No abstract

Background: Endoscopic treatment for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) is rapidly emerging, but there is a great need for randomised controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy. Design and setting: A single-centre, double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial of endoscopic gastroplication by the Endocinch suturing system. Patients and interventions: 60 patients with GORD were randomly assigned to three endoscopic gastroplications (n = 20), a sham procedure (n = 20) or observation (n = 20). The research nurse and patients in the active and sham groups were blinded to the procedure assignment. After 3 months, open-label active treatment was offered to all patients. Outcome measures: The primary outcome measures were proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and GORD symptoms, and secondary measures were quality of life, 24-h oesophageal acid exposure, oesophageal manometry and adverse events. Follow-up assessments were performed at 3, 6 and 12 months. Results: At 3 months, the percentage of patients who had reduced drug use by >50% was greater in the active treatment group (65%) than in the sham (25%) or observation groups (0%) (p,0.02). Symptoms (heartburn and to a lesser extent regurgitation) improved more in the active group than in the sham group. Three Short Form-20 quality of life subscales (role function, general health and bodily pain perception) improved in the active group versus sham. Oesophageal acid exposure was modestly decreased after active treatment (p,0.02), but not significantly greater than after the sham procedure (p = 0.61). The active treatment effects on PPI use, symptoms and quality of life persisted after 6 and 12 months of open-label follow-up (n = 41), but 29% of patients were retreated in this period. No serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions: Endoscopic gastroplication, using the Endocinch device, reduced acid-inhibitory drug use, improved GORD symptoms and improved the quality of life at 3 months compared with a sham procedure. The effects persisted up to 12 months. However, the reduction in oesophageal acid exposure was not greater after endoscopic treatment than after a sham procedure.

No abstract

Cerebral evoked potential recording was used to study the oesophagus-brain axis in 10 controls and 10 patients with non-cardiac chest pain with a manometric diagnosis of either nutcracker oesophagus or diffuse spasm and a positive edrophonium test. A series of 50 inflations (10/minute; inflation rate of 170 ml/ second) of an intraoesophageal balloon (5 cm proximal to the lower oesophageal sphincter) was performed in each subject. Three different inflation volumes were used and were individually determined to cause no sensation, slight sensation, and definite sensation, respectively (volume ranges: 2-8 ml, 5-18 ml, and 8-22 ml). All signals were coded and their quality was scored on a scale from 0 (no recognisable pattern) to 5 (well defined potential of good quality) by four 'blinded' observers. The evoked potential quality scores and amplitude of the major peaks increased significantly (p<001) with increasing sensation, both in patients and in controls. In the patients, quality score and amplitude of all four peaks of the evoked potentials were lower (p<005) and latencies of two of the four peaks were longer (p<0.02) than in the controls. The volumes of air required to produce the various sensations were lower in the patients (p<001). When divided by the balloon volume, amplitude and quality of the evoked potential were no longer significantly different between the groups. These results suggest that the increased perception of oesophageal distension in patients with non-cardiac chest pain is caused by altered central processing rather than (functionally) abnormal receptors in the oesophageal wall.