Free radicals and antioxidant systems in reflux esophagitis and Barrett’s esophagus

Table 1 Characteristics of patients with different gastroesophageal reflux diseases that were included in the study.

Group	n	Sex (M/F)	Mean age (yr)(Range)	Treatment1
				H2-RA	PPI	Antacids	Other2	No Rx
Control (non- GERD)	28	20/8	59 (20-81)	1	3	3	2	19
GERD symptoms	50	32/18	52 (18-80)	10	10	10	3	17
Erosive esophagitis	23	18/5	59 (25-90)	4	2	12	1	4
Barrett’s esophagus	28	20/8	58 (21-88)	7	11	5	1	4

¹Treatment taken by patients within 30 d before endoscopy.

²Other includes prokinetic agents (cisapride, clebopride, cinitapride, domperidone).

Table 2 Quantification of nitrotyrosine expression in Barrett’s esophagus, esophagitis and control patients.

Group	Mean±SE	Median (range)	Intensity1/Percent (%)2
Control	0.70±0.15	1.00 (0.00-1.00)	0	30
			1	70
Esophagitis	1.27±0.14	1.00 (1.00-2.00)	1	72.7
			2	27.3
Barrett's esophagus	2.41±0.14a	2.00 (2.00-3.00)	2	58.3
			3	41.7

^aP<0.05 vs control (n = 10-12 cases per group).

¹The intensity of immunohistochemistry was graded blinded according to the following scale: 0: absent, 1: weak, 2: moderate and 3: intense.

²Percentage of samples according to degree of staining.

Table 3 Quantification of Cu,ZnSOD expression in Barrett’s esophagus, esophagitis and control patients.

Group	Mean±SE	Median (range)	Intensity1/Percent (%)2
Control	1.30±0.15	1.00 (1.00-2.00)	1	70
			2	30
Esophagitis	2.00±0.27	2.00 (1.00-3.00)	1	36.4
			2	27.3
			3	36.4
Barrett's esophagus	2.5± 0.15a	2.50 (2.00-3.00)	2	50
			3	50

^aP<0.05 vs control. (n = 10-12 cases per group).

¹The intensity of immunohistochemistry was graded blinded according to the following scale: 0 : absent, 1: weak, 2: moderate and 3: intense.

²Percentage of samples according to degree of staining.