RESUMO
Resumen El estudio de las enfermedades esofágicas requiere de múltiples exámenes diagnósticos, ya que ninguno, por sí solo, provee total información sobre la funcionalidad y la anatomía del tracto digestivo superior. Para los cirujanos generales y gastrointestinales, el esofagograma constituye una herramienta esencial que, además de sugerir un diagnóstico, ofrece una idea de la anatomía del órgano y nos permite esbozar un mapa de fácil evaluación (sin la necesidad de un radiólogo), para establecer o definir un plan quirúrgico. El objetivo del presente artículo es mostrar al lector la utilidad del esofagograma en centros de referencia en el estudio y el tratamiento de las enfermedades esofágicas, así como su representación en algunas enfermedades frecuentes.
Abstract The study of esophageal diseases requires multiple diagnostic tests since no one test alone can provide full information on upper digestive tract anatomy and functionality. For general surgeons and gastrointestinal surgeons, the esophagogram is an essential tool that can suggest a diagnosis while simultaneously providing an idea of the anatomy of the organ and outlining an easily evaluated map without the need of a radiologist. This information can be used to establish a surgical plan. The aim of this article is to show readers the usefulness of esophagograms at referral centers for study and treatment of esophageal diseases while providing representations of several frequent diseases.
Assuntos
Doenças do Esôfago , Esôfago , Neoplasias EsofágicasRESUMO
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Patients with otorhinolaryngologic (ear, nose, and throat-ENT) symptoms attributed to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are usually treated with medication based on the findings of nasal endoscopy and laryngoscopy only. This study aims to determine sensitivity and specificity of symptoms, nasal endoscopy, and laryngoscopy for the diagnosis of GERD as compared to pH monitoring. METHODS: We studied 79 patients (mean age 53 years, 38 % males) in whom ENT symptoms were assumed to be secondary to GERD. All patients underwent a transnasal laryngoscopy by the ENT team and upper endoscopy and esophageal function tests by the surgical team. GERD was defined by a pathological pH monitoring. RESULTS: Pathologic reflux by pH monitoring was documented in 36 of the 79 patients (46 %), with a mean DeMeester score of 44. In 25 of the 36 patients (69 %), distal and proximal reflux was present. Among patients with negative pH monitoring, one patient was diagnosed with achalasia. ENT symptom sensitivity for globus, hoarseness and throat clearing was respectively 11, 58, and 33 %; specificity was respectively 77, 42, and 58 %. Positive predictive value for nasal endoscopy and laryngoscopy was 46 %. Among patients with positive pH monitoring, 13 (36 %) had a hypotensive lower esophageal sphincter (p < 0.01) and 27 (34 %) had abnormal peristalsis (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the results of this study showed that (a) ENT symptoms were unreliable for the diagnosis of GERD and (b) laryngoscopy had a low positive predictive value for the diagnosis of GERD. These data confirm the importance of esophageal manometry and pH monitoring in any patient with suspected ENT manifestations of GERD before starting empiric therapy with acid-reducing medications since pathologic reflux by pH monitoring was confirmed in less than half of the patients with suspected GERD.