Contribution of standard oesophageal manometry in sliding hiatal hernia: from the gastro-oesophageal pressure gradient to the diagnosis

OBJECTIVE

We tested whether gastro-oesophageal pressure gradient is augmented in sliding hiatal hernia and the yield of oesophageal manometry in diagnosing sliding hiatal hernia.

METHODS

Patients with equivalent body mass index were categorised according to manometry and endoscopy in groups: (1) no sliding hiatal hernia (n=147); (2) sliding hiatal hernia solely at endoscopy (n=46); and (3) sliding hiatal hernia at manometry (n=22). The yield of manometry was assessed taking endoscopy as referential.

RESULTS

Gastro-oesophageal pressure gradient was similar between groups both at inspiration (13.3+/-5.7 mm Hg vs. 13.6+/-5.4 mm Hg vs. 12.6+/-4.4 mm Hg; P=0.874) or expiration (5.1+/-3.8 mm Hg vs. 5.2+/-3.6 mm Hg vs. 5.1+/-3.7 mm Hg; P=0.767). Group 3 patients were older than those of groups 1 and 2 (59+/-10 vs. 42+/-15 vs. 45+/-13 years; P<0.001). Sliding hiatal hernia was larger when characterised by manometry than at endoscopy [4 cm (2.25-4.75) vs. 2 cm (2-3); P<0.001]. Manometry showed sensitivity of 28% (95%CI 19-40%), specificity of 97% (95%CI 93-99%) and positive predictive value of 82% (95%CI 63-92%) in diagnosing sliding hiatal hernia.

CONCLUSIONS

By using manometry in patients with equivalent body mass index, sliding hiatal hernia presence and size are related with age rather than gastro-oesophageal pressure gradient. This technique may be clinically useful when positive for sliding hiatal hernia.

Nutcracker oesophagus: association with chest pain and dysphagia controlling for gastro-oesophageal reflux

BACKGROUND

The association between nutcracker oesophagus, gastro-oesophageal reflux and their symptoms is controversial.

AIM

To evaluate the association of nutcracker oesophagus with chest pain and dysphagia controlling for gastro-oesophageal reflux.

METHODS

From a database of 935 consecutive patients investigated with oesophageal manometry and pH-metry, we selected all patients with nutcracker oesophagus including diffuse and segmental patterns. Patients with normal oesophageal peristalsis served as controls. Symptoms assessment, manometry testing and 24h oesophageal pH monitoring off acid-suppressive medications were performed following a standardized protocol. The associations between nutcracker oesophagus and symptoms were assessed by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Nutcracker oesophagus was found in 60 patients (6.4%), of which 30 had diffuse nutcracker oesophagus and 30 had segmental nutcracker oesophagus. The control group was composed by 656 patients with normal oesophageal peristalsis. Diffuse nutcracker oesophagus was associated with chest pain (odds ratio 4.3; 95% CI 1.9-9.9; P<0.0001) and dysphagia (odds ratio 5.3; 95% CI 2.3-12.2; P<0.0001), whereas segmental nutcracker oesophagus was associated with chest pain (odds ratio 2.8; 95% CI 1.1-6.9; P=0.026), controlling for total oesophageal acid exposure, age, sex and lower oesophageal sphincter (LOS) pressure.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that both diffuse and segmental nutcracker oesophagus should be regarded as meaningful abnormalities and not mere manometric curiosities.

Polymorphisms of GSTP1 and GSTT1, but not of CYP2A6, CYP2E1 or GSTM1, modify the risk for esophageal cancer in a western population

Esophageal cancer is among the most common and fatal tumors in the world. Eighty percent of esophageal tumors are esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Brazil is one of the high incidence areas in the West, where tobacco and alcohol consumption have been associated with ESCC. However, polymorphisms in xenobiotic metabolizing genes may also contribute to the risk. Therefore, in this study, we analyzed the risk of ESCC associated with tobacco and alcohol consumption and with polymorphisms of CYP2A6 (CYP2A6*2), CYP2E1 (CYP2E1*5B, CYP2E1*6), GSTP1 (Ile105Val), GSTM1 and GSTT1 null genotypes in 126 cases and 252 age- and gender-matched controls. Data on the amount, length and type of tobacco and alcohol consumed were collected, and DNA was extracted from blood lymphocytes from all individuals. Polymorphisms were analyzed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-multiplex (GSTM1 and T1), PCR-Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (CYP2E1*5B and *6 and GSTP1 Ile105Val) or allele-specific PCR amplification (CYP2A6*2). Risks were evaluated by multivariate conditional regression analysis. As expected, tobacco [odds ratio (OR) = 6.71, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 3.08-14.63] and alcohol (OR = 16.98, CI 7.8-36.98) consumption, independently or together (OR = 26.91, CI 13.39-54.05) were risk factors. GSTP1 Ile105Val polymorphism was an independent risk factor (OR = 2.12, CI 1.37-3.29), whereas GSTT1 wild-type was an independent protective factor for ESCC (OR = 0.37, CI 0.16-0.79). There was approximately 80% statistical power to detect both results. There was no risk associated with CYP2A6, CYP2E1 and GSTM1 polymorphisms. In conclusion, this study suggests an opposite role of GSTP1 and GSTT1 polymorphisms for the risk for ESCC.