Explore the vast range of titles available.

Patients who were referred to Veterans Affairs gastroenterology clinics with heartburn unresponsive to a proton-pump inhibitor had comprehensive evaluation for eligibility for a trial comparing Nissen fundoplication surgery with medical therapy. In the minority of patients who were confirmed to have PPI-refractory and reflux-related heartburn, surgery was more effective than medical treatment in controlling reflux symptoms.

BackgroundGastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common disorder, and is typically treated with proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) as the recommended first-line therapy. Recently, a new potassium-competitive acid blocker, vonoprazan, was launched in Japan. It is uncertain whether the standard dose of vonoprazan 20 mg is superior to that of PPIs for GERD, so a direct comparison of the therapeutic effects and adverse events between vonoprazan 20 mg and PPIs is needed.MethodsMEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase were chosen as the literature sources. Randomized controlled trials for vonoprazan 20 mg and PPIs published in English were searched. Data from studies meeting the eligibility criteria were extracted individually by two researchers and compared to maintain consistency.ResultsFifty-six articles were identified in the databases, and one study was manually searched and added to the analysis, ultimately yielding six eligible studies. For the main analysis, the risk ratios (RR) of efficacy and adverse events between vonoprazan and PPIs were 1.06 (0.99–1.13) and 1.08 (0.96–1.22), respectively. Subgroup analysis for patients with severe esophagitis at baseline showed significantly higher results for vonoprazan than lansoprazole, with an RR of 1.14 (1.06–1.22).ConclusionsOur findings suggest that vonoprazan is non-inferior to PPIs as therapy for patients with GERD. Subgroup analysis indicates that vonoprazan is more effective than PPIs for patients with severe erosive esophagitis. The safety outcomes for vonoprazan are similar to those for PPIs.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) increase the risk for enteric infections that is likely related to PPI-induced hypochlorhydria. Although the impact of acid suppression on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is unknown thus far, previous data revealed that pH ≤3 impairs the infectivity of the similar severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1. Thus, we aimed to determine whether use of PPIs increases the odds for acquiring coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among community-dwelling Americans. From May 3 to June 24, 2020, we performed an online survey described to participating adults as a \"national health survey.\" A multivariable logistic regression was performed on reporting a positive COVID-19 test to adjust for a wide range of confounding factors and to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Of 53,130 participants, 3,386 (6.4%) reported a positive COVID-19 test. In regression analysis, individuals using PPIs up to once daily (aOR 2.15; 95% CI, 1.90-2.44) or twice daily (aOR 3.67; 95% CI, 2.93-4.60) had significantly increased odds for reporting a positive COVID-19 test when compared with those not taking PPIs. Individuals taking histamine-2 receptor antagonists were not at elevated risk. We found evidence of an independent, dose-response relationship between the use of antisecretory medications and COVID-19 positivity; individuals taking PPIs twice daily have higher odds for reporting a positive test when compared with those using lower-dose PPIs up to once daily, and those taking the less potent histamine-2 receptor antagonists are not at increased risk. These findings emphasize good clinical practice that PPIs should only be used when indicated at the lowest effective dose, such as the approved once-daily label dosage of over-the-counter and prescription PPIs. Further studies examining the association between PPIs and COVID-19 are needed.

Background Hypersensitive esophagus (HE) is defined by endoscopy-negative heartburn with a normal acid exposure time but positive symptom association probability (SAP) and/or symptom index (SI) on impedance–pH monitoring, and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) responsiveness. Functional heartburn (FH) is distinguished by negative SAP/SI and PPI refractoriness. The clinical value of SAP and SI has been questioned. We aimed to investigate whether impairment of chemical clearance and of mucosal integrity, expressed by the postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave (PSPW) index and the mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI), characterize HE independently of SAP and SI. Methods Impedance–pH tracings from PPI-responsive endoscopy-negative patients, 125 with nonerosive reflux disease and 108 with HE, distinguished by an abnormal and a normal acid exposure time, and from 70 patients with FH were retrospectively selected and blindly reviewed. Results The mean PSPW index and MNBI were significantly lower in nonerosive reflux disease (30 %, 1378 Ω) than in HE (51 %; 2274 Ω) and in both of them as compared with FH (76 %; 3445 Ω) ( P  = 0.0001). Both the PSPW index (adjusted odds ratio 0.863, P  = 0.001) and the MNBI (adjusted odds ratio 0.998, P  = 0.001) were independent predictors of HE; with their combined assessment, the area under the curve on receiver operating characteristic analysis was 0.957. SAP and/or SI was positive in 67 of the 108 HE patients (62 %), whereas the PSPW index and/or MNBI was abnormal in 99 of the 108 HE patients (92 %; P  < 0.0001). Conclusions HE is characterized by impairment of chemical clearance and mucosal integrity, which explains the increased reflux perception. When SAP and SI afford uncertain results, the PSPW index and MNBI should be analyzed.

Background The LINX ® magnetic sphincter augmentation system (MSA) is a surgical technique with short-term evidence demonstrating efficacy in the treatment of medically refractory or chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Currently, the Nissen fundoplication is the gold-standard surgical treatment for GERD. We are the first to systematically review the literature and perform a meta-analysis comparing MSA to the Nissen fundoplication. Methods A comprehensive search of electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library) using search terms “Gastroesophageal reflux or heartburn” and “LINX or endoluminal or magnetic” and “fundoplication or Nissen” was completed. All randomized controlled trials, non-randomized comparison study and case series with greater than 5 patients were included. Five hundred and forty-seven titles were identified through primary search, and 197 titles or abstracts were screened after removing duplicates. Meta-analysis was performed on postoperative quality of life outcomes, procedural efficacy and patient procedural satisfaction. Results Three primary studies identified a total of 688 patients, of whom 273 and 415 underwent Nissen fundoplication and MSA, respectively. MSA was statistically superior to LNF in preserving patient’s ability to belch (95.2 vs 65.9%, p  < 0.00001) and ability to emesis (93.5 vs 49.5%, p  < 0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between MSA and LNF in gas/bloating (26.7 vs 53.4%, p  = 0.06), postoperative dysphagia (33.9 vs 47.1%, p  = 0.43) and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) elimination (81.4 vs 81.5%, p  = 0.68). Conclusion Magnetic sphincter augmentation appears to be an effective treatment for GERD with short-term outcomes comparable to the more technically challenging and time-consuming Nissen fundoplication. Long-term comparative outcome data past 1 year are needed in order to further understand the efficacy of magnetic sphincter augmentation.

In the treatment of upper GI endoscopy-negative patients with heartburn and epigastric pain or burning, antacids, antireflux agents, and mucosal protective agents are widely used, alone or as add-on treatment, to increase response to proton-pump inhibitors, which are not indicated in infancy and pregnancy and account for significant cost expenditure. In this randomized, controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter trial assessing the efficacy and safety of mucosal protective agent Poliprotect (neoBianacid, Sansepolcro, Italy) vs omeprazole in the relief of heartburn and epigastric pain/burning, 275 endoscopy-negative outpatients were given a 4-week treatment with omeprazole (20 mg q.d.) or Poliprotect (5 times a day for the initial 2 weeks and on demand thereafter), followed by an open-label 4-week treatment period with Poliprotect on-demand. Gut microbiota change was assessed. A 2-week treatment with Poliprotect proved noninferior to omeprazole for symptom relief (between-group difference in the change in visual analog scale symptom score: [mean, 95% confidence interval] -5.4, -9.9 to -0.1; -6.2, -10.8 to -1.6; intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations, respectively). Poliprotect's benefit remained unaltered after shifting to on-demand intake, with no gut microbiota variation. The initial benefit of omeprazole was maintained against significantly higher use of rescue medicine sachets (mean, 95% confidence interval: Poliprotect 3.9, 2.8-5.0; omeprazole 8.2, 4.8-11.6) and associated with an increased abundance of oral cavity genera in the intestinal microbiota. No relevant adverse events were reported in either treatment arm. Poliprotect proved noninferior to standard-dose omeprazole in symptomatic patients with heartburn/epigastric burning without erosive esophagitis and gastroduodenal lesions. Gut microbiota was not affected by Poliprotect treatment. The study is registered in Clinicaltrial.gov (NCT03238534) and the EudraCT database (2015-005216-15).

Heartburn and acid regurgitation are the typical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux. Despite the availability of several treatment options, antacids remain the mainstay treatment for gastroesophageal reflux-related symptoms based on their efficacy, safety, and over-the-counter availability. Antacids are generally recommended for adults and children at least 12 years old, and the FDA recommends antacids as the first-line treatment for heartburn in pregnancy. This narrative review summarizes the mechanism, features, and limitations related to different antacid ingredients and techniques available to study the acid neutralization and buffering capacity of antacid formulations. Using supporting clinical evidence for different antacid ingredients, it also discusses the importance of antacids as OTC medicines and first-line therapies for heartburn, particularly in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic, in which reliance on self-care has increased. The review will also assist pharmacists and other healthcare professionals in helping individuals with heartburn to make informed self-care decisions and educating them to ensure that antacids are used in an optimal, safe, and effective manner.

BackgroundVonoprazan, a potassium-competitive acid blocker, demonstrates more potent acid inhibition than proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of vonoprazan in patients with unproven gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) by comparing patients with vonoprazan-refractory heartburn with those with PPI-refractory heartburn.MethodsThis study included 104 consecutive patients with vonoprazan- or PPI-refractory heartburn (52 patients each), no erosive esophagitis on endoscopy and who underwent combined multichannel intraluminal impedance–pH (MII–pH) testing with vonoprazan/PPI discontinuation. Patients’ backgrounds, symptom scores from four questionnaires, MII–pH results and high-resolution manometry results were compared between the two groups.ResultsThe vonoprazan group demonstrated significantly higher GERD symptoms and scores of abdominal pain and diarrhea on the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale questionnaire. MII–pH results revealed that the vonoprazan group demonstrated 40.4%, 17.3%, and 42.3% and the PPIs group exhibited 26.9%, 17.3%, and 55.8% of abnormal acid reflux [true non-erosive reflux disease (NERD)], reflux hypersensitivity and functional heartburn, respectively. The vonoprazan group demonstrated higher true NERD rates but with no significant difference (p = 0.307). Among the vonoprazan group, eight patients with true NERD underwent another MII–pH test on vonoprazan, and all cases demonstrated normal acid exposure times (0.0% [0.0–0.3]).ConclusionPatients with unproven GERD with vonoprazan-refractory heartburn demonstrated more symptoms, including not only GERD symptoms but also functional dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome symptoms, than those with PPI-refractory heartburn.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one the most common medical complaints in pregnant women. Some women continue to experience GERD symptoms after delivery. Effective management of GERD symptoms is important to improve productivity and quality of life. Management of heartburn in pregnant and breastfeeding women involves lifestyle modifications, dietary modifications, non-pharmaceutical remedies and pharmaceutical drugs. For most patients, lifestyle/dietary modifications are helpful in reducing GERD symptoms. For patients who require a more intense intervention, various types of pharmaceutical drugs are available. However, the suitability of each treatment for use during pregnancy and lactation must be taken into consideration. This article explores the reported efficacy and safety of these treatment options in pregnant and breastfeeding women. Recommended treatment algorithm in pregnant and breastfeeding women have been developed.

Tricyclic antidepressants could be effective in the treatment of symptoms related to hypersensitive esophagus through their pain-modulating effect. We therefore assessed the benefit of imipramine in patients with esophageal hypersensitivity and functional heartburn. Patients with normal endoscopy findings and typical reflux symptoms despite standard-dose proton-pump inhibitor therapy underwent 24-h pH-impedance monitoring. Patients with established esophageal hypersensitivity or functional heartburn were randomly assigned to receive 8 weeks of either once-daily imipramine 25 mg (n=43) or placebo (n=40). The primary end point was satisfactory relief of reflux symptoms, defined as a >50% reduction in the gastroesophageal reflux disease score. The secondary end point was improvement in quality-of-life (QoL) as assessed by the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey score. Patients receiving imipramine did not achieve a higher rate of satisfactory relief of reflux symptoms than did patients receiving placebo (intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis: 37.2 vs. 37.5%, respectively; odds ratio (OR), 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.41-2.41; per-protocol (PP) analysis: 45.5 vs. 41.2%, respectively; OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.45-3.13). Subgroup analysis to assess the efficacy of imipramine for either esophageal hypersensitivity or functional heartburn yielded similar results. Treatment with imipramine provided significant improvement of QoL by PP analysis (72±17 and 61±19, respectively; P=0.048), but ITT analysis did not reveal any differences between imipramine and placebo (68±19 and 61±19, respectively; P=0.26). Adverse events were similar in both groups; however, constipation was more common with imipramine than placebo (51.2 vs. 22.5%, respectively; P=0.01). Although low-dose imipramine shows potential QoL benefits, it does not relieve symptoms more effectively than does placebo in patients with either esophageal hypersensitivity or functional heartburn.