Gastroesophageal reflux and esophageal motility in patients with esophageal varies

Prevalence and risk factors of endoscopically confirmed gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in patients with liver cirrhosis

Background

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common diseases in modern civilization that originates basically from a disturbance in the structure and function of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). Liver cirrhosis with or without esophageal varices (EV) may predispose to GERD, and GERD may precipitate rupture of esophageal varices. As variceal bleeding is a serious life-threatening complication of liver cirrhosis, GERD prevalence among cirrhotic patients is continuously subjected to research. We aimed to determine the prevalence of endoscopy-confirmed GERD in patients with liver cirrhosis and its possible risk factors. So, one hundred patients with HCV-related liver cirrhosis were consecutively enrolled in this study. They were subjected to history taking {including Reflux Disease Questionnaire}, thorough clinical examination, abdominal ultrasound, and lab investigations and then referred for upper endoscopy to screen for GERD and/or esophageal varices.

Results

GERD was endoscopically confirmed in 83 patients (83%) and the highest prevalence was in patients with Child B and C. Among 82 patients with esophageal varices, there were 68 patients who had endoscopic GERD (82.9%), and among 62 patients with ascites, there were 56 patients who had endoscopic GERD (90.3%).

Conclusion

We found a high prevalence of GERD (83%) among patients with liver cirrhosis. The severity of GERD was significantly related to the Child grade, the grade of varices, and the degree of ascites but ascites was the only significant risk factor for GERD development in cirrhotic patients.

Impact of Helicobacter pylori Infection on Gastric Variceal Bleeding among Patients with Liver Cirrhosis

Background and Aims

Currently, it is well known that Helicobacter pylori- (H. pylori-) related peptic ulcer is one of the main causes of nonvariceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients. However, there is a lack of data to identify the exact effect of H. pylori infection on variceal bleeding. This study was conducted to identify the impact of H. pylori infection on gastric variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients.

Patients and Methods

76 cirrhotic patients with gastric varices were included in this prospective study and divided into 2 groups: nonbleeding gastric varices (32 patients) and bleeding gastric varices (44 patients). The fasting serum gastrin level was measured. Mucosal biopsies from the gastric body and antrum were examined to determine the patterns of gastritis and the presence of H. pylori.

Results

The frequency of H. pylori infection in the studied patients was 59.2%. There were significant differences between both groups regarding liver decompensation (P = 0.001), red color sign over gastric varices (P = 0.0011), prevalence of H. pylori infection (P = 0.0049), histological patterns of gastritis (P = 0.0069), and serum gastrin level (P = 0.0200). By multivariate analysis, Child C cirrhosis, red color sign over gastric varices, and H. pylori-induced follicular gastritis were independent risk factors for bleeding from gastric varices.

Conclusion

H. pylori-induced follicular gastritis is considered as an additional risk factor for bleeding from gastric varices.

Risk factors for bleeding esophagogastric varices

Bleeding from gastric varices (GVs) is generally considered more severe than that from esophageal varices (EVs) but occurs less frequently. We review the risk factors for bleeding EVs and GVs. GVs were divided into 2 groups: cardiac varices (CVs, Lg-c) and fundal varices (FVs), i.e., varices involving the fundus alone (Lg-f) or varices involving both the cardia and fundus (Lg-cf). Elevated pressure in the portal vein is a risk factor for bleeding EVs. The portal pressure in patients with GVs and a gastrorenal shunt is lower than that in patients with EVs. The large size of varices is a risk factor for bleeding EVs. Red color signs are elevated red areas that are important for predicting the risk of variceal bleeding, and red wale markings, dilated venules oriented longitudinally on the mucosal surface, have been considered to be the sign with the highest risk. Red color signs are rare in FVs, possibly because of the pronounced thickness of the mucosal layer. Bleeding EVs are not associated with use of antiulcer drugs or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Although, in patients with bleeding GVs, "occasional" use of an oral NSAID is an important step leading to variceal hemorrhage, especially from FVs, even if the mucosa is protected by antiulcer drugs. Constipation, vomiting, severe coughing, and excessive consumption of alcohol may precipitate rupture of EVs.

Effect of Helicobacter pylori infection on esophagogastric variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Bleeding from esophageal and gastric varices is a fatal event in patients with liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension. However, the effects of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection on esophagogastric variceal bleeding are not known. The present study was aimed to elucidate the role of H. pylori infection in esophagogastric variceal bleeding.

METHODS

The subjects were 196 cirrhotic patients who were admitted to the Kurume University Hospital to treat their esophagogastric varices consisted of 95 with acute bleeding and 101 with nonbleeding but high risk of bleeding. For the diagnosis of H. pylori infection, a (13) C-urea breath test was used, and serum pepsinogen (PG) I and II levels and the PG I/II ratio were also measured.

RESULTS

Esophagogastric variceal bleeding was seen in 34.9% (n = 30) of the H. pylori-infected patients (n = 86) and in 59.1% (n = 65) of the noninfected patients (n = 110) (P < 0.0007). There was no significant difference in the infection rate between the bleeding sites of the esophagus and the stomach. The serum PG I and II levels and the PG I/II ratio were 65.6 ng/dL, 14.7 ng/dL, and 4.4, respectively, for the bleeding patients (n = 95), and 43.7 ng/dL, 17.7 ng/dL, and 3.1 for the nonbleeding patients (n = 101). Thus, the nonbleeding patients had significantly higher rate of H. pylori infection and lower acid secretion than bleeding patients (0.001). In addition, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed a significant negative association between H. pylori infection and esophagogastric variceal bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that H. pylori infection has a protective effect against esophagogastric variceal bleeding through the induction of gastric mucosal atrophy and concomitant hypoacidity.

Does gastroesophageal reflux have an influence on bleeding from esophageal varices?

BACKGROUND

Mucosal breaks induced by gastroesophageal reflux of gastric contents were more frequently found on the right anterior wall of the lower esophagus. Bleeding from esophageal varices may be also derived from gastroesophageal reflux. The circumferential location of the ruptured esophageal varices was evaluated to elucidate the relationship between gastroesophageal reflux and variceal rupture.

METHODS

Between January 2004 and December 2006, 26 patients who had primary bleeding from esophageal varices and 74 patients without evidence of bleeding with positive red color signs on varices were enrolled in this study retrospectively. Locations of bleeding spots and nonbleeding red color signs of esophageal varices were retrospectively evaluated by endoscopic photographs, and the relationship between the location of red color signs and the risk of bleeding was evaluated. Other possible predictors for bleeding were also investigated by multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

Red color signs were frequently found in the right posterior wall of the lower esophagus. However, bleeding spots of esophageal varices were more frequently seen in the right anterior side (64.0%) than in others. The positive predictor for bleeding from esophageal varices was the presence of red color sign in the right anterior wall of the esophagus, and the administration of proton pomp inhibitor was the negative predictor.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastroesophageal acid reflex may be a risk factor of bleeding from esophageal varices. Attention should be paid to the circumferential location of red color signs in endoscopic screening of patients with esophageal varices to predict future bleeding.

Gastroesophageal reflux in cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices without endoscopic treatment

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension in patients with liver cirrhosis causes manifestations such as esophageal varices, ascites and edema. Some studies have been conducted about the role of esophageal varices in the development of esophageal motor disorders and abnormal gastroesophageal reflux in these patients. Ascites could be a factor promoting gastroesophageal reflux and it has been questioned whether reflux would favor the rupture of varices. However there are a few studies using ambulatory esophageal pH recording in the evaluation of these patients.

AIMS

Evaluate gastroesophageal reflux by pH recording in cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices and possible predictors.

METHODS

Fifty one patients (28 men, 23 women, mean age of 54 years) with liver cirrhosis, diagnosed by clinical, laboratorial, image and histological findings were prospectively evaluated. All patients had esophageal varices confirmed by endoscopy and were submitted to a questionnaire about typical gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms (heartburn and or acid regurgitation). pH recording was performed with the probe placed 5 cm above the superior lower esophageal sphincter limit, as determined by manometry. Abnormal reflux (% total time with pH < 4 >4.5%) was related to the size of varices, congestive gastropathy, ascites, severity of cirrhosis and typical gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms.

RESULTS

The caliber of the varices was considered to be small in 30 patients (59%), medium in 17 (33%) and large in 4 (8%), 21 (41%) congestive gastropathy. Ascites was observed in 17 (33%), 32 patients (63%) were classified as Child-Pugh A, 17 (33%) Child-Pugh B and 2 (4%) Child-Pugh C. Twenty seven patients (53%) presented with typical gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms. Abnormal reflux at pH recording was found in 19 patients (37%). One of them presented with erosive esophagitis at endoscopy. There was no relation between ascites, variceal size, congestive gastropathy and Child-Pugh score and abnormal reflux. There was a correlation between typical gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms and abnormal reflux.

CONCLUSION

Abnormal gastroesophageal reflux was found in 37% of the patients with hepatic cirrhosis and esophageal varices. Only typical gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms predicted these findings.

Proton pump inhibitors in cirrhosis: Tradition or evidence based practice?

Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPI) are very effective in inhibiting acid secretion and are extensively used in many acid related diseases. They are also often used in patients with cirrhosis sometimes in the absence of a specific acid related disease, with the aim of preventing peptic complications in patients with variceal or hypertensive gastropathic bleeding receiving multidrug treatment. Contradicting reports support their use in cirrhosis and evidence of their efficacy in this condition is poor. Moreover there are convincing papers suggesting that acid secretion is reduced in patients with liver cirrhosis. With regard to Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) infection, its prevalence in patients with cirrhosis is largely variable among different studies, and it seems that H pylori eradication does not prevent gastro-duodenal ulcer formation and bleeding. With regard to the prevention and treatment of oesophageal complications after banding or sclerotherapy of oesophageal varices, there is little evidence for a protective role of PPI. Moreover, due to liver metabolism of PPI, the dose of most available PPIs should be reduced in cirrhotics. In conclusion, the use of this class of drugs seems more habit related than evidence-based eventually leading to an increase in health costs.

[Esophageal motor disorders in cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices non-submitted to endoscopic treatment]

BACKGROUND

The hepatic cirrhosis has as one of the main morbid-mortality causes, the portal hypertension with the development of esophageal varices, the possibility of a digestive hemorrhage and worsening of hepatic insufficiency. It is important to identify causal predictive or aggravating factors and if possible to prevent them. In the last years, it has been observed the association of esophageal motor disorders and gastro-esophageal reflux in cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices.

AIMS

To study the prevalence of the esophageal motility disorders and among them, the ineffective esophageal motility, in patients with hepatic cirrhosis and esophageal varices, without previous endoscopic therapeutic and the predictive factors.

METHODS

Prospectively, it has been evaluate 74 patients suffering from liver cirrhosis and esophagic varices, without previous endoscopic treatment. All of them were submitted to a clinical protocol, esophageal manometry and 55 patients also held the ambulatory esophageal pHmetry.

RESULTS

Esophageal motility disorders have been found in 44 patients (60%). The most prevalent was the ineffective esophageal motility, observed in 28%. The abnormal reflux disease was diagnosed through the pHmetry in 35% of the patients. There were no correlation between the manometrical abnormality in general and the ineffective esophageal motility in particular and the esophageal or gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms, the abnormal reflux, the disease seriousness, the ascites presence and the gauge of the varices.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of cirrhotic patients with non-treated esophageal varices present esophageal motor disorders. No predictive factor was found. The clinical relevance of these findings need more researches in the scope to define the real meaning of theses abnormalities.