title: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy with conscious sedation does not interfere with catheter-based 24-h pH monitoring.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To investigate the impact of esophagogastroduodenoscopy with conscious sedation on the subsequent 24-h catheter-based pH monitoring.
  
  
  METHODS
  Fifty patients with extra-esophageal symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease undergoing ambulatory dual-probe 24-h pH monitoring were enrolled from March 2010 to August 2011. All of the data were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Thirty-six patients (72%, group A) underwent pH monitoring shortly after esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with conscious sedation, and 14 patients (28%, group B) underwent pH monitoring without conscious sedation. The 24-h pH data from two time periods were analyzed: the first 4 h (Period I) and the remaining time of the study (Period II).
  
  
  RESULTS
  The mean age of the patients was 49.6 ± 12.5 years; 20 patients (40%) were men. The baseline data, including age, sex, body mass index, reflux esophagitis, the Reflux Symptom Index, and the Reflux Findings Score, were comparable between the two groups. The percentage of total time with a pH < 4 and the frequency of acid reflux during Period I were not significantly different between the two groups, as measured using both pharyngeal (0.03% ± 0.10% vs 0.07% ± 0.16%, P = 0.32; and 0.07 ± 0.23 episodes/h vs 0.18 ± 0.47 episodes/h, P = 0.33, respectively) and esophageal probes (0.96% ± 1.89% vs 0.42% ± 0.81%, P = 0.59; and 0.74 ± 1.51 episodes/h vs 0.63 ± 0.97 episodes/h, P = 0.49, respectively). The percentage of total time with a pH < 4 and the frequency of acid reflux were also not significantly different between Periods I and II in group A patients, as measured using both pharyngeal (0.03% ± 0.10% vs 0.23% ± 0.85%, P = 0.21; and 0.07 ± 0.23 episodes/h vs 0.29 ± 0.98 episodes/h, P = 0.22, respectively) and esophageal probes (0.96% ± 1.89% vs 1.11% ± 2.57%, P = 0.55; and 0.74 ± 1.51 episodes/h vs 0.81 ± 1.76 episodes/h, P = 0.55, respectively).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  EGD with conscious sedation does not interfere with the results of subsequent 24-h pH monitoring in patients with extra-esophageal symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease.
authors.affiliation: Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan. flying3454@xuite.net
authors.forename: Yung-Kuan
authors.initials: YK
authors.lastname: Tsou
authors.forename: Jau-Min
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Lien
authors.forename: Chin-Kuo
authors.initials: CK
authors.lastname: Chen
authors.forename: Cheng-Hui
authors.initials: CH
authors.lastname: Lin
authors.forename: Hsing-Yu
authors.initials: HY
authors.lastname: Chen
authors.forename: Mu-Shien
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Lee
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D057785:Catheters; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D016292:Procedural Sedation; D016145:Endoscopy, Digestive System; D004867:Equipment Design; D050782:Esophageal pH Monitoring / Q000295:instrumentation*; D005260:Female; D005764:Gastroesophageal Reflux / Q000150:complications / Q000175:diagnosis*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008365:Manometry; D008875:Middle Aged; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013997:Time Factors; D055815:Young Adult
keywords: Conscious sedation; Esophagogastroduodenoscopy; Extraesophageal symptoms; Gastroesophageal reflux disease; pH monitoring
references.citation: Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Aug;101(8):1900-20; quiz 1943
references.pmid: 16928254
references.citation: World J Gastroenterol. 2007 Aug 14;13(30):4091-5
references.pmid: 17696227
references.citation: Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2010 Aug;32(3):425-42
references.pmid: 20456310
references.citation: Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004 Feb 15;19(4):449-54
references.pmid: 14871285
references.citation: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005 Apr;3(4):329-34
references.pmid: 15822037
references.citation: J Voice. 2002 Jun;16(2):274-7
references.pmid: 12150380
references.citation: Gut. 1975 May;16(5):347-52
references.pmid: 237803
references.citation: Am J Gastroenterol. 2003 Apr;98(4):740-9
references.pmid: 12738450
references.citation: J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1983 Feb;224(2):391-7
references.pmid: 6296359
references.citation: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002 Jul;127(1):32-5
references.pmid: 12161727
references.citation: Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2008 Dec;37(4):793-805, viii
references.pmid: 19028318
references.citation: Ear Nose Throat J. 2002 Sep;81(9 Suppl 2):7-9
references.pmid: 12353431
references.citation: Scand J Gastroenterol. 2010 Oct;45(10):1248-54
references.pmid: 20560818
references.citation: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2005 Mar;114(3):177-82
references.pmid: 15825565
references.citation: J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Jun;24(6):1113-8
references.pmid: 19638089
references.citation: Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Mar;102(3):668-85
references.pmid: 17335450
references.citation: Surg Endosc. 2011 Jul;25(7):2219-23
references.pmid: 21359906
references.citation: Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009 Jun;17(3):143-8
references.pmid: 19395970
references.citation: J Clin Gastroenterol. 2006 Feb;40(2):116-21
references.pmid: 16394871
references.citation: Laryngoscope. 2001 Aug;111(8):1313-7
references.pmid: 11568561
references.citation: Am J Gastroenterol. 2005 Jan;100(1):8-10
references.pmid: 15654773
references.citation: World J Gastroenterol. 2011 Mar 14;17(10):1304-7
references.pmid: 21455329
references.citation: Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2008;10(4):245-53
references.pmid: 20840040