Quantification of dental erosions in patients with GERD using optical coherence tomography before and after double-blind, randomized treatment with esomeprazole or placebo

OBJECTIVES: Dental erosion, the chemical dissolution of enamel without bacterial involvement, is a rarely reported manifestation of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), as well as of recurrent vomiting and dietary habits. It leads to loss of tooth substance, hypersensitivity, functional impairment, and even tooth fracture. To date, dental erosions have been assessed using only very basic visual methods, and no evidence-based guidelines or studies exist regarding the prevention or treatment of GERD-related dental erosions. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, we used optical coherence tomography (OCT) to quantify dental tissue demineralization and enamel loss before and after 3 weeks of acid-suppressive treatment with esomeprazole 20 mg b.i.d. or placebo in 30 patients presenting to the Berne University Dental Clinic with advanced dental erosions and abnormal acid exposure by 24-h esophageal pH manometry (defined as >4% of the 24-h period with pH<4). Enamel thickness, reflectivity, and absorbance as measures of demineralization were quantified by OCT before and after therapy at identical localizations on teeth with most severe visible erosions as well as several other predefined changes in teeth. RESULTS: The mean+/-s.e.m. decrease of enamel thickness of all teeth before and after treatment at the site of maximum exposure was 7.2+/-0.16 black trianglem with esomeprazole and 15.25+/-0.17black trianglem with placebo (P=0.013), representing a loss of 0.3% and 0.8% of the total enamel thickness, respectively. The change in optical reflectivity to a depth of 25 black trianglem after treatment was-1.122 +/-0.769 dB with esomeprazole and +2.059+/-0.534 dB with placebo (P 0.012), with increased reflectivity signifying demineralization. CONCLUSIONS: OCT non-invasively detected and quantified significantly diminished progression of dental tissue demineralization and enamel loss after only 3 weeks of treatment with esomeprazole 20 mg b.i.d. vs. placebo. This suggests that esomeprazole may be useful in counteracting progression of GERD-related dental erosions. Further validation of preventative treatment regimens using this sensitive detection method is required, including longer follow-up and correlation with quantitative reflux measures.

Severe systemic adverse reaction to proton pump inhibitors in an infant

Episodes of respiratory distress with chest retraction and wheezing, sometimes associated with facial edema, were noted after administering the proton pump inhibitors omeprazole and esomeprazole in an infant with gastroesophageal reflux. The disturbances relieved dramatically after withdrawing the proton pump inhibitor.

Association Between Baseline Impedance Values and Response Proton Pump Inhibitorsin Patients With Heartburn

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophageal impedance measurements have been proposed to indicate the status of the esophageal mucosa, and might be used to study the roles of the impaired mucosal integrity and increased acid sensitivity in patients with heartburn. We compared baseline impedance levels among patients with heartburn who did and did not respond to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, along with the pathophysiological characteristics of functional heartburn (FH). METHODS: In a case-control study, we collected data from January to December 203 on patients with heartburn and normal findings from endoscopy who were not receiving PPI therapy and underwent impedance pH testing at hospitals in Italy. Patients with negative test results were placed on an 8-week course of PPI therapy (84 patients received esomeprazole and 36 patients received pantoprazole). Patients with more than 50% symptom improvement were classified as FH/PPI responders and patients with less than 50% symptom improvement were classified as FH/PPI nonresponders. Patients with hypersensitive esophagus and healthy volunteers served as controls. In all patients and controls, we measured acid exposure time, number of refluxes, baseline impedance, and swallow-induced peristaltic wave indices. RESULTS: FH/PPI responders had higher acid exposure times, numbers of reflux events, and acid refluxes compared with FH/PPI nonresponders (P < .05). Patients with hypersensitive esophagus had mean acid exposure times and numbers of reflux events similar to those of FH/PPI responders. Baseline impedance levels were lower in FH/PPI responders and patients with hypersensitive esophagus, compared with FH/PPI nonresponders and healthy volunteers (P < .001). Swallow-induced peristaltic wave indices were similar between FH/PPI responders and patients with hypersensitive esophagus. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with FH who respond to PPI therapy have impedance pH features similar to those of patients with hypersensitive esophagus. Baseline impedance measurements might allow for identification of patients who respond to PPIs but would be classified as having FH based on conventional impedance-pH measurements.