Abstract
Oesophageal transmucosal potential difference (PD) was measured in 76 patients during endoscopy. Twelve patients with no symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux, and normal oesophageal appearance on endoscopy and mucosal biopsy had a PD of -18.3 +/- 3.8 mV (mean +/- SD). Thirty three patients had reflux symptoms but the oesophagus appeared normal at endoscopy. Eighteen of these patients had reflux change on oesophageal suction biopsies and the PD in the same region of the oesophagus in this group was -18.1 +/- 7.5 mV. In 15 of the patients, mucosal biopsies were normal and the PD in this group was -18.8 +/- 9.9 mV. Thirty one patients had erosive oesophagitis and PD values in this group were markedly reduced. Twenty seven of these patients had PD values less than -10 mV. We conclude that PD measured by our technique is abnormal in erosive oesophagitis but that it is of no value in the diagnosis of mild mucosal damage in patients with reflux symptoms when endoscopic findings are normal.
Full text
PDF



Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Andersson S., Grossman M. I. Profile of pH, pressure, and potential difference at gastroduodenal junction in man. Gastroenterology. 1965 Oct;49(4):364–371. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Archampong E. Q., Edmonds C. J. Effect of luminal ions on the transepithelial electrical potential difference of human rectum. Gut. 1972 Jul;13(7):559–565. doi: 10.1136/gut.13.7.559. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Beck I. T., Hernandez N. A. Transmural potential difference in patients with hiatus hernia and oesophageal ulcer. Gut. 1969 Jun;10(6):469–476. doi: 10.1136/gut.10.6.469. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Behar J., Sheahan D. Histologic abnormalities in reflux esophagitis. Arch Pathol. 1975 Jul;99(7):387–391. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Black R. B., Rhodes J., Hole D. Measurement of bile damage to the gastric mucosa. The relation between the electrical potential difference and transmucosal movement of hydrogen and sodium ion. Am J Dig Dis. 1973 May;18(5):411–415. doi: 10.1007/BF01071991. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bowen B. K., Krause W. J., Ivey K. J. Effect of sodium bicarbonate on aspirin-induced damage and potential difference changes in human gastric mucosa. Br Med J. 1977 Oct 22;2(6094):1052–1055. doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.6094.1052. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chung R. S., Johnson G. M., Denbesten L. Effect of sodium taurocholate and ethanol on hydrogen ion absorption in rabbit esophagus. Am J Dig Dis. 1977 Jul;22(7):582–588. doi: 10.1007/BF01073075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Collins B. J., Spence R. A., McFarland R. J., Parks T. G., Love A. H. Reference electrode sites for potential difference measurements in the gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopy. 1983 Sep;15(5):319–321. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1021544. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Eckardt V. F., Adami B. Esophageal transmural potential difference in patients with symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux. Klin Wochenschr. 1980 Mar 17;58(6):293–297. doi: 10.1007/BF01476571. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Geall M. G., Code C. F., McIlrath D. C., Summerskill W. H. Measurement of gastrointestinal transmural electric potential difference in man. Gut. 1970 Jan;11(1):34–37. doi: 10.1136/gut.11.1.34. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Geboes K., Desmet V., Vantrappen G., Mebis J. Vascular changes in the esophageal mucosa. An early histologic sign of esophagitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 1980 May;26(2):29–32. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(80)73261-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Grantham R. N., Code C. F., Schlegel J. F. Reference electrode sites in determination of potential difference across the gastroesophageal mucosal junction. Mayo Clin Proc. 1970 Apr;45(4):265–274. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hernandez N. A., Beck I. T. Gastroesophageal transmural potential difference measured by a new constant infusion method. The effect of skin scarification on this potential difference. Am J Dig Dis. 1969 Mar;14(3):206–216. doi: 10.1007/BF02235884. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ismail-Beigi F., Horton P. F., Pope C. E., 2nd Histological consequences of gastroesophageal reflux in man. Gastroenterology. 1970 Feb;58(2):163–174. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Johnson L. F., DeMeester T. R., Haggitt R. C. Endoscopic signs for gastroesophageal reflux objectively evaluated. Gastrointest Endosc. 1976 Feb;22(3):151–155. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(76)73731-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Khamis B., Kennedy C., Finucane J., Doyle J. S. Transmucosal potential difference; diagnostic value in gastro-oseophageal reflux. Gut. 1978 May;19(5):396–398. doi: 10.1136/gut.19.5.396. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Komorowski R. A., Leinicke J. A. Comparison of fiberoptic endoscope and Quinton tube esophageal biopsies in esophagitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 1978 May;24(4):154–155. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(78)73492-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Murray H. S., Strottman M. P., Cooke A. R. Effect of several drugs on gastric potential difference in man. Br Med J. 1974 Jan 5;1(5896):19–21. doi: 10.1136/bmj.1.5896.19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Orlando R. C., Powell D. W., Bryson J. C., Kinard H. B., 3rd, Carney C. N., Jones J. D., Bozymski E. M. Esophageal potential difference measurements in esophageal disease. Gastroenterology. 1982 Nov;83(5):1026–1032. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- ROVELSTAD R. A., OWEN C. A., Jr, MAGATH T. B. Factors influencing the continuous recording of in situ pH of gastric and duodenal contents. Gastroenterology. 1952 Apr;20(4):609–624. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Turner K. S., Powell D. W., Carney C. N., Orlando R. C., Bozymski E. M. Transmural electrical potential difference in the mammalian esophagus in vivo. Gastroenterology. 1978 Aug;75(2):286–291. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
