, in relation to: the occurrence of relevant technical failures, the ability to detect reflux and the ability to correlate the clinical symptoms to reflux. METHODS: Twenty-five patients referred for esophageal pH monitoring and with typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease were studied prospectively, underwent clinical interview, endoscopy, esophageal manometry and were submitted, with a simultaneous initial period, to 24-hour catheter pH monitoring and 48-hour wireless pH monitoring. RESULTS: Early capsule detachment occurred in one (4%) case and there were no technical failures with the catheter pH monitoring (P = 0.463). Percentages of reflux time (total, upright and supine) were higher with the wireless pH monitoring (P < 0.05). Pathological gastroesophageal reflux occurred in 16 (64%) patients submitted to catheter and in 19 (76%) to the capsule (P = 0.355). The symptom index was positive in 12 (48%) patients with catheter pH monitoring and in 13 (52%) with wireless pH monitoring (P = 0.777). CONCLUSIONS: 1) No significant differences were reported between the two methods of pH monitoring (capsule vs catheter), in regard to relevant technical failures; 2) Wireless pH monitoring detected higher percentages of reflux time than the conventional pH-metry; 3) The two methods of pH monitoring were comparable in diagnosis of pathological gastroesophageal reflux and comparable in correlating the clinical symptoms with the gastroesophageal reflux.

Su1096 - 96-Hour Esophageal PH Monitoring: The Tiebreaker for Abnormal Demeester Score and Symptom Index

2018 ◽  
Vol 154 (6) ◽  
pp. S-486-S-487 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rupal Patel ◽  
Ambuj Kumar ◽  
John W. Jacobs ◽  
Soojong Chae ◽  
Joel E. Richter
Keyword(s):  
Ph Monitoring ◽  
Esophageal Ph Monitoring ◽  
Symptom Index ◽  
Demeester Score ◽  
Esophageal Ph

Ambulatory 24-Hour Esophageal pH Monitoring

1986 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 59-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hurt W. Ward ◽  
Wallace C. Wu ◽  
Joel E. Richter ◽  
Kin W. Lui ◽  
Donald O. Castell
Keyword(s):  
Ph Monitoring ◽  
Esophageal Ph Monitoring ◽  
Esophageal Ph

Computerized ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring in 50 asymptomatic volunteer subjects

1988 ◽  
Vol 155 (3) ◽  
pp. 503-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
William G. Cheadle ◽  
Gary C. Vitale ◽  
Sami A. Sadek ◽  
Alfred Cuschleri
Keyword(s):  
Ph Monitoring ◽  
Esophageal Ph Monitoring ◽  
Esophageal Ph

Wireless Esophageal pH Monitoring in Children

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Gunnarsdóttir ◽  
Pernilla Stenström ◽  
Einar Arnbjörnsson
Keyword(s):  
Ph Monitoring ◽  
Esophageal Ph Monitoring ◽  
Esophageal Ph
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document