Cargando…

The comparative analyses of different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children presented with symptoms suggesting gastroesophageal reflux disease. METHODS: The study design was cross sectional. The study retrospectively included all c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ristic, Nina, Milovanovic, Ivan, Radusinovic, Milica, Stevic, Marija, Ristic, Milos, Ristic, Maja, Kisic Tepavcevic, Darija, Alempijevic, Tamara
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5667817/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29095882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187081
_version_ 1783275558200672256
author Ristic, Nina
Milovanovic, Ivan
Radusinovic, Milica
Stevic, Marija
Ristic, Milos
Ristic, Maja
Kisic Tepavcevic, Darija
Alempijevic, Tamara
author_facet Ristic, Nina
Milovanovic, Ivan
Radusinovic, Milica
Stevic, Marija
Ristic, Milos
Ristic, Maja
Kisic Tepavcevic, Darija
Alempijevic, Tamara
author_sort Ristic, Nina
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children presented with symptoms suggesting gastroesophageal reflux disease. METHODS: The study design was cross sectional. The study retrospectively included all children who underwent combined multiple intraluminal impedance and pH (pH-MII) monitoring due to gastrointestinal and/or extraesophageal symptoms suggesting gastroesophageal reflux disease at University Children's Hospital in Belgrade, from July 2012 to July 2016. RESULTS: A total of 218 (117 boys/101 girls), mean age 6.7 years (range 0.06–18.0 years), met the inclusion criteria. Gastroesophageal reflux disease was found in 128 of 218 children (57.4%) by pH-MII and in 76 (34.1%) children by pH metry alone. Using pH-MII monitoring as gold standard, sensitivity of pH-metry was lowest in infants (22.9%), with tendency to increase in older age groups (reaching 76.4% in children ≥ 9 years). The sensitivity of pH-metry alone in children with extraesophageal symptoms was 38.1%, while the sensitivity of pH-metry in children with gastrointestinal symptoms was 63.8%. Reflux esophagitis was identified in 31 (26.1%) of 119 children who underwent endoscopy. Logistic regression analysis showed that best predictors of endoscopic reflux esophagitis are the longest acid episode (OR = 1.52, p<0.05) and DeMeester reflux composite score (OR = 3.31, p<0.05). The significant cutoff values included DeMeester reflux composite score ≥ 29 (AUC 0.786, CI 0.695–0.877, p<0.01) and duration of longest acid reflux ≥ 18 minutes (AUC 0.784, CI 0.692–0.875, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggested that compared with pH-metry alone, pH-MII had significantly higher detection rate of gastroesophageal reflux disease, especially in infants. Our findings also showed that pH-MII parameters correlated significantly with the endoscopically confirmed erosive esophagitis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5667817
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56678172017-11-17 The comparative analyses of different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children Ristic, Nina Milovanovic, Ivan Radusinovic, Milica Stevic, Marija Ristic, Milos Ristic, Maja Kisic Tepavcevic, Darija Alempijevic, Tamara PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children presented with symptoms suggesting gastroesophageal reflux disease. METHODS: The study design was cross sectional. The study retrospectively included all children who underwent combined multiple intraluminal impedance and pH (pH-MII) monitoring due to gastrointestinal and/or extraesophageal symptoms suggesting gastroesophageal reflux disease at University Children's Hospital in Belgrade, from July 2012 to July 2016. RESULTS: A total of 218 (117 boys/101 girls), mean age 6.7 years (range 0.06–18.0 years), met the inclusion criteria. Gastroesophageal reflux disease was found in 128 of 218 children (57.4%) by pH-MII and in 76 (34.1%) children by pH metry alone. Using pH-MII monitoring as gold standard, sensitivity of pH-metry was lowest in infants (22.9%), with tendency to increase in older age groups (reaching 76.4% in children ≥ 9 years). The sensitivity of pH-metry alone in children with extraesophageal symptoms was 38.1%, while the sensitivity of pH-metry in children with gastrointestinal symptoms was 63.8%. Reflux esophagitis was identified in 31 (26.1%) of 119 children who underwent endoscopy. Logistic regression analysis showed that best predictors of endoscopic reflux esophagitis are the longest acid episode (OR = 1.52, p<0.05) and DeMeester reflux composite score (OR = 3.31, p<0.05). The significant cutoff values included DeMeester reflux composite score ≥ 29 (AUC 0.786, CI 0.695–0.877, p<0.01) and duration of longest acid reflux ≥ 18 minutes (AUC 0.784, CI 0.692–0.875, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggested that compared with pH-metry alone, pH-MII had significantly higher detection rate of gastroesophageal reflux disease, especially in infants. Our findings also showed that pH-MII parameters correlated significantly with the endoscopically confirmed erosive esophagitis. Public Library of Science 2017-11-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5667817/ /pubmed/29095882 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187081 Text en © 2017 Ristic et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Ristic, Nina
Milovanovic, Ivan
Radusinovic, Milica
Stevic, Marija
Ristic, Milos
Ristic, Maja
Kisic Tepavcevic, Darija
Alempijevic, Tamara
The comparative analyses of different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children
title The comparative analyses of different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children
title_full The comparative analyses of different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children
title_fullStr The comparative analyses of different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children
title_full_unstemmed The comparative analyses of different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children
title_short The comparative analyses of different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children
title_sort comparative analyses of different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5667817/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29095882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187081
work_keys_str_mv AT risticnina thecomparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT milovanovicivan thecomparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT radusinovicmilica thecomparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT stevicmarija thecomparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT risticmilos thecomparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT risticmaja thecomparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT kisictepavcevicdarija thecomparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT alempijevictamara thecomparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT risticnina comparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT milovanovicivan comparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT radusinovicmilica comparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT stevicmarija comparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT risticmilos comparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT risticmaja comparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT kisictepavcevicdarija comparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren
AT alempijevictamara comparativeanalysesofdifferentdiagnosticapproachesindetectionofgastroesophagealrefluxdiseaseinchildren