Evidence Hub

Carditis: a relevant marker of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Data from a prospective central European multicenter study on histological and endoscopic diagnosis of esophagitis (histoGERD trial)

D. Pinto, W. Plieschnegger, Nora I. Schneider, M. Geppert, H. Bordel, Gabriele M. Höss, Andreas Eherer, E. Wolf et al.

Diseases of the esophagus, 2018

590 participants · 13 citations

Abstract

The columnar-lined mucosa at the gastroesophageal junction may contain an inflammatory infiltrate, commonly referred to as carditis (or cardia gastritis). The etiology of carditis is not entirely clear since published data are conflicting. Some authors believe it to be secondary to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and others to Helicobacter pylori gastritis. This prospective study aims at clarifying the relationship between carditis and the histological, clinical, and endoscopic findings of GERD, in a large cohort of individuals negative for H. pylori infection. Eight hundred and seventy-three individuals (477 females and 396 males, median age 53 years) participated in this study. Biopsy material was systematically sampled from above and below the gastroesophageal junction. Reflux-associated changes of the esophageal squamous epithelium were assessed according to the Esohisto consensus guidelines. Grading of carditis was performed according to the Updated Sydney System, known from the histological evaluation of gastritis. In total, 590 individuals (67.5%) had chronic carditis. Of these, 468 (53.6%) had mild chronic inflammation, with 321 individuals (68.6%) showing no or minimal changes on endoscopic examination (Los Angeles Categories N and M). The presence of chronic carditis was associated with several GERD-related parameters of the esophageal squamous epithelium (P < 0.0001), and data retained statistical significance even when analysis was restricted to…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 590 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free