Advanced

Optimal Thresholds and Discriminatory Power of 48-h Wireless Esophageal pH Monitoring in the Diagnosisof GERD.

Wenner, Jörgen LU ; Johansson, Jan LU ; Johnsson, Folke LU and Öberg, Stefan LU (2007) In American Journal of Gastroenterology 102(9). p.1862-1869
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The discriminative power of 48-h wireless esophageal pH monitoring in the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease has not been clearly demonstrated, and the cutoff level for esophageal acid exposure generating the optimal sensitivity and specificity is unknown. SUBJECTS AND Patients with typical reflux symptoms and a distinct response to acid suppressive medication METHODS: underwent upper GI endoscopy followed by 48-h wireless esophageal pH studies with the pH electrode placed 6 cm above the squamocolumnar junction. The results were compared to those obtained in 55 healthy controls. Sensitivity, specificity, and thresholds for esophageal acid exposure were analyzed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.... (More)
BACKGROUND: The discriminative power of 48-h wireless esophageal pH monitoring in the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease has not been clearly demonstrated, and the cutoff level for esophageal acid exposure generating the optimal sensitivity and specificity is unknown. SUBJECTS AND Patients with typical reflux symptoms and a distinct response to acid suppressive medication METHODS: underwent upper GI endoscopy followed by 48-h wireless esophageal pH studies with the pH electrode placed 6 cm above the squamocolumnar junction. The results were compared to those obtained in 55 healthy controls. Sensitivity, specificity, and thresholds for esophageal acid exposure were analyzed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: The patient population consisted of 64 patients, 25 women and 39 men, with a median age of 48 yr. Analysis of the area under the ROC curve showed that, for all patients as well as for subgroups of patients with (N = 33) and without (N = 31) esophagitis, the total percent time with pH < 4 for the 48-h study period was the best parameter to discriminate patients from controls. Analysis of acid exposure for day 1, day 2, or using the day with the highest acid exposure did not improve the diagnostic accuracy. A test specificity in the range of 90-95% resulted in a cutoff level of 3.6-4.4% of the total time with pH < 4 for the 48-h period. This threshold generated a test sensitivity of 59-64% in all patients, 76-79% for patients with esophagitis and 42-48% in patients with no esophagitis. CONCLUSIONS: The total percentage of time that esophageal pH was less than 4 for the entire 48-h study period was the parameter that best discriminated patients with typical reflux symptoms from healthy controls, and to achieve a specificity of 90-95% a cutoff level of 4% is recommended. The low sensitivity of wireless pH recording in patients without erosive esophagitis substantially reduces the clinical value of the test. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
American Journal of Gastroenterology
volume
102
issue
9
pages
1862 - 1869
publisher
Wiley-Blackwell
external identifiers
  • wos:000248922500007
  • scopus:34548131611
ISSN
1572-0241
DOI
10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01269.x
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
3ef86cdf-34cd-4141-91cc-5792aa777d59 (old id 168239)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=17509034&dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2007-07-24 12:15:30
date last changed
2017-10-22 03:53:29
@article{3ef86cdf-34cd-4141-91cc-5792aa777d59,
  abstract     = {BACKGROUND: The discriminative power of 48-h wireless esophageal pH monitoring in the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease has not been clearly demonstrated, and the cutoff level for esophageal acid exposure generating the optimal sensitivity and specificity is unknown. SUBJECTS AND Patients with typical reflux symptoms and a distinct response to acid suppressive medication METHODS: underwent upper GI endoscopy followed by 48-h wireless esophageal pH studies with the pH electrode placed 6 cm above the squamocolumnar junction. The results were compared to those obtained in 55 healthy controls. Sensitivity, specificity, and thresholds for esophageal acid exposure were analyzed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: The patient population consisted of 64 patients, 25 women and 39 men, with a median age of 48 yr. Analysis of the area under the ROC curve showed that, for all patients as well as for subgroups of patients with (N = 33) and without (N = 31) esophagitis, the total percent time with pH &lt; 4 for the 48-h study period was the best parameter to discriminate patients from controls. Analysis of acid exposure for day 1, day 2, or using the day with the highest acid exposure did not improve the diagnostic accuracy. A test specificity in the range of 90-95% resulted in a cutoff level of 3.6-4.4% of the total time with pH &lt; 4 for the 48-h period. This threshold generated a test sensitivity of 59-64% in all patients, 76-79% for patients with esophagitis and 42-48% in patients with no esophagitis. CONCLUSIONS: The total percentage of time that esophageal pH was less than 4 for the entire 48-h study period was the parameter that best discriminated patients with typical reflux symptoms from healthy controls, and to achieve a specificity of 90-95% a cutoff level of 4% is recommended. The low sensitivity of wireless pH recording in patients without erosive esophagitis substantially reduces the clinical value of the test.},
  author       = {Wenner, Jörgen and Johansson, Jan and Johnsson, Folke and Öberg, Stefan},
  issn         = {1572-0241},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {9},
  pages        = {1862--1869},
  publisher    = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  series       = {American Journal of Gastroenterology},
  title        = {Optimal Thresholds and Discriminatory Power of 48-h Wireless Esophageal pH Monitoring in the Diagnosisof GERD.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01269.x},
  volume       = {102},
  year         = {2007},
}