ライフサイエンスコーパス: GERD

1 GERD is believed to cause nonesophageal symptoms, such a

2 GERD is highly prevalent in southern India.

3 GERD patients consume many putative GERD causing foods a

4 GERD patients, even those with moderate to severe sympto

5 GERD should therefore be considered in patients with rhi

6 GERD symptoms were persistent in the majority of PPI use

7 GERD symptoms, HRQL, work productivity and resource use

8 GERD was confirmed by gastroscopy, manometry, pH-metry a

9 GERD was diagnosed by Los Angeles classification A-D and

10 nt-reported symptoms: dysphagia (P = .0012), GERD (P = .0001), and nausea/vomiting (P < .0001).

11 uble blind, cross-over study in 12 HS and 12 GERD patients pre-treated with 40 mg pantoprazole (PPI)

12 hundred and five participants, including 285 GERD and 220 Non-GERD participants participated in the s

13 orthern California population, comparing 317 GERD patients to 182 asymptomatic population controls.

14 The study was made up of 60 GERD patients and 20 control subjects.

15 Visitors (18-79 years) to a GERD information website who completed the GerdQ self-as

16 ern India during 2010 and early 2011 using a GERD questionnaire (GerdQ).

17 ve esophagitis or nonerosive but pH-abnormal GERD) or eosinophilic esophagitis than in patients witho

18 phagitis, 81 with nonerosive but pH-abnormal GERD, 93 without GERD, 18 with achalasia, and 15 with eo

19 Therefore, prospective data about GERD and its natural history in the general population a

20 Each additional GERD-related hospitalization was associated with a 10% i

21 in nonpharmacologic methods for alleviating GERD symptoms.

22 a polygenic overlap between GERD and BE, and GERD and EA.

23 exist between patients' characteristics and GERD symptoms, and classify subjects based on symptom-pr

24 sed risk of IBS, dyspepsia, constipation and GERD.

25 evaluating the relationship between LSG and GERD by 24-hour pH monitoring are lacking.

26 ntervals of 3 to 5 years is recommended, and GERD is treated much as it is for patients without Barre

27 was recurrence of GERD, which was defined as GERD combined with a reflux index greater than 4 on pH m

28 e tomato products and large portion meals as GERD-free controls and were even more likely to consume

29 tion of 77% (s.e. = 24%, P = 0.0012) between GERD and BE and 88% between GERD and EA (s.e. = 25%, P =

30 0.0012) between GERD and BE and 88% between GERD and EA (s.e. = 25%, P = 0.0004) was estimated using

31 D, and the extent of genetic overlap between GERD and BE or EA.

32 and supports for a polygenic overlap between GERD and BE, and GERD and EA.

33 n the center of tumorigenic events caused by GERD is repeated damage of esophageal tissues by the ref

34 risk of tumorigenic transformation caused by GERD.

35 can benefit patients with well-characterized GERD.

36 isions about surgical treatment in childhood GERD is unknown.

37 e squamo-oxyntic gap is a marker for chronic GERD.

38 cancer in Barrett esophagus include chronic GERD, hiatal hernia, advanced age, male sex, white race,

39 the gap is a measure of severity of chronic GERD; and the presence of intestinal metaplasia in the g

40 Latent class analysis classified GERD patients based on symptom profiles which related to

41 ere found in 44.2 % and 26.8 % had confirmed GERD.

42 Histopathology confirmed GERD-specific alterations as dilated intercellular space

43 ported that early results of GBP can control GERD.

44 e presence of any squamo-oxyntic gap defines GERD; the length of the gap is a measure of severity of

45 stoperatively, with only 15.9% demonstrating GERD resolution.

46 prototype device, measurements of MI detect GERD with higher levels of specificity and positive pred

47 n masala chewing were more likely to develop GERD compared with those abstained from the habit (multi

48 emonstrate preoperative GERD, 8.6% developed GERD postoperatively.

49 T2D patients exhibit different GERD symptoms, higher LES pressures and a decreased prev

50 and night, more digestive and non-digestive GERD symptoms, and bad sleep quality.

51 and less severe digestive and non-digestive GERD symptoms, and better sleep quality than in class 1.

52 2.9-12.9), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (RR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.4-2.6), dyspepsia (RR, 3.3; 95

53 factor in gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) and as a target for GERD treatment.

54 ciated with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and Barrett's esophagus.

55 standing of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and its complications.

56 reatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and may provide durable reflux control without fun

57 stations of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and to compare the most recent technological advan

58 c tests for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are suboptimal and do not accurately and reliably

59 nagement of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) commonly starts with an empiric trial of proton pu

60 treated for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) during infancy.

61 diagnose gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) have not been evaluated in terms of their ability

62 with acute gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) have not been studied prospectively in humans.

63 documented Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) in 53.4% of patients.

64 currence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in children randomized to laparoscopic (LF) or ope

65 reatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in children; however, their efficacy and safety is

66 ion about gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in patients with Diabetes mellitus type 2 (T2D) is

67 features of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in some patients whose symptoms persist despite pr

68 Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common diagnosis in infants and children, but

69 Gastrointestinal reflux disease (GERD) is a common disorder that negatively impacts healt

70 gested that gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a risk factor for developing rhinitis/rhinosinu

71 Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is associated with impaired epithelial barrier fun

72 ogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is complex and involves changes in reflux exposure

73 sification, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is much more than heartburn and patients constitut

74 Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is prevalent worldwide, particularly in developed

75 tients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is reported in up to 40%.

76 Gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) is suggested to be associated with some socio-demo

77 Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is the most common gastrointestinal disease, and t

78 Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is the most prevalent gastrointestinal disorder in

79 Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is the strongest known risk factor for esophageal

80 iduals with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) never visit their general practitioner.

81 der such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) nor should it preclude a diagnosis of EoE.

82 efractory gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains a significant problem in the gastroenterol

83 tients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms despite proton pump inhibitor (PPI) thera

84 valence of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) varies widely around the world.

85 urements of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) would improve management of patients suspecting of

86 ation, 3.9; gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), 9.7.

87 ac disease, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

88 rome (IBS), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and overactive bladder syndrome (OBS), as well as

89 ndications: gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), Barrett's esophagus (BE), and non-steroidal anti-

90 Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), functional dyspepsia (FD) and irritable bowel syn

91 lication of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), predisposes patients to esophageal adenocarcinoma

92 is chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

93 tients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

94 toperative gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD).

95 adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

96 nitions of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD).

97 otherapy in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

98 s including gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

99 reatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

100 symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

101 early-stage gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

102 tients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

103 tients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD; age, 32-60 y; 7 women) without troublesome regurgi

104 (dysphagia, gastroesophageal reflux disease [GERD], nausea/vomiting, and pain) align with clinical sy

105 mitting to lifelong PPIs to help distinguish GERD from a functional syndrome.

106 24 patients with documented GERD received esomeprazole treatment.

107 LRYGB allows to obtain an effective GERD symptom amelioration and a reduction in acid exposu

108 Respondents meeting the criteria for either GERD, FD or IBS have significantly higher odds of report

109 tor (PPI) therapy and continue to experience GERD symptoms despite optimized treatment.

110 The only reflux-triggering foods GERD patients were less likely to consume were citrus an

111 phenotypic variance of 7% (95% CI 3-11%) for GERD explained by all the genotyped SNPs.

112 the first evidence for a polygenic basis for GERD and supports for a polygenic overlap between GERD a

113 rable method when investigating children for GERD.

114 31, 2010, with primary diagnostic codes for GERD (n = 141 190).

115 capacity in adults meeting the criteria for GERD, FD and IBS, respectively, and in individuals who m

116 7.7 kg/m2] were consecutively evaluated for GERD irrespectively of related symptoms, before the oper

117 e Bravo capsule on children investigated for GERD in terms of safety, tolerability and feasibility be

118 lication are proven treatment modalities for GERD.

119 follow-ups based on objective parameters for GERD are missing.

120 al reflux disease (GERD) and as a target for GERD treatment.

121 Many diagnostic tests for GERD have been developed over the past decades.

122 ical, surgical, and endoscopic therapies for GERD.

123 Partial response to PPI therapy for GERD is associated with a high symptom burden, significa

124 remains the standard surgical treatment for GERD.

125 opy results and 46% with gastritis), 18% had GERD and 13% had ulcers (duodenal in 9% and gastric in 4

126 ldren with interpretable results (49.5%) had GERD according to RI, while 51 (56.7%) had GERD accordin

127 d GERD according to RI, while 51 (56.7%) had GERD according to DMS.

128 y than typical symptoms when the patient has GERD.

129 Most LSG patients (84.1%) continued to have GERD symptoms postoperatively, with only 15.9% demonstra

130 The frequency of overlap with IBS, GERD, and OBS were determined for the whole group and fo

131 flux Disease Questionnaire (RDQ) to identify GERD according to referral of TS, in patients without pr

132 trectomy did not reliably relieve or improve GERD symptoms and induced GERD in some previously asympt

133 and in part on protein level (P < 0.015) in GERD, while subgroup analysis of revealed this upregulat

134 orted symptom relief, with no differences in GERD symptoms or dysphagia.

135 retion layer and EGJ was 2.6 times longer in GERD compared to HS (p = 0.012).

136 dyspeptic patients, SE detected more MCE in GERD than in non-GERD patients and in the control group.

137 MCE in GERD was significantly higher (51.45 %) than in non-GERD

138 (193 ml to 100 ml, in HS, 227 ml to 94 ml in GERD; p < 0.01) and thickness of the acid layer (26 mm t

139 lts of prolonged esophageal pH monitoring in GERD patients.

140 leted the protocol had similar reductions in GERD symptom scores.

141 ibution and acidity of gastric secretions in GERD and healthy subjects (HS).

142 yer on top of gastric contents is similar in GERD patients and HS; however contact between the layer

143 antireflux surgery and medical treatment in GERD patients without known Barrett's esophagus (IRR 0.9

144 relieve or improve GERD symptoms and induced GERD in some previously asymptomatic patients.

145 flux disease, cough, aspiration, laryngitis, GERD, GORD, endoscopy, manometry, pH monitoring, proton

146 flux disease, cough, aspiration, laryngitis, GERD, GORD, endoscopy, manometry, pH monitoring, proton

147 onpharmacologic interventions exist for many GERD patients.

148 iglycerides, metabolic syndrome, and medical GERD treatment had a significant effect on latent classe

149 nctional diseases that overlap with or mimic GERD can also be treated with neuromodulators (primarily

150 gender, BMI, smoking, asthma, and nocturnal GERD were calculated.

151 valuating the relationship between nocturnal GERD and noninfectious rhinitis (NIR).

152 0.001) and with the development of nocturnal GERD.

153 ased, 10-year study indicates that nocturnal GERD was a risk factor for noninfectious rhinitis/rhinos

154 acco smoke, and asthma, those with nocturnal GERD in 1999 (>/=3 episodes of nocturnal gastroesophagea

155 participants, including 285 GERD and 220 Non-GERD participants participated in the study.

156 s significantly higher (51.45 %) than in non-GERD (32.7 %) (p = 0.047) and in the control group (20.5

157 ts, SE detected more MCE in GERD than in non-GERD patients and in the control group.

158 sk after antireflux surgery with nonoperated GERD patients, including 7 studies of patients with Barr

159 Real "de novo" GERD occurred in 5.4% group B patients.

160 Barrett's esophagus, adjusting for obesity, GERD, and levels of insulin and ghrelin (OR for 3(rd) vs

161 e functional rather than anatomical cause of GERD.

162 is study was to identify distinct classes of GERD patients according to symptom profiles, using a spe

163 Risk factors for complications of GERD include advanced age, male sex, white race, abdomin

164 s to characterize the longitudinal course of GERD and of associated erosive tooth wear, as well as fa

165 The definition of GERD was set to a reflux index (RI) of >/=5% and DeMeest

166 adoption of novel histologic definitions of GERD as follows: the presence of any squamo-oxyntic gap

167 ith typical reflux symptoms and diagnosis of GERD based on endoscopy and 48 hours, wireless pH metry.

168 Q is useful in primary care for diagnosis of GERD based on the Montreal definition.

169 alues, whereas 32 (group B) had diagnosis of GERD: 23 had acidic reflux, whereas 9 had combined reflu

170 wever, long-term instrumental evaluations of GERD after LRYGB are not available.

171 se patients without preoperative evidence of GERD, the occurrence of "de novo" reflux is uncommon.

172 es performed on patients without evidence of GERD.

173 vestigate the prevalence and risk factors of GERD in a general population of southern India.

174 masala chewing appear to be risk factors of GERD symptoms for the studied population.

175 The incidence of GERD decreased in 34 (64%) and 21 (40%) patients at E1 a

176 OUND DATA: Extraesophageal manifestations of GERD include cough, laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), and

177 al and physiologic and objective measures of GERD are difficult to interpret.

178 4, 2.73) were associated with higher odds of GERD, while higher educational level (OR = 0.53, 95%CI =

179 .81) were positively associated with odds of GERD, while higher educational level (OR = 0.55, 95%CI =

180 0.91) was associated with decreased odds of GERD.

181 30, 0.94) were associated with lower odds of GERD.

182 The presence of GERD had no effect on weight loss for the GB cohort but

183 Presence of GERD was defined as a score of >/= 8.

184 low LES pressure would mark the presence of GERD.

185 It is estimated that the prevalence of GERD in the United States is approximately 20% and that

186 The prevalence of GERD symptoms appeared to increase until 1999.

187 The prevalence of GERD symptoms in pregnant women increased from the first

188 The prevalence of GERD was 22.2 % (238/1072) in southern India, and was mo

189 ted with LF have a higher recurrence rate of GERD than those operated with OF.

190 ndergoing LF (37%) experienced recurrence of GERD compared to those undergoing OF (7%); risk ratio fo

191 The main outcome measure was recurrence of GERD, which was defined as GERD combined with a reflux i

192 cleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to the risk of GERD, and the extent of genetic overlap between GERD and

193 jects had a dose-dependent increased risk of GERD, compared to those with body mass index less than 2

194 level appeared to have an increased risk of GERD.

195 ely increases in length with the severity of GERD, indicating that the squamo-oxyntic gap is a marker

196 e is substantial overlap between symptoms of GERD and those of eosinophilic esophagitis, functional d

197 viduals experiencing overlapping symptoms of GERD, FD and IBS.

198 es that individuals experiencing symptoms of GERD, FD or IBS report poor self-rated health as well as

199 t have a positive effect in the treatment of GERD in an urban population of Iran.

200 Future approaches to treatment of GERD include potassium-competitive acid blockers, reflux

201 LNF is more effective in the treatment of GERD than LMAH-C.

202 ithout heartburn or regurgitation typical of GERD.

203 We analyze the value of GERD diagnostic tests in evaluation of these troublesome

204 Rates of improvement or worsening of GERD symptoms, development of new-onset GERD, and weight

205 with erosive tooth wear and oligosymptomatic GERD receiving esomeprazole for one year, erosive tooth

206 emographic or lifestyle factors with data on GERD symptoms identified patients with BE with an AUC of

207 4 x 10 mL/day) and omeprazole (20 mg/day) on GERD symptoms in general practice.

208 nd levels of insulin, leptin, and ghrelin on GERD and Barrett's esophagus.

209 At least one GERD symptom was present in 74 % of patients with 41 % r

210 g of GERD symptoms, development of new-onset GERD, and weight loss and complications.

211 on only demographic or lifestyle factors or GERD symptoms identified patients with BE or EAC with AU

212 Overlapping GERD symptoms were found in 44.2 % and 26.8 % had confir

213 he efficacy and safety of H2RAs in pediatric GERD.

214 sponse to PPI therapy, defined as persistent GERD symptoms >/=3 days/week despite optimized treatment

215 ients with EA are at high risk of persistent GERD and BE.

216 SG and 33 867 underwent GB, with preexisting GERD present in 44.5% of the LSG cohort and 50.4% of the

217 Preoperative GERD was associated with worse outcomes and decreased we

218 atients who did not demonstrate preoperative GERD, 8.6% developed GERD postoperatively.

219 the LSG cohort, the presence of preoperative GERD was associated with increased postoperative complic

220 st morbidly obese patients with preoperative GERD.

221 controlled trial (RCT) patients with proven GERD were eligible and assigned by central randomization

222 GERD patients consume many putative GERD causing foods as frequently or even more frequently

223 s, and 16% require reoperation for recurrent GERD and/or dysphagia.

224 causing significant weight loss, GBP reduces GERD symptoms, improves reflux esophagitis, and decrease

225 ietary modification is effective in reducing GERD, substantial opportunities for nonpharmacologic int

226 ar have significant gastroesophageal reflux (GERD), despite minor reflux symptoms.

227 New treatments of refractory GERD have been disappointing.

228 d the assessment and treatment of refractory GERD.

229 with proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-refractory GERD were randomized to CNF or LNF.

230 Patients presenting with 'refractory GERD' in fact represent a quite heterogeneous group cons

231 Questions regarding GERD were developed based on the Montreal definition.

232 In comparison, GB resolved GERD in most patients (62.8%) within 6 months postoperat

233 th 98% of patients having moderate-to-severe GERD symptoms and 65% of patients experiencing daily sym

234 HRQL and work productivity, and substantial GERD-related costs.

235 Symptomatic GERD is considered by many a contraindication to LSG.

236 nts with Barrett's esophagus and symptomatic GERD should take a long-term PPI.

237 nvention of the esophagoscope confirmed that GERD was a premorbid condition.

238 LES pressure (LESP) in the GERD group was significantly lower than in the control g

239 of distal from the proximal electrode in the GERD group.

240 when observed by the distal electrode in the GERD group.

241 follow-up, ranging from 12 to 58 months, the GERD-HRQL score was within normal limits in all patients

242 oms and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, GERD-Health Related Quality of Life scores, esophageal a

243 eflux disease (ERD); pH metry contributes to GERD diagnosis and is critical for proper diagnosis of N

244 nderstanding of the LES, its contribution to GERD, and the complication of Barrett's esophagus.

245 of health care and lost productivity due to GERD is extremely high.

246 those who lack an obvious predisposition to GERD (eg, central obesity, large hiatal hernia).

247 toms as well as specific symptoms related to GERD and OBS.

248 The development of BE is related to GERD history.

249 g in urban community were more vulnerable to GERD than those in rural community (multivariate-adjuste

250 lp to better understand, diagnose, and treat GERD.

251 I 0.42-1.39) compared with medically treated GERD patients.

252 ss 1 grouped the highest severity of typical GERD symptoms during day and night, more digestive and n

253 In class 2, only typical GERD symptoms at night occurred.

254 actice Advice 2: Patients with uncomplicated GERD who respond to short-term PPIs should subsequently

255 a growing body of evidence that uncontrolled GERD can play a significant role in the pathogenesis of

256 rett esophagus, treatment for the underlying GERD, and the role of endoscopic eradication therapy.

257 ation despite daily PPI use with 3 validated GERD-specific symptom scales, on and off PPIs.

258 stric bypass is the procedure of choice when GERD and morbid obesity coexist.

259 We aimed to examine whether GERD patients follow recommended dietary guidelines, and

260 ce for patients with Barrett esophagus whose GERD is treated medically or surgically.

261 I: 1.09-1.76), but inversely associated with GERD (OR for 3(rd) vs 1(st) tertile = 0.364; 95% CI: 0.1

262 Serum ghrelin was inversely associated with GERD, as hypothesized, but positively associated with Ba

263 ake were independent factors associated with GERD.

264 e workup for infants and young children with GERD and better define "failure of medical management" i

265 We performed clinical evaluation with GERD-HRQoL questionnaire, upper endoscopy, esophageal ma

266 socio-demographic and lifestyle factors with GERD in participants referred to a teaching hospital in

267 ion of minimal change esophagitis (MCE) with GERD is controversial.

268 ); this association was stronger in men with GERD (P = .01 for OR heterogeneity).

269 Among men with GERD, diabetes was inversely associated with Barrett's e

270 arrett's esophagus, particularly in men with GERD.

271 controlled, phase 4 study, outpatients with GERD were randomly allocated to either group 1 (omeprazo

272 Treatment-naive patients with GERD (diagnosed by endoscopy and pH-metry; n = 203; NCT0

273 were signi fi cantly lower in patients with GERD (erosive esophagitis or nonerosive but pH-abnormal

274 Best Practice Advice 1: Patients with GERD and acid-related complications (ie, erosive esophag

275 to investigate MI patterns in patients with GERD and common nonreflux conditions, to assess MI patte

276 Patients with GERD and hiatal hernias </=2 cm were randomly assigned t

277 es in the esophageal mucosa of patients with GERD compared to controls (P < 0.05).

278 in detecting MCL in dyspeptic patients with GERD compared with patients without GERD by GerdQ or by

279 The pattern of MI in patients with GERD differed from that in patients without GERD or pati

280 ces as for DeMeester score, of patients with GERD from that of the control group and of distal from t

281 with eosinophilic esophagitis; patients with GERD had low MI closer to the squamocolumnar junction, a

282 sulted in esophageal stasis in patients with GERD or SERD.

283 Most patients with GERD present with heartburn and effortless regurgitation

284 Of 20 patients with GERD symptoms after six months of high-dose PPI therapy,

285 was an effective treatment for patients with GERD symptoms, particularly in those with persistent reg

286 ar to those in treatment-naive patients with GERD, but partial PPI responders experienced more severe

287 a greater extent than PPIs in patients with GERD.

288 Nissen fundoplication (LNF) in patients with GERD.

289 usion of acid than controls or patients with GERD.

290 er management and follow-up of patients with GERD.

291 he surgical treatment of obese patients with GERD.

292 ponse to PPI therapy in French patients with GERD.

293 and healing of esophagitis in patients with GERD.

294 ine follow-up of an Internet population with GERD is feasible.

295 ation reasons in an Internet population with GERD.

296 d antireflux surgery, and 41% presented with GERD symptoms, although only 28% were receiving medical

297 Partial PPI responders with GERD (n = 580; NCT00703534) had frequent (>/= 3 days/wee

298 nonerosive but pH-abnormal GERD, 93 without GERD, 18 with achalasia, and 15 with eosinophilic esopha

299 nts with GERD compared with patients without GERD by GerdQ or by endoscopy with 24-h pH monitoring (P

300 ophilic esophagitis than in patients without GERD or patients with achalasia (P < .001).

301 GERD differed from that in patients without GERD or patients with eosinophilic esophagitis; patients