United European gastroenterology journal · 2017
The Rome IV versus Rome III criteria for heartburn diagnosis: A comparative study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang Mengyu, Chen Minhu, Peng Sui, Xiao Yinglian
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The phenotypes of heartburn patients are heterogeneous.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the proportion of heartburn phenotypes in a Chinese population and to compare the Rome IV and III criteria for heartburn diagnosis.
METHODS: A retrospective study was performed among heartburn patients referred for upper endoscopy and esophageal function tests in a tertiary hospital. Their symptoms fulfilled Rome IV and III criteria.
RESULTS: A total of 233 patients were included. Fifty-nine patients (25%) were diagnosed with esophagitis, 96 (41%) with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) and 78 (34%) with functional heartburn (FH) based on Rome III criteria. Approximately 70% of the Rome III NERD patients were changed based on Rome IV criteria, with 36 patients (15%) diagnosed with reflux hypersensitivity (RH) and 32 patients (14%) who didn't fulfill the criteria considered unclassified. The FH and RH patients showed higher esophagogastric junction-contractile integral (EGJ-CI) and less hiatal hernia than did Rome IV NERD patients. The unclassified had more hiatal hernias than the FH and RH (p < 0.05). The EGJ-CI was similar between Rome III NERD and FH cases.
CONCLUSION: The Rome IV criteria were stricter for heartburn diagnosis and superior in distinguishing NERD from functional disorders on motility patterns than Rome III.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the proportion of heartburn phenotypes in a Chinese population and to compare the Rome IV and III criteria for heartburn diagnosis.
METHODS: A retrospective study was performed among heartburn patients referred for upper endoscopy and esophageal function tests in a tertiary hospital. Their symptoms fulfilled Rome IV and III criteria.
RESULTS: A total of 233 patients were included. Fifty-nine patients (25%) were diagnosed with esophagitis, 96 (41%) with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) and 78 (34%) with functional heartburn (FH) based on Rome III criteria. Approximately 70% of the Rome III NERD patients were changed based on Rome IV criteria, with 36 patients (15%) diagnosed with reflux hypersensitivity (RH) and 32 patients (14%) who didn't fulfill the criteria considered unclassified. The FH and RH patients showed higher esophagogastric junction-contractile integral (EGJ-CI) and less hiatal hernia than did Rome IV NERD patients. The unclassified had more hiatal hernias than the FH and RH (p < 0.05). The EGJ-CI was similar between Rome III NERD and FH cases.
CONCLUSION: The Rome IV criteria were stricter for heartburn diagnosis and superior in distinguishing NERD from functional disorders on motility patterns than Rome III.