Clinical role of ambulatory reflux monitoring in PPI non‐responders: recommendation statements. Issue 8 (16th August 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Yadlapati, Rena; Gawron, Andrew J.; Gyawali, C. Prakash; Chen, Joan; Clarke, John; Fass, Ronnie; Jain, Anand; Lynch, Kristle; Khan, Abraham; Katz, Philip O.; Katzka, David A.; Richter, Joel; Schnoll‐Sussman, Felice; Spechler, Stuart J.; Vaezi, Michael F.; Vela, Marcelo; Pandolfino, John E.
• Is Part Of: Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics. Volume 56:Issue 8(2022)
• Page Start: 1274
• Page End: 1283
• Publication Date: 2022-08-16
• Subjects: Digestive organs -- Diseases -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Digestive organs -- Effect of drugs on -- Periodicals; Gastrointestinal system -- Diseases -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Gastrointestinal system -- Effect of drugs on -- Periodicals; 615.73
• DOI: 10.1111/apt.17180
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0269-2813

Abstract

Summary: Background: Optimal ambulatory reflux monitoring methodology in symptomatic reflux patients continues to be debated. Aims: To utilise published literature and expert opinion to develop recommendation statements addressing use of ambulatory reflux monitoring in clinical practice Methods: The RAND Appropriateness Method (RAM) was utilised among 17 experts with discussion, revision and two rounds of ranking of recommendation statements. Ambulatory reflux monitoring protocol, methodology and thresholds ranked as appropriate by ≥80% of panellists met the criteria for appropriateness. Results: Prolonged (96‐h recommended) wireless pH monitoring off proton pump inhibitor (PPI) was identified as the appropriate diagnostic tool to assess the need for acid suppression in patients with unproven gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and persisting typical reflux symptoms despite once‐daily PPI. Acid exposure time (AET) <4.0% on all days of monitoring with negative reflux‐symptom association excludes GERD and does not support ongoing PPI treatment. Conversely, AET >6.0% across ≥2 days is conclusive evidence for GERD and supports treatment for GERD, while AET >10% across ≥2 days identifies severe acid burden that supports escalation of anti‐reflux treatment. In previously proven GERD, impedance‐pH monitoring on PPI is helpful in defining refractory GERD and mechanisms of continued symptoms; the presence of <40 reflux events, AET <2.0% and a negative reflux‐symptom association does not support escalation of anti‐reflux treatment. In contrast, AET > 4.0% and positive reflux‐symptom association support escalation of anti‐reflux treatment, including use of invasive therapeutics. Conclusions: Statements meeting appropriateness for average clinical care have been identified when utilising reflux monitoring in patients with typical reflux symptoms and PPI non‐response. Abstract : This RAND Appropriateness Method among 17 esophageal experts yielded 15 recommendations regarding the clinical role of ambulatory reflux monitoring in PPI non‐responders.