Search

Systemic sclerosis is an autoimmune chronic disease characterised by microvascular, muscular and immunologic abnormalities that lead to progressive and systemic deposition of connective tissue in the skin and internal organs. The gastrointestinal tract is often overlooked by physicians but it is the most affected organ after the skin, from the mouth to the anus. Indeed, 80% of SSc patients may present with gastrointestinal involvement. Gastrointestinal manifestations range from bloating and heartburn to dysphagia and anorectal dysfunction to severe weight loss and malabsorption. However, the gastrointestinal involvement is rarely the direct cause of death, but has great impact on quality of life and leads to several comorbidities that subsequently affect patients' survival. Treatments, including nutritional support and prokinetics provide limited benefits and do not arrest the progressive course of the disease, but earlier detection of gastrointestinal involvement may reduce the risk of complications such as malnutrition., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Esophageal motility abnormalities are among the main factors implicated in the pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The recent introduction in clinical and research practice of novel esophageal testing has markedly improved our understanding of the mechanisms contributing to the development of gastroesophageal reflux disease, allowing a better management of patients with this disorder. In this context, the present article intends to provide an overview of the current literature about esophageal motility dysfunctions in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Esophageal manometry, by recording intraluminal pressure, represents the gold standard to diagnose esophageal motility abnormalities. In particular, using novel techniques, such as high resolution manometry with or without concurrent intraluminal impedance monitoring, transient lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxations, hypotensive LES, ineffective esophageal peristalsis and bolus transit abnormalities have been better defined and strongly implicated in gastroesophageal reflux disease development. Overall, recent findings suggest that esophageal motility abnormalities are increasingly prevalent with increasing severity of reflux disease, from non-erosive reflux disease to erosive reflux disease and Barrett's esophagus. Characterizing esophageal dysmotility among different subgroups of patients with reflux disease may represent a fundamental approach to properly diagnose these patients and, thus, to set up the best therapeutic management. Currently, surgery represents the only reliable way to restore the esophagogastric junction integrity and to reduce transient LES relaxations that are considered to be the predominant mechanism by which gastric contents can enter the esophagus. On that ground, more in depth future studies assessing the pathogenetic role of dysmotility in patients with reflux disease are warranted.

Laryngopharyngeal reflux is defined as the reflux of gastric content into larynx and pharynx. A large number of data suggest the growing prevalence of laryngopharyngeal symptoms in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. However, laryngopharyngeal reflux is a multifactorial syndrome and gastroesophageal reflux disease is not the only cause involved in its pathogenesis. Current critical issues in diagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux are many nonspecific laryngeal symptoms and signs, and poor sensitivity and specificity of all currently available diagnostic tests. Although it is a pragmatic clinical strategy to start with empiric trials of proton pump inhibitors, many patients with suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux have persistent symptoms despite maximal acid suppression therapy. Overall, there are scant conflicting results to assess the effect of reflux treatments (including dietary and lifestyle modification, medical treatment, antireflux surgery) on laryngopharyngeal reflux. The present review is aimed at critically discussing the current treatment options in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux, and provides a perspective on the development of new therapies.

Introduction: Approximately 20% of the Western population is affected by gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). To date, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) represent the mainstay of GERD medical treatment. However, despite their undoubted benefit, about 40% of GERD patients display an inadequate response to these drugs. Recently, a new PPI, ilaprazole , at oral doses of 10 mg has shown higher suppression of gastric acid secretion, more prolonged plasma half-life, and similar safety compared to 20 mg omeprazole., Areas Covered: This review provides an update on the following points: pharmacokinetic profile and metabolism of ilaprazole in relation to its pharmacodynamic properties; comparative data on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ilaprazole with currently available PPIs; and implications for studies on the therapeutic efficacy of ilaprazole in GERD., Expert Opinion: Different studies show that ilaprazole, a benzimidazole derivative, has an extended plasma half-life in comparison with all other approved PPIs. In addition, ilaprazole metabolism is not significantly influenced by CYP2C19, compared to the available PPIs. Furthermore, the pharmacological characteristics of ilaprazole confer theoretical advantages that are expected to translate into an improved acid control, particularly at night time. However, studies comparing the clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ilaprazole with those of second-generation PPIs are insufficient. Moreover, further investigations assessing the efficacy of ilaprazole in the management of GERD are required. In healthy volunteers, as well as in patients with gastric or duodenal ulcers, ilaprazole has not shown clinically relevant changes in hematology and biochemistry testing, nor significant treatment-related adverse symptoms.

Several studies indicate a significant degree of overlap between irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Likewise, both functional heartburn (FH) and IBS are functional digestive disorders that may occur in the same patients. However, data establishing a solid link between FH and IBS are lacking, mainly because the clinical definition of FH has undergone substantial changes over the years. The available literature on the overlap between GERD or FH and IBS highlights considerable heterogeneity in terms of the criteria and diagnostic procedures used to assess heartburn and IBS. In particular, several epidemiological studies included patients with concomitant IBS and GERD without any attempt to distinguish FH (as defined by the Rome III criteria) from GERD via pathophysiological investigations. Independent of these critical issues, there is preliminary evidence supporting a significant degree of FH-IBS overlap. This underscores the need for studies based on updated diagnostic criteria and accurate pathophysiological classifications, particularly to distinguish FH from GERD. This distinction would represent an essential starting point to achieving a better understanding of pathophysiology in the subclasses of patients with GERD and FH and properly assessing the different degrees of overlap between IBS and the subcategories of heartburn.The present review article intends to appraise and critically discuss current evidence supporting a possible concomitance of GERD or FH with IBS in the same patients and to highlight the pathophysiological relationships between these disorders.

Mussels (Mytilus galloprovincialis), collected from a harvesting area approved by European Community Regulation, were transplanted to four polluted sites located in the Northwestern Mediterranean area (Tuscany). They were used as bio-monitors to test the quality of the marine water pollution. At different times after the transplantation, mussels were withdrawn and tested for presence of phages and enteric viruses by molecular tests. 52.4% of the transplanted mussel samples were positive for at least one enteric virus. Hepatitis A virus (HAV) was identified in each site (17/37; 45.9%). Three samples were positive for hepatitis E virus (HEV) (8.1%) and two (5.4%) for norovirus (NoV) genogroup I. Coliphages and RYC 2056 phages were detected in all sites, while HSP 40 phages were detected in three sites. Results demonstrate the ability of transplanted mussels in accumulating and retaining different species of enteric microorganisms. Their utility as bio-monitor organisms enables testing for viral marine pollution., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To evaluate the effect of a novel alginate-based compound, Faringel, in modifying reflux characteristics and controlling symptoms., Methods: In this prospective, open-label study, 40 patients reporting heartburn and regurgitation with proven reflux disease (i.e., positive impedance-pH test/evidence of erosive esophagitis at upper endoscopy) underwent 2 h impedance-pH testing after eating a refluxogenic meal. They were studied for 1 h under basal conditions and 1 h after taking 10 mL Faringel. In both sessions, measurements were obtained in right lateral and supine decubitus positions. Patients also completed a validated questionnaire consisting of a 2-item 5-point (0-4) Likert scale and a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS) in order to evaluate the efficacy of Faringel in symptom relief. Tolerability of the treatment was assessed using a 6-point Likert scale ranging from very good (1) to very poor (6)., Results: Faringel decreased significantly (P < 0.001), in both the right lateral and supine decubitus positions, esophageal acid exposure time [median 10 (25th-75th percentil 6-16) vs 5.8 (4-10) and 16 (11-19) vs 7.5 (5-11), respectively] and acid refluxes [5 (3-8) vs 1 (1-1) and 6 (4-8) vs 2 (1-2), respectively], but increased significantly (P < 0.01) the number of nonacid reflux events compared with baseline [2 (1-3) vs 3 (2-5) and 3 (2-4) vs 6 (3-8), respectively]. Percentage of proximal migration decreased in both decubitus positions (60% vs 32% and 64% vs 35%, respectively; P < 0.001). Faringel was significantly effective in controlling heartburn, based on both the Likert scale [3.1 (range 1-4) vs 0.9 (0-2); P < 0.001] and VAS score [7.1 (3-9.8) vs 2 (0.1-4.8); P < 0.001], but it had less success against regurgitation, based on both the Likert scale [2.6 (1-4) vs 2.2 (1-4); P = not significant (NS)] and VAS score [5.6 (2-9.6) vs 3.9 (1-8.8); P = NS]. Overall, the tolerability of Faringel was very good 5 (2-6), with only two patients reporting modest adverse events (i.e., nausea and bloating)., Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that Faringel is well-tolerated and effective in reducing heartburn by modifying esophageal acid exposure time, number of acid refluxes and their proximal migration.

Aim: To investigate the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in patients with a laryngoscopic diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)., Methods: Between May 2011 and October 2011, 41 consecutive patients with laryngopharyngeal symptoms (LPS) and laryngoscopic diagnosis of LPR were empirically treated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for at least 8 wk, and the therapeutic outcome was assessed through validated questionnaires (GERD impact scale, GIS; visual analogue scale, VAS). LPR diagnosis was performed by ear, nose and throat specialists using the reflux finding score (RFS) and reflux symptom index (RSI). After a 16-d wash-out from PPIs, all patients underwent an upper endoscopy, stationary esophageal manometry, 24-h multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH (MII-pH) esophageal monitoring. A positive correlation between LPR diagnosis and GERD was supposed based on the presence of esophagitis (ERD), pathological acid exposure time (AET) in the absence of esophageal erosions (NERD), and a positive correlation between symptoms and refluxes (hypersensitive esophagus, HE)., Results: The male/female ratio was 0.52 (14/27), the mean age ± SD was 51.5 ± 12.7 years, and the mean body mass index was 25.7 ± 3.4 kg/m(2). All subjects reported one or more LPS. Twenty-five out of 41 patients also had typical GERD symptoms (heartburn and/or regurgitation). The most frequent laryngoscopic findings were posterior laryngeal hyperemia (38/41), linear indentation in the medial edge of the vocal fold (31/41), vocal fold nodules (6/41) and diffuse infraglottic oedema (25/41). The GIS analysis showed that 10/41 patients reported symptom relief with PPI therapy (P < 0.05); conversely, 23/41 did not report any clinical improvement. At the same time, the VAS analysis showed a significant reduction in typical GERD symptoms after PPI therapy (P < 0.001). A significant reduction in LPS symptoms. On the other hand, such result was not recorded for LPS. Esophagitis was detected in 2/41 patients, and ineffective esophageal motility was found in 3/41 patients. The MII-pH analysis showed an abnormal AET in 5/41 patients (2 ERD and 3 NERD); 11/41 patients had a normal AET and a positive association between symptoms and refluxes (HE), and 25/41 patients had a normal AET and a negative association between symptoms and refluxes (no GERD patients). It is noteworthy that HE patients had a positive association with typical GERD-related symptoms. Gas refluxes were found more frequently in patients with globus (29.7 ± 3.6) and hoarseness (21.5 ± 7.4) than in patients with heartburn or regurgitation (7.8 ± 6.2). Gas refluxes were positively associated with extra-esophageal symptoms (P < 0.05). Overall, no differences were found among the three groups of patients in terms of the frequency of laryngeal signs. The proximal reflux was abnormal in patients with ERD/NERD only. The differences observed by means of MII-pH analysis among the three subgroups of patients (ERD/NERD, HE, no GERD) were not demonstrated with the RSI and RFS. Moreover, only the number of gas refluxes was found to have a significant association with the RFS (P = 0.028 and P = 0.026, nominal and numerical correlation, respectively)., Conclusion: MII-pH analysis confirmed GERD diagnosis in less than 40% of patients with previous diagnosis of LPR, most likely because of the low specificity of the laryngoscopic findings.