Analysis of computed tomographic findings according to gastroesophageal flap valve grade

Abstract

Background/AimsThe gastroesophageal junction is an important barrier against gastroesophageal ref lux. Endoscopic grading of gastroesophageal f lap valve is simple, reproducible, and may predict reflux activity. We investigated the correlation between gastroesophageal flap valve grade and the gastroesophageal junction’s structural properties using abdominal computed tomography.MethodsA total of 138 patients with early gastric cancer who underwent both pre-treatment esophagogastroduodenoscopy and water-distended stomach two-phase computed tomography were enrolled. Endoscopic gastroesophageal f lap valve grade and abdominal computed tomography findings were analyzed to assess anatomical factors including the gastroesophageal junction and related organs.ResultsThe angle of His increased significantly with gastroesophageal flap valve grade (grade I, 65.2˚ ± 19.6˚; grade II, 66.6˚ ± 19.8˚; grade III, 76.7˚ ± 11.9˚; grade IV, 120.0˚ ± 30.3˚; p < 0.001), as did the size of the diaphragmatic hiatus (grade I, 213.0 ± 53.8 mm2 ; grade II, 232.6 ± 71.0 mm2 ; grade III, 292.3 ± 99.2 mm2 ; grade IV, 584.4 ± 268.3; p < 0.001). The length of the abdominal esophagus decreased as gastroesophageal flap valve grade increased (grade I, 34.6 ± 5.8 mm; grade II, 32.0 ± 6.5 mm; grade III, 24.6 ± 7.8 mm; grade IV, –22.6 ± 38.2 mm; p < 0.001). There was no significant relationship between gastroesophageal flap valve grade and visceral and subcutaneous fat areas (p = 0.877 and p = 0.508, respectively).ConclusionsEndoscopic grading of the gastroesophageal flap valve is well correlated with anatomical changes around the gastroesophageal junction on abdominal computed tomography, and it can provide useful information about the anti-reflux barrier.

Association Between Gastroesophageal Flap Valve and Endoscopically Diagnosed Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease According to Lyon Consensus

“…Ultimately a total of 15 articles [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32] were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis based on the criteria of inclusion and exclusion (Fig. 1).…”