Assessment and Protection of Esophageal Mucosal Integrity in Patients With Heartburn Without Esophagitis

Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
The American Journal of Gastroenterology (Impact Factor: 9.21). 01/2013; 108(4). DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2012.469
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVES:Intact esophageal mucosal integrity is essential to prevent symptoms during gastroesophageal reflux events. Approximately 70% of patients with heartburn have macroscopically normal esophageal mucosa. In patients with heartburn, persistent functional impairment of esophageal mucosal barrier integrity may underlie remaining symptoms. Topical protection of a functionally vulnerable mucosa may be an attractive therapeutic strategy. We aimed to evaluate esophageal mucosal functional integrity in patients with heartburn without esophagitis, and test the feasibility of an alginate-based topical mucosal protection.METHODS:Three distal esophageal biopsies were obtained from 22 patients with heartburn symptoms, and 22 control subjects. In mini-Ussing chambers, the change in transepithelial electrical resistance (TER) of biopsies when exposed to neutral, weakly acidic, and acidic solutions was measured. The experiment was repeated in a further 10 patients after pretreatment of biopsies with sodium alginate, viscous control, or liquid control "protectant" solutions.RESULTS:Biopsy exposure to neutral solution caused no change in TER. Exposure to weakly acidic and acidic solutions caused a greater reduction in TER in patients than in controls (weakly acid -7.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.9 to -4.5) vs. 3.2% (-2.2 to 8.6), P<0.05; acidic -22.8% (-31.4 to 14.1) vs. -9.4% (-17.2 to -1.6), P<0.01). Topical pretreatment with alginate but not with control solutions prevented the acid-induced decrease in TER (-1% (-5.9 to 3.9) vs. -13.5 (-24.1 to -3.0) vs. -13.2 (-21.7 to -4.8), P<0.05).CONCLUSIONS:Esophageal mucosa in patients with heartburn without esophagitis shows distinct vulnerability to acid and weakly acidic exposures. Experiments in vitro suggest that such vulnerable mucosa may be protected by application of an alginate-containing topical solution.Am J Gastroenterol advance online publication, 29 January 2013; doi:10.1038/ajg.2012.469.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The link between organizing pneumonia (OP) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is not well known. There is little evidence in the literature to establish a causal link between GERD and OP. Objectives: The aim of the study was to assess the hypothesis that OP is more severe when it is associated with GERD and that it leads to more frequent relapses. Methods: In a retrospective study on 44 patients suffering from OP, we compared the clinical, radiological and histological characteristics of 2 groups, 1 composed of patients with GERD (n = 20) and the other of patients without GERD (n = 24). Results: The GERD group was distinguished by a higher number of patients with migratory alveolar opacities on chest radiography and thoracic computerized tomography (14/20 vs. 9/24; p = 0.03 and 18/20 vs. 13/24; p = 0.01), greater hypoxemia [60 (42-80) vs. 70 (51-112) mm Hg; p = 0.03], greater bronchoalveolar lavage cellularity [0.255 (0.1-1.8) vs. 0.150 (0.05-0.4) g/l; p = 0.035] and more frequent relapses (14/20 vs. 9/24; p = 0.03). Conclusions: OP associated with GERD is more severe and results in more frequent relapses. Microinhalation of gastric secretions might induce lung inflammation leading to OP and relapse. We suggest that typical symptoms of GERD such as pyrosis should be investigated in OP. © 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.
    Respiration 01/2015; 89(2). DOI:10.1159/000369470 · 2.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background The molecular basis and effects of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy on PPI-responsive oesophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE) and eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) remain unknown.AimTo compare symptom-histological and cytokine gene expression in PPI-REE and EoE patients, at baseline and after specific treatment.Methods In consecutive adult patients with an EoE phenotype (dysphagia/food impaction, typical endoscopic findings and > 15 eos/HPF), gene expression of eotaxin-3, IL-13, and IL-5 were determined in distal and proximal oesophagus, at baseline and after omeprazole 40 mg b.d. for 8 weeks. PPI-REE was defined by clinicohistological response. PPI nonresponders (EoE) were offered treatment with topical steroids.ResultsFifty three patients were re-evaluated on PPI therapy. 23 patients (43%) had PPI-REE and 30 patients (57%) had EoE. At baseline, eotaxin-3/IL-13/IL-5 gene expression was indistinguishable between EoE and PPI-REE, excepting increased IL-5 expression in proximal oesophagus (12.54 vs. 57, P = 0.029). PPI therapy significantly decreased eotaxin-3/IL-13 in PPI-REE, at both oesophageal sites (P ≤ 0.008), and IL-5 in distal (P = 0.016), but not in proximal oesophagus. Patients with steroid-responsive EoE also showed a significant decrease in eotaxin-3/IL-5 expression at both oesophageal sites. In EoE patients, initial PPI trial significantly decreased distal oesophageal eosinophilia (63.78 to 41.79 eos/HPF, P = 0.025) and led to symptom remission in 16%, but did not influence Th2 markers.Conclusions Baseline cytokine gene expression in PPI-REE was nearly indistinguishable from EoE. PPI therapy significantly downregulated oesophageal eotaxin-3/Th2-cytokine gene expression in PPI-REE, similarly to that seen in steroid-responsive EoE. A subset of EoE patients showed clinicohistological improvement on PPI therapy.
    Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 08/2014; 40(8). DOI:10.1111/apt.12914 · 4.55 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective Little is known about the mucosal phenotype of the proximal human esophagus. There is evidence to suggest that the proximal esophagus is more sensitive to chemical and mechanical stimulation compared to the distal. This may have physiological relevance (e.g. in prevention of aspiration of gastroesophageal refluxate), but also pathological relevance (e.g. in reflux perception or dysphagia). Reasons for this increased sensitivity are unclear but may include impairment in mucosal barrier integrity or changes in sensory innervation. We assessed mucosal barrier integrity and afferent nerve distribution in the proximal and distal esophagus of healthy human volunteers. Design In 10 healthy volunteers baseline proximal and distal esophageal impedance was measured in vivo. Esophageal mucosal biopsies from the distal and proximal esophagus were taken and baseline transepithelial electrical resistance (TER) was measured in Ussing chambers. Biopsies were examined immunohistochemically for presence and location of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) immunoreactive nerve fibers. Results Baseline impedance was higher in the proximal than in the distal esophagus (2936Ω(SD578) vs. 2229Ω(SD821); p = 0.03), however, baseline TER was not significantly different between them. Mucosal CGRP-immunoreactive nerves were found in the epithelium of both proximal and distal esophagus, but were located more superficially in the proximal mucosa compared to the distal (11.5(SD7) vs. 21.7(SD5) cells layers from lumen, p=0.002). Conclusion Mucosal barrier integrity is similar in proximal and distal esophagus, but proximal mucosal afferent nerves are in a more superficial location. The enhanced sensitivity to reflux-evoked symptoms of the proximal esophagus most likely has an anatomical basis. Copyright © 2014, American Journal of Physiology- Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology.
    AJP Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology 01/2015; 308(6):ajpgi.00175.2014. DOI:10.1152/ajpgi.00175.2014 · 3.74 Impact Factor