Cargando…
Wireless Ambulatory Esophageal pH Monitoring in Dogs with Clinical Signs Interpreted as Gastroesophageal Reflux
BACKGROUND: Although gastroesophageal reflux (GER) often is assumed to be causative for upper gastrointestinal and respiratory signs in dogs, no attempts have been made to verify this assumption. OBJECTIVES: To monitor esophageal pH with the Bravo pH system in healthy dogs and client‐owned dogs disp...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4895632/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25269696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jvim.12461 |
_version_ | 1782435890171215872 |
---|---|
author | Kook, P.H. Kempf, J. Ruetten, M. Reusch, C.E. |
author_facet | Kook, P.H. Kempf, J. Ruetten, M. Reusch, C.E. |
author_sort | Kook, P.H. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Although gastroesophageal reflux (GER) often is assumed to be causative for upper gastrointestinal and respiratory signs in dogs, no attempts have been made to verify this assumption. OBJECTIVES: To monitor esophageal pH with the Bravo pH system in healthy dogs and client‐owned dogs displaying signs commonly attributed to GER. ANIMALS: Seven healthy and 22 client‐owned dogs. METHODS: After routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy, radiotelemetric pH capsules were placed in distal esophagus for continuous pH recording. Reflux was defined as single pH measurement <4. At discharge, owners were instructed to press individually predefined clinical sign‐buttons on the receiver whenever indicated. Results between groups were compared using Mann–Whitney U‐test. RESULTS: The median (range) number of refluxes in client‐owned and healthy dogs, respectively, was 17 (1–205) and 10 (1–65), the number of refluxes >5 minutes in duration was 1 (0–14), and 1 (0–4), duration of longest reflux (min) was 10 (0–65) and 8 (0–27), and fractional time pH <4 (%) was 0.76% (0.01–6.28), and 0.3% (0–3.1). No differences were found between groups. The median of 7 (1–35) clinical sign‐button pushes were recorded in 21 dogs. Median of 12.5% (2.8% [1/35]–50% [2/4]) reflux‐positive clinical sign‐button pushes was found in 10 dogs with reflux‐positive pushes. Five (22.7%) dogs had increased esophageal acid exposure, and mild esophagitis was noted in 1 dog. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Despite evidence of increased GER in some dogs, the clinical sign‐reflux association remained poor. Future investigation should focus on dogs with esophagitis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4895632 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48956322016-06-22 Wireless Ambulatory Esophageal pH Monitoring in Dogs with Clinical Signs Interpreted as Gastroesophageal Reflux Kook, P.H. Kempf, J. Ruetten, M. Reusch, C.E. J Vet Intern Med Standard Articles BACKGROUND: Although gastroesophageal reflux (GER) often is assumed to be causative for upper gastrointestinal and respiratory signs in dogs, no attempts have been made to verify this assumption. OBJECTIVES: To monitor esophageal pH with the Bravo pH system in healthy dogs and client‐owned dogs displaying signs commonly attributed to GER. ANIMALS: Seven healthy and 22 client‐owned dogs. METHODS: After routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy, radiotelemetric pH capsules were placed in distal esophagus for continuous pH recording. Reflux was defined as single pH measurement <4. At discharge, owners were instructed to press individually predefined clinical sign‐buttons on the receiver whenever indicated. Results between groups were compared using Mann–Whitney U‐test. RESULTS: The median (range) number of refluxes in client‐owned and healthy dogs, respectively, was 17 (1–205) and 10 (1–65), the number of refluxes >5 minutes in duration was 1 (0–14), and 1 (0–4), duration of longest reflux (min) was 10 (0–65) and 8 (0–27), and fractional time pH <4 (%) was 0.76% (0.01–6.28), and 0.3% (0–3.1). No differences were found between groups. The median of 7 (1–35) clinical sign‐button pushes were recorded in 21 dogs. Median of 12.5% (2.8% [1/35]–50% [2/4]) reflux‐positive clinical sign‐button pushes was found in 10 dogs with reflux‐positive pushes. Five (22.7%) dogs had increased esophageal acid exposure, and mild esophagitis was noted in 1 dog. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Despite evidence of increased GER in some dogs, the clinical sign‐reflux association remained poor. Future investigation should focus on dogs with esophagitis. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2014-09-30 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4895632/ /pubmed/25269696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jvim.12461 Text en Copyright © 2014 by the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine |
spellingShingle | Standard Articles Kook, P.H. Kempf, J. Ruetten, M. Reusch, C.E. Wireless Ambulatory Esophageal pH Monitoring in Dogs with Clinical Signs Interpreted as Gastroesophageal Reflux |
title | Wireless Ambulatory Esophageal pH Monitoring in Dogs with Clinical Signs Interpreted as Gastroesophageal Reflux |
title_full | Wireless Ambulatory Esophageal pH Monitoring in Dogs with Clinical Signs Interpreted as Gastroesophageal Reflux |
title_fullStr | Wireless Ambulatory Esophageal pH Monitoring in Dogs with Clinical Signs Interpreted as Gastroesophageal Reflux |
title_full_unstemmed | Wireless Ambulatory Esophageal pH Monitoring in Dogs with Clinical Signs Interpreted as Gastroesophageal Reflux |
title_short | Wireless Ambulatory Esophageal pH Monitoring in Dogs with Clinical Signs Interpreted as Gastroesophageal Reflux |
title_sort | wireless ambulatory esophageal ph monitoring in dogs with clinical signs interpreted as gastroesophageal reflux |
topic | Standard Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4895632/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25269696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jvim.12461 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kookph wirelessambulatoryesophagealphmonitoringindogswithclinicalsignsinterpretedasgastroesophagealreflux AT kempfj wirelessambulatoryesophagealphmonitoringindogswithclinicalsignsinterpretedasgastroesophagealreflux AT ruettenm wirelessambulatoryesophagealphmonitoringindogswithclinicalsignsinterpretedasgastroesophagealreflux AT reuschce wirelessambulatoryesophagealphmonitoringindogswithclinicalsignsinterpretedasgastroesophagealreflux |