Journal of gastroenterology · 2017
Endoscopic diagnosis of hiatus hernia under deep inspiration is not consistent with esophageal manometric diagnosis.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Hanada Yuriko, Hoshino Shintaro, Hoshikawa Yoshimasa, Takenouchi Nana, Umezawa Mariko, Kawami Noriyuki, Iwakiri Katsuhiko
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To investigate the relationship between endoscopic and esophageal manometric hiatus hernia (HH).
METHODS: Forty-six gastroesophageal reflux disease patients with endoscopic HH under maintenance therapy were recruited. Endoscopy was performed on all patients in a fully conscious state. Endoscopic HH was defined as apparent separation greater than 1 cm of the lower margin of the esophageal palisade vessels and the diaphragm hiatus on endoscopy under deep inspiration. Esophageal manometry was conducted using high-resolution manometry (HRM). The length between the lower margin of the lower esophageal sphincter and pulmonary inversion point was measured 10 times. The mean and maximum of the length was then calculated.
RESULTS: The mean HH length on HRM was 0 cm (0-0) [median (25th to 75th percentile)], 0 cm (0-0), 0.5 cm (0-1.1), and 2.2 cm (1.3-2.5) in the groups with endoscopic HH lengths of 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4-5 cm, respectively. The maximum HH length on HRM was 0 cm (0-0), 0 cm (0-0), 0.8 cm (0-1.4), and 2.4 cm (1.5-2.9) in the 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4-5 cm endoscopic HH groups, respectively. The mean and maximum HH lengths increased significantly in the group with an endoscopic HH length of 4-5 cm compared with the other groups, but did not differ significantly among the 1-2, 2-3, and 3-4 cm groups. Of patients with endoscopic HH less than 3 cm, few had esophageal manometric HH greater than 2 cm.
CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic diagnosis of HH under deep inspiration is not consistent with esophageal manometric diagnosis, leading to overdiagnosis.
METHODS: Forty-six gastroesophageal reflux disease patients with endoscopic HH under maintenance therapy were recruited. Endoscopy was performed on all patients in a fully conscious state. Endoscopic HH was defined as apparent separation greater than 1 cm of the lower margin of the esophageal palisade vessels and the diaphragm hiatus on endoscopy under deep inspiration. Esophageal manometry was conducted using high-resolution manometry (HRM). The length between the lower margin of the lower esophageal sphincter and pulmonary inversion point was measured 10 times. The mean and maximum of the length was then calculated.
RESULTS: The mean HH length on HRM was 0 cm (0-0) [median (25th to 75th percentile)], 0 cm (0-0), 0.5 cm (0-1.1), and 2.2 cm (1.3-2.5) in the groups with endoscopic HH lengths of 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4-5 cm, respectively. The maximum HH length on HRM was 0 cm (0-0), 0 cm (0-0), 0.8 cm (0-1.4), and 2.4 cm (1.5-2.9) in the 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4-5 cm endoscopic HH groups, respectively. The mean and maximum HH lengths increased significantly in the group with an endoscopic HH length of 4-5 cm compared with the other groups, but did not differ significantly among the 1-2, 2-3, and 3-4 cm groups. Of patients with endoscopic HH less than 3 cm, few had esophageal manometric HH greater than 2 cm.
CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic diagnosis of HH under deep inspiration is not consistent with esophageal manometric diagnosis, leading to overdiagnosis.