The Experts below are selected from a list of 3123 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Mamoru Suzuki - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the relationship between esopHagoscopic findings and total acid reflux time below pH 4 and pH 5 in the upper EsopHagus in patients with laryngopHaryngeal reflux disease lprd
Auris Nasus Larynx, 2005Co-Authors: Ryoji Tokashiki, Kazuhiro Nakamura, Yusuke Watanabe, Hiroya Yamaguchi, Mamoru SuzukiAbstract:Abstract Objective: To investigate the relationship between esopHagoscopic findings and total acid reflux time in the upper EsopHagus in the patients of laryngopHaryngeal reflux disease (LPRD), and to evaluate whether pH Method: EsopHagoscopy and 24-h pH monitoring in the upper EsopHagus were performed in 29 patients suspected of LPRD and 19 healthy volunteers participated as controls. The total acid reflux times below pH 4 and 5 in the upper EsopHagus were compared between the LPRD group and the controls. The LPRD group was divided into LPRD with reflux esopHagitis (RE) and LPRD without RE, and the total acid reflux times below pH 4 and 5 of these two groups were compared. Results: Eight of the 29 (27.6%) LPRD patients had reflux esopHagitis. The LPRD group showed a significantly longer acid reflux time than the control group at pH below 5 ( P = 0.009) but not at pH below 4 ( P = 0.48). The LPRD with RE had significantly longer acid reflux times below both pH 4 and 5 in the upper EsopHagus compared to those of the LPRD without RE. The P values using a cut-off value of pH 5 were smaller than that of pH 4 in all statistical results. Conclusion: The LPRD patients showed significantly longer acid reflux time in the upper EsopHagus than the control group. In the LPRD group, the LPRD with RE patients had more frequent acid exposure in the upper EsopHagus than the LPRD without RE. A pH level of 5 could be appropriate as a cutoff level for the diagnosis of LPRD in upper EsopHagus pH monitoring.
Ryoji Tokashiki - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the relationship between esopHagoscopic findings and total acid reflux time below pH 4 and pH 5 in the upper EsopHagus in patients with laryngopHaryngeal reflux disease lprd
Auris Nasus Larynx, 2005Co-Authors: Ryoji Tokashiki, Kazuhiro Nakamura, Yusuke Watanabe, Hiroya Yamaguchi, Mamoru SuzukiAbstract:Abstract Objective: To investigate the relationship between esopHagoscopic findings and total acid reflux time in the upper EsopHagus in the patients of laryngopHaryngeal reflux disease (LPRD), and to evaluate whether pH Method: EsopHagoscopy and 24-h pH monitoring in the upper EsopHagus were performed in 29 patients suspected of LPRD and 19 healthy volunteers participated as controls. The total acid reflux times below pH 4 and 5 in the upper EsopHagus were compared between the LPRD group and the controls. The LPRD group was divided into LPRD with reflux esopHagitis (RE) and LPRD without RE, and the total acid reflux times below pH 4 and 5 of these two groups were compared. Results: Eight of the 29 (27.6%) LPRD patients had reflux esopHagitis. The LPRD group showed a significantly longer acid reflux time than the control group at pH below 5 ( P = 0.009) but not at pH below 4 ( P = 0.48). The LPRD with RE had significantly longer acid reflux times below both pH 4 and 5 in the upper EsopHagus compared to those of the LPRD without RE. The P values using a cut-off value of pH 5 were smaller than that of pH 4 in all statistical results. Conclusion: The LPRD patients showed significantly longer acid reflux time in the upper EsopHagus than the control group. In the LPRD group, the LPRD with RE patients had more frequent acid exposure in the upper EsopHagus than the LPRD without RE. A pH level of 5 could be appropriate as a cutoff level for the diagnosis of LPRD in upper EsopHagus pH monitoring.
ивашкина наталья юрьевна - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the clinical significance of disorders of the motor function of the EsopHagus stomach and duodenum
Terapevticheskii Arkhiv, 2019Co-Authors: A S Trukhmanov, трухманов александр сергеевич, Yu N Ivashkina, ивашкина наталья юрьевнаAbstract:The purpose of the review is to determine the relationship between the clinical symptoms of diseases and disorders of the motor function of the EsopHagus, stomach and duodenal bulb, to present modern methods of their diagnosis and pathogenetic principles of treatment of diseases. Depending on the pathogenesis, it is possible to distinguish secondary motility disorders resulting from organic lesions, and primary (functional) changes. The emergence of clinical symptoms is associated with impaired motor - evacuation function of the digestive tract, which can be divided into two large groups: changes in the peristaltic activity of the organ wall and the work of the spHincter apparatus. The basis of the regulation of motility of the EsopHagus, stomach and duodenum is the interaction of nervous and humoral factors, the central processing of impulses is carried out in the cerebral cortex. In case of violation of the coordinated action of inhibitory and excitatory regulation systems, pathological contractile activity occurs, which manifests itself as hypo - or hyper - motor dyskinesia. X-ray, ultrasound, high resolution manometry of the EsopHagus, pH-meter, scintigrapHy, computed tomograpHy, antroduodenal manometry and a number of others are used to diagnose disorders of the motor function of the digestive tract, which can determine the mechanism of the development of symptoms and prescribe pathogenetic treatment to the patient. Thus, the occurrence of clinical symptoms is associated with changes in the motor - evacuation function of the digestive tract due to a violation of the coordinating action of inhibitory and excitatory factors. The use of modern diagnostic methods for the study of motor function makes it possible to determine the mechanism for the development of clinical symptoms, which allows the patient to prescribe an effective pathogenetic treatment.
G A Yakovlev - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
accuracy of measurement of acidogenic function of the stomach by intragastric pH metry
Biomedical Engineering, 2004Co-Authors: G A YakovlevAbstract:Measurement of acidogenic function of the stomach (AFS) is widely used in modern clinical gastroenterology and functional diagnosis of such acid-dependent diseases as duodenal ulcer (DU), gastric ulcer (GU), etc. [2, 5, 9]. According to the method suggested by E. Yu. Linar [4], intragastric pH is measured simultaneously in acidogenic and neutralizing zones of the stomach. The first antimony pH-sensitive electrode (AE) together with a calomel internal reference electrode (IRE) are placed in the antrum. The second AE is placed in the stomach body. According to Yu. A. Leya, the stomach body, intermedial zone, and pyloric segment are acidogenic, transitory, and neutralizing zones, respectively (Fig. 1) [3]. The transition through intermedial zone, which is no wider than 2-3 mm [3], is accompanied by pH change from 1.0-2.0 in the stomach body to 5.0-7.0 in the antrum. The pH probes developed in 1969-1970 were equipped with two or three AEs (diameter, 7 mm) and a calomel IRE attached to the end of the pH probe (Fig. 1). For three decades (up to the 1990s), these probes were widely used for intragastric pH-metry in several thousands of patients [6, 7, 9]. The following standard electrode positions were used: antrumnstomach body, antrumnstomach bodyncardia, duodenumn antrumnstomach body. Accumulated clinical experience made it possible to assess the AFS state in patients with such acid-dependent diseases as duodenal ulcer, gastric ulcer, etc. It has been shown in recent years [10-12] that accuracy of intragastric pH-metry in two or more stomach segments with different levels of pH is significantly reduced if the first AE is collocated with the IRE in the same GIT segment, whereas the second (third) AE is located in another GIT segment. For example, if the first AE with the IRE is in an acidogenic zone of the stomach body and the second SE is in the EsopHagus, basal pH measured in the EsopHagus is 0.8 unit lower than true value (Table 1). This decrease in the EsopHagus pH is due to the fact that this value of intracavitary basal pH measured in EsopHagus by the second AE is determined not only by the electromotive force (EMF) between the AE and IRE located in stomach body but also by diffusion potential between EsopHagus and stomach body. If the stomach is strongly acidic (pH 0.9-1.9), the diffusion potential is about 40 mV, which is equivalent to about 0.8 pH unit. The stepwise decrease in the value of pH measured in the EsopHagus by the third AE is shown in Fig. 2. It follows from Fig. 2c that displacement of the IRE located near the first AE from the EsopHagus to stomach body (Fig. 2a) causes a 1.0
Kazuhiro Nakamura - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the relationship between esopHagoscopic findings and total acid reflux time below pH 4 and pH 5 in the upper EsopHagus in patients with laryngopHaryngeal reflux disease lprd
Auris Nasus Larynx, 2005Co-Authors: Ryoji Tokashiki, Kazuhiro Nakamura, Yusuke Watanabe, Hiroya Yamaguchi, Mamoru SuzukiAbstract:Abstract Objective: To investigate the relationship between esopHagoscopic findings and total acid reflux time in the upper EsopHagus in the patients of laryngopHaryngeal reflux disease (LPRD), and to evaluate whether pH Method: EsopHagoscopy and 24-h pH monitoring in the upper EsopHagus were performed in 29 patients suspected of LPRD and 19 healthy volunteers participated as controls. The total acid reflux times below pH 4 and 5 in the upper EsopHagus were compared between the LPRD group and the controls. The LPRD group was divided into LPRD with reflux esopHagitis (RE) and LPRD without RE, and the total acid reflux times below pH 4 and 5 of these two groups were compared. Results: Eight of the 29 (27.6%) LPRD patients had reflux esopHagitis. The LPRD group showed a significantly longer acid reflux time than the control group at pH below 5 ( P = 0.009) but not at pH below 4 ( P = 0.48). The LPRD with RE had significantly longer acid reflux times below both pH 4 and 5 in the upper EsopHagus compared to those of the LPRD without RE. The P values using a cut-off value of pH 5 were smaller than that of pH 4 in all statistical results. Conclusion: The LPRD patients showed significantly longer acid reflux time in the upper EsopHagus than the control group. In the LPRD group, the LPRD with RE patients had more frequent acid exposure in the upper EsopHagus than the LPRD without RE. A pH level of 5 could be appropriate as a cutoff level for the diagnosis of LPRD in upper EsopHagus pH monitoring.