Published online Aug 14, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i30.9111
Peer-review started: February 10, 2015
First decision: April 13, 2015
Revised: April 15, 2015
Accepted: June 9, 2015
Article in press: June 10, 2015
Published online: August 14, 2015
Processing time: 188 Days and 5.1 Hours
AIM: To evaluate pre-lung transplant acid reflux on pH-testing vs corresponding bolus reflux on multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII) to predict early allograft injury.
METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of lung transplant recipients who underwent pre-transplant combined MII-pH-testing at a tertiary care center from January 2007 to November 2012. Patients with pre-transplant fundoplication were excluded. Time-to-event analysis was performed using a Cox proportional hazards model to assess associations between measures of reflux on MII-pH testing and early allograft injury. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (c-statistic) of the Cox model was calculated to assess the predictive value of each reflux parameter for early allograft injury. Six pH-testing parameters and their corresponding MII measures were specified a priori. The pH parameters were upright, recumbent, and overall acid reflux exposure; elevated acid reflux exposure; total acid reflux episodes; and acid clearance time. The corresponding MII measures were upright, recumbent, and overall bolus reflux exposure; elevated bolus reflux exposure; total bolus reflux episodes; and bolus clearance time.
RESULTS: Thirty-two subjects (47% men, mean age: 55 years old) met the inclusion criteria of the study. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (46.9%) represented the most common pulmonary diagnosis leading to transplantation. Baseline demographics, pre-transplant cardiopulmonary function, number of lungs transplanted (unilateral vs bilateral), and post-transplant proton pump inhibitor use were similar between reflux severity groups. The area under the ROC curve, or c-statistic, of each acid reflux parameter on pre-transplant pH-testing was lower than its bolus reflux counterpart on MII in the prediction of early allograft injury. In addition, the development of early allograft injury was significantly associated with three pre-transplant MII measures of bolus reflux: overall reflux exposure (HR = 1.18, 95%CI: 1.01-1.36, P = 0.03), recumbent reflux exposure (HR = 1.25, 95%CI: 1.04-1.50, P = 0.01) and bolus clearance (HR = 1.09, 95%CI: 1.01-1.17, P = 0.02), but not with any pH-testing parameter measuring acid reflux alone.
CONCLUSION: Pre-transplant MII measures of bolus reflux perform better than their pH-testing counterparts in predicting early allograft injury post-lung transplantation.
Core tip: Gastroesophageal reflux has been associated with poor lung transplant outcomes, including allograft injury and rejection. While ambulatory pH-testing only measures acid reflux, multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII) assesses total bolus reflux, regardless of acidity. Comparison of pH-testing and MII measures of reflux in the prediction of lung transplant outcomes may improve and standardize pre-transplant reflux testing. Our study demonstrated that pre-transplant MII measures of bolus reflux perform better than their pH-testing counterparts to predict early allograft injury post-lung transplantation. MII should be performed alongside pH testing for reflux assessment during pre-lung transplant evaluation.