Article Text

PDF
PWE-172 Does salivary pepsin measurement change diagnostic outcome in patients investigated by 24h ph monitoring?
  1. AMP Rasijeff1,
  2. W Jackson1,
  3. JM Burke1,
  4. PW Dettmar2
  1. 1GI Physiology, Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust
  2. 2RD Biomed Limited, Hull, UK

Abstract

Introduction Pepsin, a gastric enzyme, has been proposed as a marker of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) when present in saliva.1 In contrast to routine diagnostic methods, quantification of salivary pepsin is rapid and non-invasive. Furthermore, 24h pH-monitoring has limited sensitivity.2We aimed to evaluate the impact of salivary pepsin measurement on diagnosis of GORD in patients undergoing 24h pH-monitoring.

Method Patients referred for 24h pH-monitoring (off medication) were invited to take part in the study. Eligible participants complained of heartburn, regurgitation, chest pain or acid in the mouth and were referred for testing by a gastroenterologist, upper gastrointestinal surgeon or respiratory consultant. Presence of additional atypical symptoms was assessed by questionnaire (Reflux Symptom Index). Patients underwent high resolution oesophageal manometry and catheter-based 24h pH-monitoring. During the monitoring period, participants collected up to three saliva samples at the time of experiencing their predominant symptom (s). Pepsin concentration of samples was quantified using a lateral flow device (Peptest) where at least one sample containing >25ng/ml pepsin was indicative of reflux disease. Diagnostic outcome by pepsin measurement and 24h pH-monitoring (>4.2% of time pH <4 considered diagnostic of GORD) was compared using Fisher’s exact test.

Results 100 participants recruited; 80 participants included in final analysis (exclusions: corrupt pH study (n = 1), no pepsin samples collected (n = 19)). 81% of participants returned at least one positive pepsin sample. 39/80 (49%) patients were classified as having reflux disease based on 24h-pH monitoring (mean%time pH <4: 10.9% vs 1.8% in reflux negative group, p < 0.05). Of these, 30/39 (77%) also had positive reflux outcome using pepsin. Of 41 individuals without reflux based on pH-monitoring, 85% had at least one positive pepsin sample. 9 individuals studied were found to have reflux on pH-monitoring, but no evidence of salivary pepsin. Pepsin based reflux outcome was not dependent on the outcome from 24 h pH-monitoring (Fisher’s exact 2-tailed sig. = 0.398).

Conclusion A higher proportion of the total population was found to have GORD based on pepsin measurement (81% vs 49% using pH), which may reflect the poor sensitivity of 24h pH-monitoring. Measurement of salivary pepsin changed the diagnostic outcome when compared to 24h pH-monitoring in 44% of symptomatic reflux patients. Further studies should explore the relationships between pepsin concentration and symptoms of reflux. This study may support the use of salivary pepsin measurement to prevent false-negative diagnosis based on 24h pH-monitoring alone.

Disclosure of interest A. Rasijeff: None Declared, W. Jackson: None Declared, J. Burke: None Declared, P. Dettmar Shareholder of: RD Biomed Limited.

References

  1. Hayat JO, et al. Gut 2015;64:373–380

  2. Dent J, et al. Gut 2010;59:714–721

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.