Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Page 1
Key words Functional dyspepsia Rome III Criteria proton pump inhibitors prokinetics, endoscopy antidepressants.
Dyspepsia is a nonspecific term used to describe upper abdominal discomfort caused by disorders of the upper digestive tract.
Page 2
Rome III
They consist of one or more of the following symptoms : a. Bothersome postprandial fullness b. Early satiation c. Epigastric pain d. Epigastric burning
AND
No evidence of structural disease (including at upper endoscopy) that is likely to explain the symptoms. Criteria fulfilled for the last 3 months with symptom onset at least 6 months prior to diagnosis
Page 3
dyspepsia
structural abnormality (40%) : - peptic ulcer (25%) - reflux esophagitis - gastric cancer - biliary and pancreatic disorders
Functional (60%)
- POSTPRANDIAL DISTRESS SYNDROME - EPIGASTRIC PAIN SYNDROME
Page 4
Patients in whom heartburn is the main symptom are not considered to have functional dyspepsia since in all likelihood their diagnosis is gastroesophageal reflux disease.
Page 5
POSTPRANDIAL DISTRESS SYNDROME Diagnostic criteria* Must include one or both of the following: Bothersome postprandial fullness, occurring after ordinary-sized meals, at least several times per week Early satiation that prevents finishing a regular meal, at least several times per week Supportive criteria Upper abdominal bloating or postprandial nausea or excessive belching can be present Epigastric pain syndrome may coexist
Page 6
EPIGASTRIC PAIN SYNDROME : Diagnostic criteria* Must include all of the following:
Pain or burning localized to the epigastrum of at least moderate severity, at least once per week The pain is intermittent Not generalized or localized to other abdominal or chest regions Not relieved by defecation or passage of flatus Not fulfilling criteria for gallbladder and sphincter of Oddi disorders Supportive criteria The pain may be of a burning quality, but without a retrosternal component The pain is commonly induced or relieved by ingestion of a meal, but may occur while fasting Postprandial distress syndrome may coexist
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Alarm symptoms : Age > 50 yrs Family history of digestive malignancy Involuntary weight loss Gastrointestinal bleeding of feriprive anemia Progressive dysphagia Odinophagia Recurrent vomiting Palpable tumor or adenopathy Icterus
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
GERD
(Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease)
Page 13
Definition : Symptoms or mucosal damage produced by the abnormal reflux of gastric contents into the esophagus
Cardinal symptoms : Heartburn & regurgitation& dysphagia AS : chest pain, water brash (Hypersalivation), globus sensation, odynophagia (Esophageal ulcer), nausea
Page 14
Page 15
Diferential diagnosis Another esophagitis (Inf, eosinophilic) Peptic ulcer CAD Esophageal motor disorder
Page 16
In contrast, although patients often think that coffee, chocolate, and alcohol can trigger symptoms, firm evidence linking specific foods with GERD is lacking.
*Advice on lifestyle, such as stopping smoking, losing weight, and avoiding large, late meals can reduce the frequency and severity of reflux symptoms, although it is rare for these measures to remove the need for acid suppression.
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Dignostic tools Esophagoscopy Ambulatory esophageal PH monitoring Esophageal manometry Bernstein test Hystology Radiography vs endoscopy
Page 21
ERD 25%
Page 22
Page 23
Classification Savary-Miller classification Grade I exhibits one or more supravestibular, non-confluent reddish spots, with or without exudate Grade II demonstrates erosive and exudative lesions in the distal esophagus that may be confluent, but not circumferential Grade III is characterized by circumferential erosions in the distal esophagus, covered by hemorrhagic and pseudomembranous exudate Grade IV is defined by the presence of chronic complications such as deep ulcers, stenosis, or scarring with Barrett's metaplasia
Page 24
Los Angeles classification Grade A one or more mucosal breaks each 5 mm in length Grade B at least one mucosal break >5 mm long, but not continuous between the tops of adjacent mucosal folds Grade C at least one mucosal break that is continuous between the tops of adjacent mucosal folds, but which is not circumferential Grade D mucosal break that involves at least three-fourths of the luminal circumference
Page 25
laryngeal diseases
Page 26
Page 27
30% will have normal coronary arteries; of these, 40% to 50% have objective evidence of GERD by endoscopy or ambulatory pH monitoring
Prevalence of GERD symptoms is 23% to 100% Esophagitis is seen in 0% to 47% Abnormal ambulatory pH recordings noted in 20% to 63% Empiric trial of PPI
78% sensitivity and 86% specificity , for diagnosing GERD association with noncardiac chest pain.
Page 28
Diagnosis
The majority of patients with extraesophageal manifestations of GERD do not have the classic symptoms of heartburn or regurgitation less than 30% have endoscopic evidence of reflux esophagitis Twenty-four-hour pH monitoring has been commonly used to look for evidence of acid reflux into the lower esophagus, upper esophagus, and pharynx. However, this test is not comfortable for most patients
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Lama mempertahankan pH >4 berbanding lurus dengan angka kesembuhan pasien GERD
Pasien sembuh setelah 8 minggu (%)
100
80
60
40
20
0 10 12 14 16 18 Lama pH lambung >4 ( jam) Joelson & Johnson. GUT 1989; 30:1523-1525 Bell et al. Digestion 1992;51 Suppl1:59-67 2 4 6 8 20 22
Page 33
esomeprazole 40 mg sekali sehari rabeprazole 20 mg sekali sehari omeprazole 20 mg sekali sehari 13,3
15,3 ** *
12,9
12,7
11,2 15 20
Page 34
5 hari
p < 0,05
9 hari
7 hari
p 0,01
8 hari
6 hari
p < 0,001
8 hari
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Lama pasien mengalami sustained symptom resolution* hari
*Sustained
Kahrilas PJ, et al. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2000;14:12491258, 2 Castell, et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97(2):575 583, 3 Labenz, et al. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2005;21:739746
1
Page 35
Coclusions
Gastroesophageal reflux is extremely common and may manifest with typical and atypical symptoms. At present it is extremely difficult to establish a definite diagnosis of extraesophageal GERD. Typical esophageal symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation) may be absent in a large number of patients.
Neither the type of ENT symptoms nor the ENT findings are of predictive value in determining underlying GERD.
Page 36
Conclusions
Although interesting new modalities for reflux testing are available (capsule pH monitoring, impedance testing) it remains to be seen whether these modalities improve diagnostic accuracy Currently, the most cost-effective approach for most patients with suspected reflux-related symptoms is a trial of a high-dose protonpump inhibitor for 3 months. pH testing reserved to confirm adequate acid suppression in those with refractory symptoms. Although improvement in cough symptoms may be evident within 2 weeks of treatment, improvement in other ENT disorders may require 3 or more months of therapy.
Page 37
Page 38