Cargando…

The Lyon Consensus: Does It Differ From the Previous Ones?

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a complex disorder with heterogeneous symptoms and a multifaceted pathogenetic basis, which prevent a simple diagnostic algorithm or any categorical classification. Clinical history, questionnaires and response to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy are insu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ghisa, Matteo, Barberio, Brigida, Savarino, Vincenzo, Marabotto, Elisa, Ribolsi, Mentore, Bodini, Giorgia, Zingone, Fabiana, Frazzoni, Marzio, Savarino, Edoardo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7329153/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32606254
http://dx.doi.org/10.5056/jnm20046
_version_ 1783552861805740032
author Ghisa, Matteo
Barberio, Brigida
Savarino, Vincenzo
Marabotto, Elisa
Ribolsi, Mentore
Bodini, Giorgia
Zingone, Fabiana
Frazzoni, Marzio
Savarino, Edoardo
author_facet Ghisa, Matteo
Barberio, Brigida
Savarino, Vincenzo
Marabotto, Elisa
Ribolsi, Mentore
Bodini, Giorgia
Zingone, Fabiana
Frazzoni, Marzio
Savarino, Edoardo
author_sort Ghisa, Matteo
collection PubMed
description Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a complex disorder with heterogeneous symptoms and a multifaceted pathogenetic basis, which prevent a simple diagnostic algorithm or any categorical classification. Clinical history, questionnaires and response to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy are insufficient tools to make a conclusive diagnosis of GERD and further investigations are frequently required. The Lyon Consensus goes beyond the previous classifications and defines endoscopic and functional parameters able to establish the presence of GERD. Evidences for reflux include high-grade erosive esophagitis, Barrett’s esophagus, and peptic strictures at endoscopy as well as esophageal acid exposure time > 6% on pH-metry or combined pH-impedance monitoring. Even if a normal endoscopy does not exclude GERD, its combination with distal acid exposure time < 4% on off-PPI pH-impedance monitoring provides sufficient evidence refuting this diagnosis. Reflux-symptom association on pH-monitoring provides supportive evidence for reflux-triggered symptoms and may predict a better treatment outcome, when present. Also recommendations to perform pH-impedance “on” or “off” PPI are well depicted. When endoscopy and pH-metry or combined pH-impedance monitoring are inconclusive, adjunctive evidence from biopsy findings (eg, microscopic esophagitis), high-resolution manometry (ie, ineffective esophagogastric barrier and esophageal body hypomotility), and novel impedance metrics, such as mean nocturnal baseline impedance and post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index, can contribute to better identify patients with GERD. Definition of individual patient phenotype, based on the level of refluxate exposure, mechanism of reflux, efficacy of clearance, underlying anatomy of the esophagogastric junction, and clinical presentation, will lead to manage GERD patients with a tailored approach chosen among different types of therapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7329153
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73291532020-07-10 The Lyon Consensus: Does It Differ From the Previous Ones? Ghisa, Matteo Barberio, Brigida Savarino, Vincenzo Marabotto, Elisa Ribolsi, Mentore Bodini, Giorgia Zingone, Fabiana Frazzoni, Marzio Savarino, Edoardo J Neurogastroenterol Motil Review Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a complex disorder with heterogeneous symptoms and a multifaceted pathogenetic basis, which prevent a simple diagnostic algorithm or any categorical classification. Clinical history, questionnaires and response to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy are insufficient tools to make a conclusive diagnosis of GERD and further investigations are frequently required. The Lyon Consensus goes beyond the previous classifications and defines endoscopic and functional parameters able to establish the presence of GERD. Evidences for reflux include high-grade erosive esophagitis, Barrett’s esophagus, and peptic strictures at endoscopy as well as esophageal acid exposure time > 6% on pH-metry or combined pH-impedance monitoring. Even if a normal endoscopy does not exclude GERD, its combination with distal acid exposure time < 4% on off-PPI pH-impedance monitoring provides sufficient evidence refuting this diagnosis. Reflux-symptom association on pH-monitoring provides supportive evidence for reflux-triggered symptoms and may predict a better treatment outcome, when present. Also recommendations to perform pH-impedance “on” or “off” PPI are well depicted. When endoscopy and pH-metry or combined pH-impedance monitoring are inconclusive, adjunctive evidence from biopsy findings (eg, microscopic esophagitis), high-resolution manometry (ie, ineffective esophagogastric barrier and esophageal body hypomotility), and novel impedance metrics, such as mean nocturnal baseline impedance and post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index, can contribute to better identify patients with GERD. Definition of individual patient phenotype, based on the level of refluxate exposure, mechanism of reflux, efficacy of clearance, underlying anatomy of the esophagogastric junction, and clinical presentation, will lead to manage GERD patients with a tailored approach chosen among different types of therapy. The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2020-07-30 2020-07-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7329153/ /pubmed/32606254 http://dx.doi.org/10.5056/jnm20046 Text en © 2020 The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Ghisa, Matteo
Barberio, Brigida
Savarino, Vincenzo
Marabotto, Elisa
Ribolsi, Mentore
Bodini, Giorgia
Zingone, Fabiana
Frazzoni, Marzio
Savarino, Edoardo
The Lyon Consensus: Does It Differ From the Previous Ones?
title The Lyon Consensus: Does It Differ From the Previous Ones?
title_full The Lyon Consensus: Does It Differ From the Previous Ones?
title_fullStr The Lyon Consensus: Does It Differ From the Previous Ones?
title_full_unstemmed The Lyon Consensus: Does It Differ From the Previous Ones?
title_short The Lyon Consensus: Does It Differ From the Previous Ones?
title_sort lyon consensus: does it differ from the previous ones?
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7329153/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32606254
http://dx.doi.org/10.5056/jnm20046
work_keys_str_mv AT ghisamatteo thelyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT barberiobrigida thelyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT savarinovincenzo thelyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT marabottoelisa thelyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT ribolsimentore thelyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT bodinigiorgia thelyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT zingonefabiana thelyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT frazzonimarzio thelyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT savarinoedoardo thelyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT ghisamatteo lyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT barberiobrigida lyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT savarinovincenzo lyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT marabottoelisa lyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT ribolsimentore lyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT bodinigiorgia lyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT zingonefabiana lyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT frazzonimarzio lyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones
AT savarinoedoardo lyonconsensusdoesitdifferfromthepreviousones