Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine >
A single-center retrospective study on epidemiological and Traditional Chinese Medicine syndrome characteristics of 21010 patients with reflux/heartburn symptoms
Received date: 2021-12-12
Accepted date: 2022-02-11
Online published: 2022-02-14
Supported by
Study of Mucosa Repair Mechanism of Reflux Esophagitis Cure by the Method of Huoxuetongjiang(81573737);Mechanism of Huoxue Tongjiang Formula Treat Reflux Esophagitis based on the Effect of Esophageal Microbiome on TLR4/PAR2/TRPV1 Pathway(82074213)
OBJECTIVE: To provide a basis for the clinical identification of true and false reflux, integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine, and psychosomatic treatment, we conducted a retrospective study of the etiology and epidemiological and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) syndrome characteristics of patients with reflux/heartburn symptoms.
METHODS: The 210 10 patients with reflux/heartburn treated at Tianjin Nankai Hospital from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019, were divided into four groups according to their pathogenesis. Sex, age, course of disease, incidence rate, gastroscopy, 24-h pH-impedance, esophageal manometry, Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA) / Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) score, 8-week proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment effect, and TCM syndrome characteristics were statistically analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 21010 patients (8864 men and 12146 women), with reflux/heartburn symptoms were screened, including 6284 (29.9%) patients with reflux esophagitis (RE), 10427 (49.6%) patients with non-erosive reflux esophagitis (NERD), 2430 (11.6%) patients with reflux hypersensitivity (RH), and 1870 (8.9%) patients with functional heartburn (FH). The incidence of the disease was higher in women than in men (P <0.0001). The ranking of the incidence of anxiety and depression in these four groups was FH>RH>NERD>RE (P < 0.0001). There were more women than men in the groups with anxiety and more men than women in the groups with depression (P < 0.0001), and there was no significant difference in the distribution of anxiety and depression between men and women (P = 0.5689). There were significant differences in TCM syndrome characteristics between NERD, RE, and functional esophageal diseases (P < 0.01). The highest proportion of functional esophageal disease TCM symptoms was Qistagnation and phlegm obstruction syndrome (36.16%), and there was no significant difference between RH and FH. The effective rates of PPI treatment at 8 weeks in patients in the RE, NERD, RH, and FH groups were 89%, 72%, 54%, and 0%, respectively. RE was classified into grades A, B, C, and D according to the Los Angeles grading system. The ranking of the incidence of these four grades was A>B>C>D (P < 0.0001). The effective rates of PPI treatment at 8 weeks were 91%, 81%, 69%, and 63% in patients with grade A, B, C, and D RE, respectively (P < 0.0001). The highest proportion of TCM syndrome types of NERD and RE was the stagnated heat syndrome in the liver and stomach syndrome, 38.99% and 33.90%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Reflux/heartburn symptoms are relatively common in middle-aged women, and NERD is the most common etiology, followed by RE, RH, and FH. The most common TCM syndrome characteristics in NERD and RE were stagnated heat syndrome in the liver and stomach syndrome, and Qistagnation and phlegm obstruction syndrome in functional esophageal diseases. Most patients with reflux/heartburn symptoms also experienced anxiety and depression.
Yanping TANG , Peicai LI , Xi LIU , Lei LIU , Yanxia GONG , Xiaodong WEI , Lina LIU , Li YANG . A single-center retrospective study on epidemiological and Traditional Chinese Medicine syndrome characteristics of 21010 patients with reflux/heartburn symptoms[J]. Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 2023 , 43(3) : 574 -581 . DOI: 10.19852/j.cnki.jtcm.20220214.001
| [1] | Zhang M, Chen M, Peng S, Xiao Y. The Rome IV versus Rome Ⅲ criteria for heartburn diagnosis: a comparative study. United European Gastroenterol J 2018; 6: 358-66. |
| [2] | Tack J and Pandolfino JE. Pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterology 2018; 154: 277-88. |
| [3] | Committee ASoP, Muthusamy VR, Lightdale JR, et al. The role of endoscopy in the management of GERD. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 1305-10. |
| [4] | Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, et al. The montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 1900-20; quiz 43. |
| [5] | Aziz Q, Fass R, Gyawali CP, et al. Functional esophageal disorders. Gastroenterology 2016; 130: 1459-65. |
| [6] | Yamada T, Kawamura O, Toki M. Interobserver and intraobserver variation in endoscopic assessment of GERD using the "Los Angeles" classification. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 1999; 49: 700. |
| [7] | Chi ZC. Reflux hypersensitivity. World Chin J Dig 2018; 26: 885-91. |
| [8] | Vardar R and Keskin M. Indications of 24-h esophageal pH monitoring, capsule pH monitoring, combined pH monitoring with multichannel impedance, esophageal manometry, radiology and scintigraphy in gastroesophageal reflux disease? Turk J Gastroenterol 2017; 28: S16-s21. |
| [9] | Kahrilas PJ, Sifrim D. High-resolution manometry and impedance-pH/manometry: valuable tools in clinical and investigational esophagology. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 756-69. |
| [10] | Kahrilas PJ, Bredenoord AJ, Fox M, et al. The Chicago classification of esophageal motility disorders, v3.0. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2015; 27: 160-74. |
| [11] | Fuller G, Bolus R, Whitman C, et al. PRISM, a patient-reported outcome instrument, accurately measures symptom change in refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dig Dis Sci 2017; 62: 593-606. |
| [12] | El-Serag HB. Time trends of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 5: 17-26. |
| [13] | Fass R, Fennerty MB, Vakil N. Nonerosive reflux disease--current concepts and dilemmas. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96: 303-14. |
| [14] | Yamasaki T, O'Neil J, Fass R. Update on functional heartburn. Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 13: 725-34. |
| [15] | Kim JJ, Kim N, Park JH, et al. Comparison of tight junction protein-related gene mRNA expression levels between male and female gastroesophageal reflux disease patients. Gut Liver 2018; 12: 411-19. |
| [16] | Hsieh YH, Wu MF, Yang PY, et al. What is the impact of metabolic syndrome and its components on reflux esophagitis? A cross-sectional study. BMC Gastroenterol 2019; 19: 33. |
| [17] | Honda J, Iijima K, Asanuma K, et al. Estrogen enhances esophageal barrier function by potentiating occludin expression. Dig Dis Sci 2016; 61: 1028-38. |
| [18] | Li P, Wang F, Ji GZ, et al. The psychological results of 438 patients with persisting GERD symptoms by symptom checklist 90-revised (SCL-90-R) questionnaire. Medicine (Baltimore) 2018; 97: e9783. |
| [19] | Hartono JL, Mahadeva S, Goh KL. Anxiety and depression in various functional gastrointestinal disorders: do differences exist? Dig Dis 2012; 13: 252-57. |
| [20] | Riehl ME, Pandolfino JE, Palsson OS, Keefer L. Feasibility and acceptability of esophageal-directed hypnotherapy for functional heartburn. Dis Esophagus 2016; 29: 490-96. |
| [21] | Zhang BH, Tang XD, Li BS, Wang FY. Discussion on the advantages of Traditional Chinese Medicine in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Zhong Yi Za Zhi 2012; 53: 658-60. |
| [22] | Li YM, Yan C, Bai CC. Key points of TCM syndrome differentiation and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease from the perspective of integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine. Liaoning Zhong Yi Yao Da Xue Xue Bao 2016; 18: 141-3. |
| [23] | Tang YP, Liu SM, Gong YX, Wang R, Li SH, Li FR. Effect of compound Baiji Hu on mucosal blood flow in rats with reflux esophagitis. Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xiao Hua Za Zhi 2011; 19: 295-98. |
| [24] | Chen LL, Bu P, Fang XH, Correlation between brain gut peptides, Traditional Chinese Medicine syndrome and course of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Shi Jie Hua Ren Xiao Hua Za Zhi 2016; 24: 2531-36. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |