Gut · 1998
A prospective study of oesophageal function in patients with normal coronary angiograms and controls with angina.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Cooke R A, Anggiansah A, Chambers J B, Owen W J
Аннотация
AIMS: To compare the incidence of oesophageal abnormalities and their correlation with chest pain in patients with normal coronary angiograms, and in controls with angina.
PATIENTS: Sixty one patients with normal coronary angiograms (NCA group) referred to a single cardiac centre between March 1990 and April 1991; 25 matched controls with confirmed coronary artery disease (CAD group).
SETTING: Cardiac referral centre and oesophageal function testing laboratory.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Oesophageal manometry, provocation tests, and 24 hour ambulatory pH monitoring.
RESULTS: Simultaneous contractions were more common (6.7% versus 0.8%, p < 0.01), and the duration of peristaltic contractions was longer (2.9 versus 2.4 seconds, p < 0.01) in the NCA group than in the CAD group. There were no group differences in the amplitude of peristaltic contractions, and none had nutcracker oesophagus. Ten (16%) patients with NCA and no patients with CAD had diffuse spasm (p = 0.03). Twenty one (34%) patients with NCA, and five (20%) patients with CAD had abnormal gastro-oesophageal reflux (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference between the groups in the number of patients whose pain was temporally related to pH events. Particular chest pain characteristics, or the presence of additional oesophageal symptoms, were not predictive of an oesophageal abnormality.
CONCLUSION: Oesophageal function tests commonly implicate the oesophagus as a source of pain in patients with normal coronary angiograms. With the exception of simultaneous contractions during manometry however, the incidence of abnormalities and in particular the correlation of pH events with chest pain are as common in patients with normal coronary angiograms as in controls with angina. The oesophagus may often be an unrecognised source of pain in both groups of patients.
PATIENTS: Sixty one patients with normal coronary angiograms (NCA group) referred to a single cardiac centre between March 1990 and April 1991; 25 matched controls with confirmed coronary artery disease (CAD group).
SETTING: Cardiac referral centre and oesophageal function testing laboratory.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Oesophageal manometry, provocation tests, and 24 hour ambulatory pH monitoring.
RESULTS: Simultaneous contractions were more common (6.7% versus 0.8%, p < 0.01), and the duration of peristaltic contractions was longer (2.9 versus 2.4 seconds, p < 0.01) in the NCA group than in the CAD group. There were no group differences in the amplitude of peristaltic contractions, and none had nutcracker oesophagus. Ten (16%) patients with NCA and no patients with CAD had diffuse spasm (p = 0.03). Twenty one (34%) patients with NCA, and five (20%) patients with CAD had abnormal gastro-oesophageal reflux (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference between the groups in the number of patients whose pain was temporally related to pH events. Particular chest pain characteristics, or the presence of additional oesophageal symptoms, were not predictive of an oesophageal abnormality.
CONCLUSION: Oesophageal function tests commonly implicate the oesophagus as a source of pain in patients with normal coronary angiograms. With the exception of simultaneous contractions during manometry however, the incidence of abnormalities and in particular the correlation of pH events with chest pain are as common in patients with normal coronary angiograms as in controls with angina. The oesophagus may often be an unrecognised source of pain in both groups of patients.