高玉静, 王潇潇, 王巍峰, 彭丽华, 杨云生. 24 h双通道食管pH监测对胃食管酸反流的监测意义[J]. 解放军医学院学报, 2015, 36(3): 212-215. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2015.03.004
引用本文: 高玉静, 王潇潇, 王巍峰, 彭丽华, 杨云生. 24 h双通道食管pH监测对胃食管酸反流的监测意义[J]. 解放军医学院学报, 2015, 36(3): 212-215. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2015.03.004
GAO Yujing, WANG Xiaoxiao, WANG Weifeng, PENG Lihua, YANG Yunsheng. Value of 24 hours dual-probe pH monitoring of esophagus in patients with gastroesophageal reflux[J]. ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF CHINESE PLA MEDICAL SCHOOL, 2015, 36(3): 212-215. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2015.03.004
Citation: GAO Yujing, WANG Xiaoxiao, WANG Weifeng, PENG Lihua, YANG Yunsheng. Value of 24 hours dual-probe pH monitoring of esophagus in patients with gastroesophageal reflux[J]. ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF CHINESE PLA MEDICAL SCHOOL, 2015, 36(3): 212-215. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2015.03.004

24 h双通道食管pH监测对胃食管酸反流的监测意义

Value of 24 hours dual-probe pH monitoring of esophagus in patients with gastroesophageal reflux

  • 摘要: 目的 探讨24 h双通道食管pH监测对胃食管病理性酸反流的监测意义。 方法 收集2011年8月- 2012年9月因胃食管反流相关症状在我院消化科胃肠动力室行动态24 h双通道食管pH监测的51例患者资料,根据24 h双通道食管pH监测结果分为:远端、近端均有病理性酸反流组(20例),仅远端有病理性酸反流组(2例),仅近端有病理性酸反流组(9例),远端、近端均无病理性酸反流组(20例)。比较单、双通道24 h食管pH监测食管病理性酸反流阳性率的差异,分析仅近端食管出现病理性酸反流的可能原因及近端与远端食管酸反流的相关性。 结果 51例中9例仅近端提示有病理性酸反流,其中8例同时在本院进行了胃镜和(或)高分辨率食管测压检查,1例为Barrett食管(主诉仅为咽部异物感,没有明显的反酸、烧心症状),7例主诉反酸、烧心者中2例食管裂孔疝、2例贲门失迟缓、1例十二指肠球部溃疡和1例胡桃夹食管,另外1例胃镜结果阴性(未做高分辨率食管测压检查)。近端、远端均有病理性酸反流患者近端食管pH< 4所占总监测时间的百分比、卧位pH< 4所占百分比、立位pH< 4所占百分比及Demeester记分均明显高于单纯近端食管病理性酸反流患者(P< 0.05),最长酸反流时间的差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。食管近端、远端酸反流均与年龄有关,年龄越大越易反流。 结论 24 h双通道食管pH监测对有明显胃食管反流症状但pH监测远端食管无病理性酸反流的患者有一定诊断意义。喉咽反流与胃食管反流具有相关性,24 h双通道食管pH监测对其研究有帮助。

     

    Abstract: Objective To study the value of 24 hours dual-probe monitoring in patients with pathological gastroesophageal acid reflux (GER). Methods Retrospective investigation and analysis were carried out in 51 patients with GER symptoms in our hospital from August 2011 to September 2012. All patients had underwent 24 hours dual-probe pH monitoring of esophagus and they were divided into with both low and upper-esophageal reflux group (n=20), with upper-esophageal reflux only group (n=2), with low-esophageal reflux only group (n=9) and without any esophageal reflux group (n=20) according to test results. Positive rates of pathological gastroesophageal acid reflux were compared between one-probe and dual-probe pH monitoring for 24 hours. The potential causes for patients had upper-esophageal reflux only and the relationship between low and upper-esophageal reflux were analyzed. Results Of the 9 patients with upper-esophageal reflux only, 8 cases were detected by gastroscopy and/or High-resolution manometry (HRM) examination, including 1 just case complained of globus sensation without obvious regurgitation and heartburn symptoms, and the rest 7 patients complained of reflux and heartburn: 2 patients with hiatal hernia, 2 with achalasia, 1 with Nutcracker esophagus, 1 with duodenal ulcer (DU) and 1 operated gastroscopy only turning out with no pathological changes. The upper-esophageal reflux was more serious when patients had both upper-esophageal reflux and low-esophageal reflux. The percent and total amount of time of the esophageal pH< 4 in the upright and supine positions and DeMeester score were significantly increased (P< 0.05), while there showed no significant differences in maximum reflux time (P> 0.05). Both upper and low esophageal reflux were related to age. Conclusion 24 hours dual-probe monitoring may be useful in diagnosing GERD with apparent symptoms and no reflux being found by single-probe monitoring of gastroesophageal. Moreover, the pathogensis, morbidity and severity of LPR are closely related to GERD and 24 hours dual-probe monitoring is helpful for the research.

     

/

返回文章
返回