Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: The pathogenesis of extraesophageal symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease is complex, and esophageal motility and reflux may be involved in it. In this study, we aimed to compare esophageal motility and reflux characteristics in gastroesopha- geal reflux disease patients with and without extraesophageal symptoms by high-resolution manometry and multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring.
Methods: We retrospectively studied gastroesophageal reflux disease patients between January 2014 and December 2018. All patients had undergone high-resolution manometry and multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring. The results were compared and analyzed.
Results: A total of 59 patients were included in this study. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to their main complaint: only typical symptoms (group A, n = 11), both typical and extraesophageal symptoms (group B, n = 33), and only extraesophageal symp- toms (group C, n = 15). Compared with group A, the lower esophageal sphincter basal pressure, integrated residual pressure, and lower esophageal sphincter length were lower, and the proximal reflux percentages of a weak acid and non-acid reflux were higher in group B and group C (P < .017). The positive rate of esophageal motility disorders was lower in group A than in other groups (P < .05). The propor- tion of patients with multiple rapid swallows/single swallow-distal contractile integral ratio greater than 1-was higher in group A than in other groups (P < .05).
Conclusions: Decreased lower esophageal sphincter pressure and lower esophageal sphincter length, increased proximal esophageal reflux of weak acid and non-acid reflux, esophageal motility disorders, and decreased peristaltic reserve are involved in the pathogenesis of extraesophageal symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9153958 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.5152/tjg.2022.201040 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!