Modern achievements of Russian gastroenterologists and engineers in the assessment of mean acidity of pH-grams of the stomach and esophagus (in Russian only)

Close metadata

Aim — to compare diagnostic significance of daily pH-grams of the esophagus (DeMeester score, % of time with pH 0.8—4.0) and three acidity indicators considering mean concentrations of positive hydrogen ions in daily pH-grams proposed by the staff of «Istok-Sistema» Closed Joint-Stock Company. Material and methods. There were 94 patients with pathological (over 14,72) and normal (less than 14,72) DeMeester score. The results of daily pH-grams of the esophagus were assessed by using of acidity indicators (median pH, mean square pH, average pH, percentage of time with pH <4, acidity index, DeMeester score) and new variables of pH-grams of the esophagus based on mean concentration of positive hydrogen ions. Three indicators were proposed to assess the acidity of esophagus: 1) mean pH based on average concentration of positive hydrogen ions of the entire pH-gram of the esophagus; 2) overall time with pH 0.8—4.0 equal to the sum of the products of the percent of time of acidic GERs with pH<4 in the intervals: 0.8≤pH<1.0; 1.0≤pH<2.0; 2.0≤pH<3.0; 3.0≤pH<4.0 and the coefficients taking into account the actual average acidity in certain intervals of the daily pH-gram of the esophagus; 3) pH of the esophagus as equal to the sum of the products of mean daily concentrations of H+ ions (mmol/l) and durations (in hours) of the impact on the mucous membrane of the esophagus in the intervals 0.8≤pH<1,0; 1,0≤pH<2,0; 2,0≤pH<3,0; 3,0≤pH<4,0. Results. It was found that the use of three proposed acidity parameters provides a higher accuracy in calculation of normal and pathological GER in the esophagus compared with DeMeester score and percentage of time with pH <4 in the range of 0.8≤pH<4.0. Conclusion. Assessment of DeMeester score, percentage of time with pH <4 in the range of 0.8≤pH<4.0, median pH, mean square pH, arithmetic mean pH can lead to the errors in evaluation of the results of daily pH-metry. It is advisable to apply above-mentioned values considering mean concentration of positive hydrogen ions in the stomach and esophagus in order to obtain the correct acidity values. This will significantly reduce the likelihood of errors associated with the influence of food intake, duodenogastric reflux (DGR) and other factors on the average daily pH.

Keywords:

daily pH-metry

concentration of positive hydrogen ions

Authors:

Yakovlev G.A.

«Istok-Sistema» Closed Joint-Stock Company, Moscow, Russia

List of references:

Savarino V, Mela GS, Zentilin P, Mele MR, Lapertosa L, Patetta R, Dallorto E, Vassalo A, Mansi C, Vigneri S, Celle G, Circadian gastric acidity in Helicobacter pylori positive ulcer patients with and without gastric metaplasia in the duodenum. Gut. 1996;39:508-512.
Wagner S, Gladziwa U, Gebel M, Schüler A, Freise J, Schmidt FW. Circadian pattern of intragastric acidity in duodenal ulcer patients: a study of variations in relation to ulcer activity. Gut. 1991;32:1104-1109.
Merki HS, Fimmel CJ, Walt RP, Harre K, Röhmel J, Witzel L. Pattern of 24 hour intragastric acidity in active duodenal ulcer disease and in healthy controls. Gut. 1988;29:1583-1587.
Rapoport SI, Lakshin AA, Rakitin BV, Trifonov MM. pH-metry of the esophagus and stomach in diseases of the upper digestive tract. Ed. Komarov FI. M. 2005;208. (In Russ.)
Vasiliev VYu, Yanova OB. Interpretation of the results of esophageal acidification and gastric acidification (according to 24-hour pH-metry). Experimental and clinical gastroenterology. 2011;5:75-79. (In Russ.)
Siluyanov SV, Stupin VA, Smirnova GA, Mishulin LE, Malkova NI. Diagnostic criteria for multi-channel intragastric pH-metry. Health care and medical technology. 2005;10:32-35. (In Russ.)
Weinstein SG. On the graphical representation of the results of measurement of intragastric pH and methods of their statistical processing. Kazan medical journal. 1977;4:52-53. (In Russ.)
Orlikov GA, Witin’ VYa. About the methodological features atropinovy test. Therapeutic archive. 1980;2:26-29. (In Russ.)
Geller LI, Geller AL. Statistical evaluation of the results of intragastric metry. Laboratory case. 1987;2:31-33. (In Russ.)
Zlatkina AR, Toothless KV, Gordeeva TK. Quantitative data processing pH-metry of the gastrointestinal tract — guidelines. Moscow, the Ministry of health of the RSFSR, 1988. (In Russ.)
Medvedev VN, Zelensky LM, Orlovskii VF, Dotsenko NJ, Medvedev VN, Protsenko NN, Kryukova TM. Comparative evaluation of gastric secretory function, we study the probe method and the method of intragastric pH-metry. Clinical medicine. 1990;68:3:89-92. (In Russ.)
Gorshkov VA. Acid-related diseases and the crisis of functional methods of research of a stomach. The modern gastroenterology. 2002;3(9):7-12. (In Russ.)
Yakovlev GA. Osnovy zondovoj pH-metrii dlja gastrojenterologii. M. 2016. (In Russ.)
Yakovlev GA, Storonova OA, Trukhmanov AS. Kriterii ocenki kislotnostiv pishhevode. RZhGGK. 2016;26(4):109. (In Russ.)
Yakovlev GA, Kaibyshev VO, Nikonov EL, Mishulin LE, Fedorov ED, Shapovaliants SG. Daily pH-metry of the esophagus and stomach: errors of data interpretation and their clinical significance. Evidence-based gastroenterology. 2018;7 (3):11-17. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17116/dokgastro2018703111
Campos GM, Peters JH, DeMeester TR, Oberg S, Crookes PF, Mason RJ. The pattern of esophageal acid exposure in gastroesophageal reflux disease influences the severity of the disease. Archives of surgery. 1999;134 (8):882-887.
Tutuian R, Castell DO, Xue S, Katz PO. The acidity index: a simple approach to the measurement of gastric acidity. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 2004 Feb 15;19(4):443-448.
Starostin BD. Controversial and unresolved issues of GERD. Part 1. News Of Universities. North Caucasus region. Natural science. Special issue. 2005;52-54. (In Russ.)
Starostin BD. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (part II). Etiopathogenesis, clinic, diagnosis. Gastroenterology of St. Petersburg. 2014;3-4:2-14. (In Russ.)
Yakovlev GA. The new criterion for assessing the acidity of the daily pH-grams of the esophagus. RZHGGK. 2018;28:5:93. (In Russ.)
Yakovlev GA. Coefficients for calculating a new criterion of acidity pH daily-grams of the esophagus. RZHGGK. 2018;28:5:93. (In Russ.)
Roman S, Gyawali CP, Savarino E, Yadlapati R, Zerbib F, Wu J, Vela MF, Tutuian R, Tatum RP, Sifrim D, Keller J, Fox MR, Pandolfino JE, Bredenoord AJ. Ambulatory reflux monitoring for diagnosis of gastro-esophageal reflux disease: Update of the Porto consensus and recommendations from an international consensus group. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2017;29:e13067.
Savarino E, Bredenoord AJ, Fox M, Pandolfino JE, Roman S, Gyawali CP. Expert consensus document: Advances in the physiological assessment and diagnosis of GERD. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017 Nov;14(11):665-676.
Gyawali CP, Kahrilas PJ, Savarino E, Zerbib F, Mion F, Smout AJPM, Vaezi MF, Sifrim D, Fox MR, Vela MF, Tutuian R, Tack J, Bredenoord AJ, Pandolfino JE, Roman S. Modern diagnosis of GERD: the Lyon Consensus Gut Published Online First: 03 February 2018. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314722
Frazzoni L, Frazzoni M, de Bortoli N, Tolone S, Martinucci I, Fuccio L, Savarino V, Savarino E.V. Critical appraisal of Rome IV criteria: hypersensitive esophagus does belong to gastroesophageal reflux disease spectrum. Ann Gastroenterol. 2018 Jan-Feb;31(1):1-7.
Yakovlev GA. Universal criterion for acidity (pH) of the duodenum, stomach and esophagus, Published on 28-02-2017. (In Russ.) www/medlinks.ru
Yakovlev GA. The Modern mathematical analysis of the per diem rn-gram of the esophagus, Published 31-10-2018. (In Russ.) www/medlinks.ru
Yakovlev GA. Significant indicator of the damaging capacity of reluctate acidic gastroesophageal reflux (GER) on the mucous membrane of the esophagus, Published 05-12-2018. (In Russ.) www/medlinks ru.

Close metadata