Abstract
ABSTRACT Background: The catheter of the esophageal pH monitoring is associated with nasal and throat discomfort, and different behave in patients. The capsule of the wireless pH monitoring may cause chest pain and complications. Aim: To compare the wireless and conventional pH monitoring concerning the degree of discomfort and limitations in daily activities, complications, ability to diagnose pathological reflux, and costs. Methods: Twenty-five patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux were prospectively submitted, in a simultaneous initial period, to 24-hour catheter esophageal pH monitoring and 48-hour wireless system. After removing each system, patients underwent a specific clinical questionnaire. Results: Fifteen patients (60%) pointed a higher discomfort in the introduction of the capsule (p=0.327). Discomfort and limitations in daily activities were lower on 2nd day (p<0.05); however, continued to be expressive (32% to 44%). Chest pain occurred in 13 (52%) patients. The diagnostic gain of pathological reflux was 12% with the wireless system (p=0.355). Conclusions: 1) There is no significant difference between the discomfort mentioned in the introduction of the capsule and the catheter; 2) during reflux monitoring, the wireless system provides significant less discomfort and limitations in daily activities; 3) there is no significant difference between the two methods in the ability to diagnose pathological reflux; 4) wireless pH monitoring has higher cost.
Highlights
Esophageal pH monitoring was introduced into clinical practice in in patients in the 70’s15
The wireless system has been developed to avoid restrictions and improve the diagnostic sensitivity, it’s capsule may cause chest pain in up to 65% of cases1,4,23, . 24,28,34 This study was motivated by no local and few international publications concerning the comparative study of the discomfort and limitations in daily activities between wireless pH monitoring and conventional esophageal pH monitoring[3]
Twenty-five patients meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled in the study and submitted to the two types of esophageal pH monitoring
Summary
Esophageal pH monitoring was introduced into clinical practice in in patients in the 70’s15. The first method identifies the disease forms causing esophagitis, while the second diagnoses pathological gastroesophageal reflux[21]. The conventional method (with catheter) has sensitivity ranging from 79% to 96%, specificity 85% to 100%, and 98% accuracy[8,10,14,16,19,27,30]. The wireless method (without catheter and with capsule) has similar sensitivity and specificity (78.3% to 100% and 84.5% to 94.8%, respectively)[23]. 24,28,34 This study was motivated by no local and few international publications concerning the comparative study of the discomfort and limitations in daily activities between wireless pH monitoring and conventional esophageal pH monitoring[3]. The present study aimed to compare both esophageal pH monitoring, with and without catheter, concerning the degree of discomfort and restrictions in routine activities, complications, ability to diagnose pathological gastroesophageal reflux, and costs
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
