Evidence Hub

Endoscopic assessment of gastroesophageal reflux disease patients and risk factors of esophageal lesions

Abdul Alim, Harun Or-Rashid, Golam Rabbani, Fam Anjuman Ara

Barind Medical College Journal, 2018

108 participants

Abstract

Background: Gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common esophageal disorder in Bangladesh. GERD is associated with significant impaired quality of life and sometimes complicated with high morbidity and mortality. Objective: To investigate upper Gl endoscopic findings in patients having typical symptoms of GERD and the risk factors of esophageal lesions in GERD patients. Methods: This was a cross-sectional descriptive type of study conducted at a private clinic in Rajshahi city. All the adults attending at the clinic having typical GERD symptoms more than 6 weeks constituted the study population. Total 108 GERD patients were included in this study. Data were collected by a data collection sheet through interview and patient examination including UGI endoscopy. Chi-square test was applied to find out the association between Clinico-demographic characteristics and GERD status of the study subjects. Multiple logistic regression analysis was done to identify the risk factors to develop esophageal lesion in GERD patients. Results: A total of 108 GERD patients, 88 (81.5%) were nonerosive reflux disease (NERD) patients and the rest 20 (18.5%) patients had esophageal lesions. Of those 20 GERD patients with esophageal lesion, 9 (8.3%) had erythema, 5 (4.6%) had erosion, 4 (3.6%) had hiatus hernia with esophagitis and only 2 (1.8%) had Barretts. Twenty-four (22.2%) patients had endoscopic evidence of gastroduodenal lesions. Older age and diabetes mellitus were identified as…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 108 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