Rapid Communication
Copyright ©2008 The WJG Press and Baishideng. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Oct 21, 2008; 14(39): 6030-6035
Published online Oct 21, 2008. doi: 10.3748/wjg.14.6030
Is ineffective esophageal motility associated with gastropharyngeal reflux disease?
Kyung Yup Kim, Gwang Ha Kim, Dong Uk Kim, Soo Geun Wang, Byung Joo Lee, Jin Choon Lee, Do Youn Park, Geun Am Song
Kyung Yup Kim, Gwang Ha Kim, Dong Uk Kim, Geun Am Song, Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, South Korea
Soo Geun Wang, Byung Joo Lee, Jin Choon Lee, Department of Otolaryngology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, South Korea
Do Youn Park, Department of Pathology, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, South Korea
Author contributions: Kim KY and Kim GH contributed equally to this work; Kim GH, Park DY and Song GA designed the research; Kim KY, Kim GH, Kim DU, Wang SG, Lee BJ and Lee JC performed the research; Kim GH and Park DY analyzed the data; and Kim KY and Kim GH wrote the paper.
Supported by A grant of The Korean Institute of Medicine
Correspondence to: Gwang Ha Kim, Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Medical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, 1-10 Ami-dong, Seo-Gu, Busan 602-739, South Korea. doc0224@pusan.ac.kr
Telephone: +82-51-2407869 Fax: +82-51-2448180
Received: September 3, 2008
Revised: September 27, 2008
Accepted: October 4, 2008
Published online: October 21, 2008
Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the association between ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) and gastropharyngeal reflux disease (GPRD) in patients who underwent ambulatory 24-h dual-probe pH monitoring for the evaluation of supraesophageal symptoms.

METHODS: A total of 632 patients who underwent endoscopy, esophageal manometry and ambulatory 24-h dual-pH monitoring due to supraesophageal symptoms (e.g. globus, hoarseness, or cough) were enrolled. Of them, we selected the patients who had normal esophageal motility and IEM. The endoscopy and ambulatory pH monitoring findings were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS: A total of 264 patients with normal esophageal motility and 195 patients with the diagnosis of IEM were included in this study. There was no difference in the frequency of reflux esophagitis and hiatal hernia between the two groups. All the variables showing gastroesophageal reflux and gastropharyngeal reflux were not different between the two groups. The frequency of GERD and GPRD, as defined by ambulatory pH monitoring, was not different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION: There was no association between IEM and GPRD as well as between IEM and GERD. IEM alone cannot be considered as a definitive marker for reflux disease.

Keywords: Ineffective esophageal motility; Gastroesophageal reflux disease; Gastropharyngeal reflux disease