esophageal transit scintigraphy
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

19
(FIVE YEARS 1)

H-INDEX

5
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2021 ◽  
pp. jrheum.201283
Author(s):  
Giuseppina Abignano ◽  
Gianna Angela Mennillo ◽  
Giovanni Lettieri ◽  
Duygu Temiz Karadag ◽  
Antonio Carriero ◽  
...  

Objective The University of California Los Angeles Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium gastrointestinal tract 2.0 (UCLA GIT 2.0) questionnaire is a self-reported tool measuring gastrointestinal (GI) quality of life in systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients. Scarce data are available on the correlation between patient reported GI symptoms and motility dysfunction as assessed by esophageal transit scintigraphy. Methods We evaluated the UCLA GIT 2.0 reflux scale in SSc patients admitted to our clinic and undergoing esophageal transit scintigraphy, and correlated their findings. Results Thirty-one SSc patients undergoing esophageal transit scintigraphy were included. Twentyseven were female, 8 with diffuse cutaneous subset; 26/31 (84%) patients had a delayed transit and an abnormal esophageal emptying activity. Mean (SD) emptying activity percentage was higher in patients with none-to-mild GIT 2.0 reflux score [81.1 (11.5)] than in those with the moderate [55.7 (17.8), p = 0.003] and severe-to-very-severe scores [55.8 (19.7), p = 0.002]. The 26 (84%) SSc patients with delayed esophageal transit had a higher GIT 2.0 reflux score (p=0.04). Percentage of esophageal emptying activity negatively correlated with the GIT 2.0 reflux score (r = - 0.68, p < 0.0001) while it did not correlate with the other scales and the total GIT 2.0 score. Conclusion SSc patients with impaired esophageal scintigraphy findings have a higher GIT 2.0 reflux score. The UCLA SCTC GIT 2.0 is a complementary tool for objective measurement of esophageal involvement which can be easily administered in day-to-day clinical assessment.



2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 510-516
Author(s):  
Sandra Monetti Dumont ◽  
Henrique Silveira Costa ◽  
Ana Thereza Chaves ◽  
Maria do Carmo Pereira Nunes ◽  
Viviane Parisotto Marino ◽  
...  


2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 663-677
Author(s):  
Asha Sarma ◽  
Frederick D. Grant ◽  
Neha S. Kwatra


2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-54
Author(s):  
Shoukat H Khan ◽  
Madhu Vijay P ◽  
Tanveer A Rather ◽  
Bashir A Laway


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 251-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marek Chojnowski ◽  
Małgorzata Kobylecka ◽  
Marzena Olesińska


2015 ◽  
Vol 60 (8) ◽  
pp. 2390-2397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoo Mi Park ◽  
Han Ho Jeon ◽  
Jae Jun Park ◽  
Jie-Hyun Kim ◽  
Young Hoon Youn ◽  
...  


2015 ◽  
Vol 148 (4) ◽  
pp. S-1158-S-1159
Author(s):  
Joshua A. Boys ◽  
Daniel S. Oh ◽  
Jack Seto ◽  
Robert W. Henderson ◽  
Steven R. DeMeester ◽  
...  


2014 ◽  
Vol 146 (5) ◽  
pp. S-890-S-891
Author(s):  
Kee Wook Jung ◽  
Segyeong Joo ◽  
Hwoon-Yong Jung ◽  
Seung-Jae Myung ◽  
Hye Ok Kim ◽  
...  


2014 ◽  
Vol 79 (5) ◽  
pp. AB518-AB519
Author(s):  
Yoo MI. Park ◽  
Jie-Hyun Kim ◽  
Young Hoon Youn ◽  
Hyojin Park


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document