Clinical and endoscopic features of Chinese reflux esophagitis patients

Table 1 Comparison of age in patients with different grades of reflux esophagitis

	LA-A	LA-B	LA-C	LA-D
Mean age	53.35b	54.53b	60.50	61.44
SD	13.90	14.19	13.68	14.97

^bP < 0.01 vs the age of patients with grades C and D of RE. LA-A: Los Angeles Classification grade A; LA-B: Los Angeles Classification grade B; LA-C: Los Angeles Classification grade C; LA-D: Los Angeles Classification grade D.

Table 2 Relationship between reflux esophagitis and H pylori infection

	Patients (n)	RE patients (n)	Male	Female	LA-A	LA-B	LA-C	LA-D
H pylori+	7190	277	188	89	137	116	15	9
H pylori-	11 633	1128	707	421	576	440	79	36
Percentage (%)	38.2	19.7b	21.01	17.45	19.3	20.86	15.96	20
Total	18 823	1405	895	510	710	556	94	45

^bP < 0.01 vs H pylori infection rate in all patients undergoing endoscopic examination. RE: Reflux esophagitis; LA-A: Los Angeles Classification grade A; LA-B: Los Angeles Classification grade B; LA-C: Los Angeles Classification grade C; LA-D: Los Angeles Classification grade D; H pylori+: Infected with H pylori; H pylori-: Not infected with H pylori.

Table 3 Relationship of reflux esophagitis and esophageal hiatal hernia

	RE patients (n)	Mean age	Male	Female	LA-A	LA-B	LA-C	LA-D
EHH+	195	62.03 ± 14.11	122	73	48	74	48	25
EHH-	1210	53.35 ± 13.83b	773	437	662	482	46	20
Percentage (%)	13.9		13.63	14.31	6.76a	13.31a	51.06a	55.56a
Total	1405	54.56 ± 14.19	895	510	710	556	94	45

^bP < 0.01 vs the age of patients with esophageal hiatal hernia;

^aP = 0.717 (no difference in the detection rate of grades C and D of RE; P < 0.01 (significant differences in the detection rate of esophageal hiatal hernia among the other patients; EHH+: Associated esophageal hiatal hernia; EHH-: No esophageal hiatal hernia.