We have located links that may give you full text access.
Accurate placement of the esophageal pH electrode for 24-hour pH monitoring using a combined pH/manometry probe.
American Journal of Gastroenterology 2000 April
OBJECTIVE: Accurate placement of a pH electrode requires manometric localization of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). Combined manometry/pH devices using water-perfused tubes attached to pH catheters and the use of an electronic "LES locator" have been reported. We investigated whether accurate placement of pH probes can be achieved using such a probe, and whether this may reduce the need for the performance of the usual stepwise pull-back manometry.
METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients (15 men, 15 women; median age, 56 yr; interquartile range, 42-68 yr) referred for manometry and pH testing were included in the study. The localization of the LES was determined with standard esophageal manometry. After that, a second 3-mm pH electrode with an internal perfusion port was passed into the stomach. Using this catheter, a single stepwise pull-through manometry was performed and the LES position was noted. LES location, mean pressure, and length obtained with standard manometry were compared to data from the combined pH/manometry catheter. Additionally the time necessary to perform each of the procedures was noted and the patient's discomfort caused by the catheter was evaluated using a standardized questionnaire.
RESULTS: The LES location with the pH/manometry probe was proximal to that with standard manometry in 19 patients (63%), the same in nine patients (30%), and distal in two patients (7%). The differences were <2 cm in 29 of 30 (97%) patients. The LES location with the pH/manometry probe required a median of 6.5 min (interquartile range: 3.5-8.5 min) versus a median of 21.5 min (interquartile range: 14.5-26.5 min) for standard manometry (p < 0.0001). In addition, LES evaluation using the combined pH/manometry probe provided accurate data on the resting pressure, as well as overall and intraabdominal length of the LES. All patients tolerated the combination probe better than the standard manometry probe (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Placement of the esophageal electrode for 24-h esophageal pH monitoring using a combined pH/manometry probe is accurate. The technique is simple, time-saving, and convenient for the patients. Because it is possible to accurately evaluate the LES using this technique, it may even replace conventional manometry before pH probe placement.
METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients (15 men, 15 women; median age, 56 yr; interquartile range, 42-68 yr) referred for manometry and pH testing were included in the study. The localization of the LES was determined with standard esophageal manometry. After that, a second 3-mm pH electrode with an internal perfusion port was passed into the stomach. Using this catheter, a single stepwise pull-through manometry was performed and the LES position was noted. LES location, mean pressure, and length obtained with standard manometry were compared to data from the combined pH/manometry catheter. Additionally the time necessary to perform each of the procedures was noted and the patient's discomfort caused by the catheter was evaluated using a standardized questionnaire.
RESULTS: The LES location with the pH/manometry probe was proximal to that with standard manometry in 19 patients (63%), the same in nine patients (30%), and distal in two patients (7%). The differences were <2 cm in 29 of 30 (97%) patients. The LES location with the pH/manometry probe required a median of 6.5 min (interquartile range: 3.5-8.5 min) versus a median of 21.5 min (interquartile range: 14.5-26.5 min) for standard manometry (p < 0.0001). In addition, LES evaluation using the combined pH/manometry probe provided accurate data on the resting pressure, as well as overall and intraabdominal length of the LES. All patients tolerated the combination probe better than the standard manometry probe (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Placement of the esophageal electrode for 24-h esophageal pH monitoring using a combined pH/manometry probe is accurate. The technique is simple, time-saving, and convenient for the patients. Because it is possible to accurately evaluate the LES using this technique, it may even replace conventional manometry before pH probe placement.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app