Comparison of Risk Factors and Disease Severity Between Old and Young Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Development of scores assessing the refluxogenic potential of diet of patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux

OBJECTIVE

To develop clinical tools assessing the refluxogenic potential of foods and beverages (F&B) consumed by patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

METHODS

European experts of the LPR Study group of the Young-Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Oto-rhino-laryngological societies were invited to identify the components of Western European F&B that would be associated with the development of LPR. Based on the list generated by experts, four authors conducted a systematic review to identify the F&B involved in the development of esophageal sphincter and motility dysfunctions, both mechanisms involved in the development of gastroesophageal reflux disease and LPR. Regarding the F&B components and the characteristics identified as important in the development of reflux, experts developed three rational scores for the assessment of the refluxogenic potential of F&B, a dish, or the overall diet of the patient.

RESULTS

Twenty-six European experts participated to the study and identified the following components of F&B as important in the development of LPR: pH; lipid, carbohydrate, protein composition; fiber composition of vegetables; alcohol degree; caffeine/theine composition; and high osmolality of beverage. A total of 72 relevant studies have contributed to identifying the Western European F&B that are highly susceptible to be involved in the development of reflux. The F&B characteristics were considered for developing a Refluxogenic Diet Score (REDS), allowing a categorization of F&B into five categories ranging from 1 (low refluxogenic F&B) to 5 (high refluxogenic F&B). From REDS, experts developed the Refluxogenic Score of a Dish (RESDI) and the Global Refluxogenic Diet Score (GRES), which allow the assessment of the refluxogenic potential of dish and the overall diet of the LPR patient, respectively.

CONCLUSION

REDS, RESDI and GRES are proposed as objective scores for assessing the refluxogenic potential of F&B composing a dish or the overall diet of LPR patients. Future studies are needed to study the correlation between these scores and the development of LPR according to impedance-pH study.

Efficacy and safety of twice-daily rabeprazole maintenance therapy for patients with reflux esophagitis refractory to standard once-daily proton pump inhibitor: the Japan-based EXTEND study

BACKGROUND

Rabeprazole at 10 or 20 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) has been reported to be highly effective in the treatment of proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-resistant reflux esophagitis (RE) that is refractory to the standard once-daily PPI regimen. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of rabeprazole maintenance therapy at 10 mg once daily (q.d.) or b.i.d. for longer than 8 weeks.

METHODS

Patients with RE refractory to standard PPI regimens for at least 8 weeks were enrolled. They were treated with rabeprazole at 10 or 20 mg b.i.d. for 8 weeks during the open-label treatment period. After endoscopic examination, those with confirmed healing entered the subsequent double-blind maintenance therapy. During this period, the subjects were randomized to receive rabeprazole 10 mg q.d. (control) or 10 mg b.i.d. The primary endpoint was the endoscopic no-recurrence rate at Week 52.

RESULTS

In total, 517 subjects entered the treatment, and 359 subjects continued on maintenance therapy. The full analysis set for central assessment included 343 subjects. The no-recurrence rate at Week 52 was significantly higher in the b.i.d. group (73.9%; p < 0.001, χ² test) than in the q.d. group (44.8%). In particular, the b.i.d. regimen was more effective in all subgroups with Los Angeles Classification Grade B to D at treatment entry.

CONCLUSIONS

In the maintenance treatment of PPI-resistant RE, rabeprazole at 10 mg b.i.d. exerted a stronger recurrence-preventing effect than 10 mg q.d. over 52 weeks. No particular safety issues were noted during long-term administration. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02135107.