欢迎来到《四川大学学报(医学版)》
门若庭, 易智慧, 杨正兵等. 非典型症状与典型症状胃食管反流病患者临床特点比较[J]. 四川大学学报(医学版), 2014, 45(3): 484-488.
引用本文: 门若庭, 易智慧, 杨正兵等. 非典型症状与典型症状胃食管反流病患者临床特点比较[J]. 四川大学学报(医学版), 2014, 45(3): 484-488.
MEN Ruo-ting, YI Zhi-hui, YANG Zheng-bing.et al. Comparison of Clinical Features Between Gastroesophageal Reflux Diseases with Atypical and Typical Symptoms[J]. Journal of Sichuan University (Medical Sciences), 2014, 45(3): 484-488.
Citation: MEN Ruo-ting, YI Zhi-hui, YANG Zheng-bing.et al. Comparison of Clinical Features Between Gastroesophageal Reflux Diseases with Atypical and Typical Symptoms[J]. Journal of Sichuan University (Medical Sciences), 2014, 45(3): 484-488.

非典型症状与典型症状胃食管反流病患者临床特点比较

Comparison of Clinical Features Between Gastroesophageal Reflux Diseases with Atypical and Typical Symptoms

  • 摘要: 目的 比较非典型症状胃食管反流病(a-GERD)患者与典型症状胃食管反流病(t-GERD)患者的高分辨率食管测压(HRM)、24 h食管多通道腔内阻抗-pH监测(MII-pH)及质子泵抑制剂(PPI)治疗结果,提高对a-GERD的认识。 方法 对 30例疑诊a-GERD患者行上消化道内镜、HRM、MII-pH检查及PPI治疗,以同期33例t-GERD 患者作对照,比较两组患者的临床症状、食管动力、反流及PPI疗效的差异。 结果 30例疑诊a-GERD患者中24例确诊为a-GERD,其中1/3的患者年龄在60岁以上,发病年龄、合并症发生率高于t-GERD患者(P<0.05)。两组内镜下食管黏膜糜烂的发生率及食管测压各项指标差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。24 h食管MII-pH监测示a-GERD组无论酸反流、非酸反流时间百分比及次数均高于t-GERD组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);且前组反流以卧位、气液体混合反流多见, 而后组以立位反流多见。经2周标准剂量的PPI治疗后,a-GERD组的有效率低于t-GERD组,差异有统计学意义(45.8% vs. 78.8%,P<0.01);但继续2周2倍标准剂量的PPI联合促动力药治疗,两组有效率的差异无统计学意义(72.7% vs.88.0%,P<0.05)。 结论 与t-GERD患者相比,a-GERD患者的年龄偏大,临床表现为与体位有关的上胸部症状且夜间及进餐可加重,反流更严重且混合反流多见,PPI治疗的剂量更大。

     

    Abstract: Objective To study the differences between gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) with atypical symptoms (a-GERD) and typical symptoms (t-GERD). Methods 30 patients of suspected a-GERD were recruited and examined with upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, high-resolution manometry (HRM), 24 h esophageal multichannel intra-luminal impedance monitoring with pH sensor (MII-pH) and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trials. The results were compared with those of 33 cases of GERD with typical symptoms. Results Among the 30 patients of suspected GERD, 24 were confirmed with a-GERD. One third of those patients were over sixty-years old, significantly higher than those with typical GERD (P<0.05). No significant differences in prevalence of esophageal mucosa breakage and esophageal manometry readings were found between the two groups (P>0.05). The a-GERD patients had higher data readings in 24 h esophageal MCII-pH monitoring than the t-GERD patients (P<0.05). Supine type of GER and mixed reflux were predominately seen in the a-GERD patients, while upright type of GER was predominate seen in the t-GERD patients. The response rate of PPI in the a-GERD patients was significantly lower than that in the t-GERD patients when a course of standard dosage of PPI was given (45.8% vs. 78.8%, P<0.01). But there was no significant difference in PPI response between these two groups when a second course with double standard dosage of PPI combined with pro-motility agents were given (72.7% vs. 88.0%, P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with patients of t-GERD, older onset age, more severe degree of acid reflux are presented in patients of a-GERD. a-GERD should be considered when it is hard to explain the symptoms of upper part of the chest in clinical practice. 24 h esophageal MII-pH monitoring and/or diagnostic therapy with double standard dosage of PPI helps make a correct diagnosis.

     

© 2014 《四川大学学报(医学版)》编辑部 版权所有 cc

开放获取 本文遵循知识共享署名—非商业性使用4.0国际许可协议(CC BY-NC 4.0),允许第三方对本刊发表的论文自由共享(即在任何媒介以任何形式复制、发行原文)、演绎(即修改、转换或以原文为基础进行创作),必须给出适当的署名,提供指向本文许可协议的链接,同时标明是否对原文作了修改;不得将本文用于商业目的。CC BY-NC 4.0许可协议详情请访问 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0

/

返回文章
返回