Open Access

Gastro‑oesophageal reflux disease in liver cirrhosis: Possible pathogenesis and clinical intervention (Review)

  • Authors:
    • Fei Yu
    • Yue Zhu
    • Na Li
    • Hong-Fang Fu
    • Zhi Jiang
    • Xiao-Yi Zhang
    • Liang Zeng
    • Xiao-Yu Hu
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: July 12, 2023     https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12113
  • Article Number: 414
  • Copyright: © Yu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

Oesophageal variceal bleeding is a common complication of decompensated liver cirrhosis (LC). Some studies have reported that reflux oesophagitis (RE) is a risk factor for upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and greatly impacts the quality of life. However, the frequency and mechanism of gastro‑oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in LC remain unclear. The present review explored the possible pathogenesis, and analysed the advantages and disadvantages of the interventional measures and the need for implementation of these measures. By combining the comprehensive terms associated with LC, GERD and RE, EMBASE, Medline/PubMed and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched. The underlying pathological mechanism of GERD in LC was summarized: Transient relaxation of the lower oesophageal sphincter, delayed gastric emptying, increased intra‑abdominal pressure, increased intragastric pressure and excessive nitric oxide production destroyed the ‘anti‑reflux barrier’, causing gastric content reflux. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been widely used empirically to lower the risk of oesophageal venous rupture and bleeding. However, long‑term use of acid inhibitors in patients with LC may induce complications, such as spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. The metabolic half‑life of PPIs is prolonged in patients with severe liver function impairment. Therefore, the indications for using acid inhibitors lack clarity. However, after endoscopic oesophageal variceal eradication, additional benefits may be gained from the long‑term use of PPIs in small doses.

1. Introduction

The term gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) refers to a set of syndromes that include the signs and symptoms associated with any pathological process, with retrosternal burning (heartburn) and reflux as the characteristic symptoms. The Montreal definition of GERD states that GERD is a disease that develops when the reflux of stomach contents causes troublesome symptoms or complications. The word ‘trouble’ in the definition accurately captures how negative the symptoms appear to patients. The symptoms of GERD are classified by this international evidence-based consensus into oesophageal symptom syndrome (with oesophageal symptoms but no evidence of oesophageal injury, including non-erosive reflux disease) and oesophageal injury syndrome [mucosal injury is a recognised aspect, and the most common manifestation is reflux oesophagitis (RE), including stenosis, Barrett's oesophagus, and adenocarcinoma], while the recognised extra-oesophageal symptoms include reflux cough syndrome, reflux laryngitis syndrome, reflux asthma syndrome, reflux tooth erosion syndrome, etc. (1). In addition, this new definition acknowledges that the reflux causing symptoms might be weakly acidic or gaseous. According to extensive population-based studies, the prevalence of GERD in Western Europe and North America is 10-20% (2). Symptomatic GERD adversely affects the quality of life of patients with chronic liver disease (as affects the mood and general health perception) (3).

The pathophysiology of GERD comprises several factors, such as low basal pressure of the lower oesophageal sphincter (LES), prolonged LES relaxation time, delayed oesophageal clearance, and delayed gastric emptying (4). In addition, GERD is also closely associated with unhealthy lifestyle habits, such as smoking, obesity, strenuous exercise after meals, consumption of carbonated drinks, poor eating habits, and excessive alcohol and coffee consumption. Individuals with diabetes and metabolic syndrome are more likely to experience GERD. RE is the most common manifestation of oesophageal injury. RE is a risk factor for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) and greatly impacts the quality of life. Patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis (LC) often experience oesophageal variceal bleeding, and it appears that effective anti-reflux treatment should be used. However, the frequency and specific mechanism of RE in LC have not been elucidated. Patients with LC might be prone to GERD, and some studies indicate that the prevalence of GERD in patients with LC is high (5-7). What factors cause GERD in LC? Is it necessary to employ anti-reflux measures? Some studies have reported that GERD might promote the rupture of oesophageal varices (EV) in patients with LC, resulting in an increased risk of UGIB (7-10). In recent years, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been widely used empirically to lower the risk of oesophageal venous rupture and bleeding in patients with LC. Herein, we attempt to explain the possible pathogenesis of GERD in LC and discuss whether anti-reflux measures should be employed.

2. Epidemiological investigation

GERD is very common worldwide, and the prevalence of gastro-oesophageal reflux symptoms varies greatly among countries. A recent survey indicates that the GERD prevalence in China is approximately 2.5% (11). According to a systematic review, the prevalence of GERD in East Asia ranges from 2.5 to 6.7%; however, the data lacks quality (12). A study comprehensively analysed the epidemiological trend of GERD in 204 countries and regions in the past 20 years and reported that the age-standardised prevalence rate (ASPR) increased globally from 2015 to 2019. The risk of GERD is closely associated with age, and the incidence of GERD in women is marginally higher. In the past 20 years, the ASPRs of Latin America, the Caribbean, South Asia, North Africa, and the Middle East were the highest, while those of East Asia and China were the lowest (below 5%) (13). The increased risk of GERD in these areas is associated with potential risk factors, such as obesity, alcohol consumption, and smoking, which is consistent with the findings of previous studies (11). The study conducted in 2018 also reported that despite the lack of clear evidence indicating the high-risk factors of GERD, the observed prevalence rate of individuals over 50 years of age, smokers, users of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and obese individuals is significantly higher (14). Eating habits, such as irregular eating patterns, large meals, and bedtime meals, might be associated with GERD symptoms (15). In a prospective study in China, 1280 patients with chronic liver disease (879 patients with LC) were endoscopically assessed, and a RE prevalence of 36.4% was reported in patients with chronic liver disease (6). A recent retrospective study reported that the 10-year incidence of RE in patients with LC was similar to that of the general population (4.79%) (16). Currently, there are a few studies on the prevalence and associated factors of GERD in patients with LC, and a more representative research population and standardised methods are warranted for further epidemiological study. There is a lack of evidence proving the positive correlation between LC and GERD to date because patients with LC are often accompanied by complications, such as EV and portal hypertension (PHT), several high-risk factors, such as previous endoscopic injection sclerotherapy and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) exist, which might result in severe RE in patients with LC. As most patients with RE lack GERD symptoms and do not take acid inhibitors before the onset of severe UGIB, the prevalence of severe RE that causes UGIB has increased significantly in the past three decades (8). Ethanol can damage the mucosal barrier, cause oesophageal mucosal inflammation, increase the risk of oesophageal acid damage, and increase the prevalence of GERD or RE among alcoholics (17,18). Alcohol is a risk factor for LC, which might be one of the reasons why some patients with LC are likely to develop GERD.

3. Pathophysiological changes of GERD

Under normal conditions, the intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) is positive, and the intra-thoracic pressure is negative, which is the physical basis of promoting the reflux of stomach contents into the oesophagus. A small amount of reflux occurs in all individuals throughout the day, and the primary mechanism resulting in most physiological reflux events is referred to as transient LES relaxation (TLESR). However, the normal anatomy and physiology of the oesophagus, LES, diaphragm at hiatus, and stomach can prevent pathological GERD. The most common causes of pathological reflux are the destruction of the LES normal reflux barrier and the pressure gradient change in the thoracic and abdominal cavities (19,20). Several studies have reported that ascites can increase intragastric and IAP (21-23). Patients with LC have a high incidence of acid reflux (23) and oesophagitis (24). In patients with LC, a decreased LES pressure is observed with increased ascitic fluid (23,25). Therefore, ascites in patients with LC is a potentially important factor for GERD development (7,21,23,26).

Fluctuations are observed in the normal oesophageal mucosal environment between destruction and repair; therefore, physiological TLESR occurs (20). The LES function is closely associated with the incidence and severity of GERD. The LES is the annular muscle layer at the distal end of the oesophagus, which generates resting pressure higher than the IAP, and the resting pressure generated by the LES is sufficient to prevent the back-flow of gastric contents to the oesophagus (27). The LES, diaphragm, and the normal anatomy of the oesophagus and stomach are involved in the anti-reflux mechanism.

Severe RE and UGIB are often observed in patients with LC owing to EV, PVT, PHT, etc., thereby deserving the attention of hepatologists and gastroenterologists. However, the existing research on GERD-related LC is scarce. Some studies employed endoscopy and oesophageal manometry to demonstrate that patients with LC have lower oesophageal motility disorder, abnormal changes in the potential of hydrogen (pH) in the lower oesophageal segment, and varying degrees of oesophageal mucosal injury (Table I) (5-7,26,28).

Table I

Related research on oesophageal monitoring in patients with LC.

Table I

Related research on oesophageal monitoring in patients with LC.

First author/s, yearCountryResearch objectiveObservation methods and outcome indicatorsRelated prevalence rate(Refs.)
Hassanin et al, 2021EgyptA total of 100 patients with HCV-associated LC were enrolled in the study and underwent clinical examination, imaging examination and upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.Oesophageal mucosal lesions were classified according to the Los Angeles classification system as follows: Grade A, mucosal erosion <5 mm, not extending between the upper limit of two mucosal folds; grade B, mucosal erosion >5 mm, not extending between the upper limit of two mucosal folds; grade C, confluent erosion that is continuous between the upper limit of two or more mucosal folds but involves <75% of the oesophageal circumference; and grade D, confluent and circumferential erosion that involves ≥75% of the oesophageal circumference.83 patients (83%) were diagnosed with GERD by endoscopy, and the prevalence rates of grades B and C were the highest. Among 62 patients with ascites, 56 patients (90.3%) were diagnosed with GERD under endoscopy. This study reported that ascites are the only risk factor for GERD in patients with LC.(7)
Zhang et al, 2011ChinaA total of 78 patients with LC and 30 healthy controls confirmed to be EV-free by endoscopy were included.LESP, PA, PD, PV, dynamic 24-h oesophageal pH and bilirubin monitoring were measured. i) In the LC group, the LESP was 15.32±2.91 mmHg, the PA was 61.41±10.52 mmHg, the PD was 5.32±1.22 s, and the PV was 5.22±1.11 cm/s. ii) 24-h oesophageal pH and bilirubin monitoring results: Compared with those in the control group, pathological oesophageal pH and bilirubin measurements increased in the LC group, while bile reflux events also increased.The incidences of RE and pathological reflux were 37.18 and 55.13%, respectively.(5)
Li et al, 2010ChinaExperimental group: 1,280 patients with chronic liver disease (879 patients with LC and 401 patients with chronic hepatitis). Control group: 29 patients with acute hepatitis A or E.Referring to the Los Angeles classification scheme, the degree and scope of oesophageal mucosal injury were observed by endoscopy, and RE was classified into grades A, B, C and D. In the experimental group, 43% of the patients with LC (378/879) had different degrees of oesophageal mucosal damage compared with 22% of the patients with chronic hepatitis (91/401).In this clinical study, the prevalence of RE in patients with chronic liver disease was 36.4% (469/1280), while it was 10.3% (3/29) in the control group.(6)
Schechter et al, 2007BrazilA total of 51 patients with LC with EV confirmed by endoscopy were included in the study.By manometry, pH recording was performed by placing the probe 5 cm above the upper limit of the LES. Reflux episodes and abnormal reflux were defined according to the duration of oesophageal pH <4 in different positions. Abnormal reflux of pH records was observed in 19 patients with LC with EV (37%), and 1 of the patients developed erosive oesophagitis during endoscopy.27 patients (53%) had typical GERD symptoms. An association was observed between typical GERD symptoms and abnormal reflux.(28)
Navarro-Rodriguez et al, 2003BrazilLESP and 24-h oesophageal pH of 16 patients with ascites were monitored before and after the puncture.According to the degree of intra-abdominal pressure reduction achieved, the patients were divided into group A (decreased by >70%) and group B (decreased by <70%). Before and after the reduction of intra-abdominal pressure, the LESP in the two groups was as follows: Group A, before puncture, 15.60 mmHg, after puncture, 18.09 mmHg; and group B, before puncture, 23.09 mmHg, after puncture, 20.40 mmHg. However, 24-h pH monitoring showed pathological reflux in patients with ascites that was reduced with the paracentesis. In 16 patients, the mean total number of reflux episodes before puncture was 520.26, and that after was 136.26. In group A, the mean total number of reflux episodes was as follows: Before puncture, 661.27; after puncture, 99.45.The results revealed that a reduction in intra-abdominal pressure of >70% decreased gastro-oesophageal reflux.(26)

[i] LC, liver cirrhosis; HCV, hepatitis C virus; RE, reflux esophagitis; EV, oesophageal varices; LESP, lower oesophageal sphincter pressure; PA, peristaltic amplitude; PD, peristaltic duration; PV, peristaltic velocity; GERD, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease; LES, lower oesophageal sphincter.

4. Mechanism

Relevant biological findings and clinical mechanism analysis have been reported concerning GERD's abnormal mechanism. GERD can be associated with bile (alkaline) reflux, gastric or oesophageal distension, and dyskinesia. The LES plays a crucial role in the incidence and severity of GERD. Currently, the mechanism of RE in patients with LC has not been fully elucidated. However, the incidence of RE in patients with LC is associated with the following factors: i) Patients with LC often experience delayed gastric emptying and might develop corresponding gastrointestinal symptoms (29). ii) Ascites result in an increased IAP, compressing the stomach and causing reflux of the stomach contents (26). iii) The existence of tense ascites results in decreased LES pressure. During swallowing or coughing, the intragastric pressure instantaneously increases, which might cause gastro-oesophageal reflux (23,25). iv) With pathological changes in the livers of patients with LC, the inducible nitric oxide (NO) synthase (NOS) (iNOS) expression increases, and the endothelial NOS (eNOS) activity decreases, resulting in a large number of harmful pro-inflammatory NO mediators. On the one hand, the visceral artery vessels dilate, and the plasma osmotic pressure decreases, resulting in ascites (30-33). On the other hand, excessive NO, promoting an increase in the TLESR frequency, results in an increase in the total number of reflux episodes (34,35).

Increased IAP and GERD

LC causes increased intrahepatic resistance, a gradual increase in portal pressure, systemic visceral arterial dilatation, and effective circulating blood volume insufficiency. Through the antidiuretic process of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone pathway, the sympathetic nervous system, and renal vasoconstriction, the human body increases the total plasma volume through water-sodium retention to maintain sufficient effective arterial blood volume. However, other factors, such as hypoalbuminaemia and changes in intestinal capillary pressure and permeability, can cause an accumulation of free fluid in the abdominal cavity (36). A study measuring the LES pressure (LESP) in patients with LC reported that 10 control participants had a LESP of 21±1 mmHg, whereas, among 15 patients with LC, 10 had a LESP of 22±1 mmHg, while five LC patients with massive tension ascites had a LESP of 16±2 mmHg. After the resolution of ascites through diuresis, the LESP increased to 25±3 mmHg in all LC patients with massive tension ascites. Additionally, the remission of ascites not only increased the LESP but also decreased the gastric pressure significantly, with a significant linear correlation between the mean increase in LESP and the mean decrease in gastric pressure (25). The results of another experimental study revealed that intragastric pressure in patients with LC and ascites is proportional to the volume of ascites, particularly in patients with tension ascites; a sudden, transient increase in the intragastric pressure during swallowing or vigorous coughing might cause gastric oesophageal reflux (23). When abdominal compression is applied, the LES relaxes, and gastro-oesophageal reflux prolongs after swallowing (37). Twenty-four-hour dynamic monitoring of oesophageal pH in patients with ascites revealed that gastro-oesophageal reflux significantly decreased when the IAP decreased by more than 70% of the pre-puncture baseline, implying that a significant reduction in the IAP significantly decreased gastro-oesophageal reflux (26).

Increased IAP, formation of hiatal hernia, and GERD

When the IAP increases, the oesophagogastric junction (EGJ)actively contracts, and the tonic contraction of the diaphragm results in increased LESP (38). During swallowing, the oesophageal body is shortened due to contraction of the longitudinal muscles of the oesophagus, causing the LES to move proximally, and a small part of the proximal stomach enters the thoracic cavity through the diaphragmatic hiatus. After swallowing, due to the elasticity of the phreno-oesophageal ligament, all structures return to their original anatomical positions. However, due to factors such as excessive contraction of the longitudinal oesophageal muscles, increased IAP, and age-related degeneration, these ligaments might lose their elasticity, resulting in a hiatal hernia (39). The existence of a hiatal hernia alters the pressure topography of the EGJ, which might increase the susceptibility of gastro-oesophageal reflux events. When the LES relaxes during swallowing, the LESP decreases, and when the pressure of the hiatal hernia exceeds the LESP, barium back-flow occurs from the hiatal pouch to the oesophagus (40). It is well known that GERD is associated with the formation of hiatal hernia caused by increased IAP; however, few studies have confirmed that hiatal hernia is directly associated with LC. More evidence based on standardised methods is required.

Excessive NO production and GERD

Several studies have revealed that liver pathology varies in patients with LC, resulting in high NO levels and elevated exhaled NO (eNO) (32,34,35,41-43). NO is a novel signalling molecule associated with inflammation and tissue damage and is the most known effective vasodilator. It can dilate visceral blood vessels, increase visceral blood flow, and aggravate PHT (44,45). In view of factors such as decreased hepatic metabolism, toxin accumulation, increased intestinal permeability, impaired intestinal motility, and changes and translocation of the intestinal flora, endotoxins, and other intestinal-derived metabolites, the blood vessels could be directly stimulated in vivo or cytokines could be stimulated to produce NOS. During NOS catalysis, L-arginine interacts with oxygen to increase NO synthesis and release in vivo (46,47). Does a change in the microbial community in patients with LC affect ammonia metabolism? Compared with normal individuals, the structure of the duodenal mucosal microflora in LC changes, and with the development of LC, the intestinal microflora exhibits an increase in Enterobacteriaceae, Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, and other microflora, and these microflorae produce endotoxins and ammonia through their urease activities, respectively (48,49). A study revealed that gut urease-containing bacteria Streptococcus salivarius was observed in patients with LC, and it was revealed that a change in the salivary bacteria number in patients with LC was positively correlated with ammonia accumulation (50). However, aseptic animals can also produce ammonia through intestinal glutaminase activity. Therefore, it is unclear whether the change in the intestinal microecology in LC has additional effects on ammonia accumulation and excessive NO production.

The increase in NO concentration increases the risk of hepatic encephalopathy. Hyperammonaemia could increase NO, and the NO concentration in brain regions with acute ammonia toxicity increases, resulting in common learning and memory disorders and brain oedema (51,52).

NO is produced by three isoforms of NOS: neuronal NOS, iNOS, and eNOS. eNOS is constitutively expressed in hepatic sinusoidal endothelial cells (LSECs) and produces a small amount of NO. A small amount of NO keeps hepatic stellate cells (HSCs) and Kupffer cells still, which is essential for controlling vascular tension and blood flow in hepatic sinuses, and plays a crucial role in vascular homeostasis and inhibiting hepatic pathological conditions. However, iNOS is not expressed under normal conditions, but its expression is induced by bacterial endotoxin lipopolysaccharide secondary to intestinal bacterial translocation and pro-inflammatory cytokines associated with liver ischaemia-reperfusion injury. iNOS is up-regulated in various hepatic cells (including LSECs, Kupffer cells, HSCs, smooth muscle cells, bile duct cells (cholangiocytes), and other immune cells), which produce a large amount of NO and promote liver injury. Under pathological conditions, eNOS activity decreases, iNOS is up-regulated, and NO production in LSECs decreases, resulting in capillarisation of endothelial cells and HSC activation, accompanied by extracellular matrix deposition, HSC contraction and proliferation, finally resulting in increased intrahepatic resistance and sinusoidal blood flow disorder (33,53-58). Hepatic microvascular dysfunction and excessive NO production result in apoptosis, inflammation, deoxyribonucleic acid damage, and hepatocellular carcinoma.

A small increase in portal vein pressure and the increase of related blood flow is first sensed by the intestinal microcirculation. This increases vascular endothelial growth factor production, triggering eNOS activation and subsequent NO overproduction (30-32,41). Therefore, excessive NO production might be associated with ascites. Multiple studies (42,43) demonstrated that NO, eNO, and plasma NO levels in peripheral and hepatic veins of patients with LC patients are significantly elevated, and NO is closely associated with TLESR. Reportedly, NO can decrease the peristaltic wave amplitude in the distal oesophagus and the peristaltic contraction rate in the proximal oesophagus. NO plays a crucial role in TLESR secondary to fundus distension, which is secondary to reflux attack (34). A study on healthy volunteers revealed (35) that the use of substances that inhibit NO synthesis [NG-monomethyl-L-arginine (L-NMMA)] can significantly lower the TLESR frequency after ingestion of solid food, and reduce the total reflux attack. It can then be confirmed laterally that excessive NO might result in an increase in the transient relaxation frequency of LES, thereby resulting in an increase in the total number of reflux attacks.

Another study reported that L-NMMA inhibited the increase in the number of TLESRs caused by gastric distension by inhibiting NO synthesis (34). The findings of Boulant's research on dogs also demonstrated that L-NMMA reduces the gastric distension controlled by pressure in dogs and reduces the number of TLESRs caused by gastric distension (59). NO is involved in the maintenance of basal gastric fundic tension and human diet-induced gastric fundal relaxation. Prolonged L-NMMA infusion inhibits NO synthesis, causing fundic contraction, which results in a decrease in the basal fundus volume (60). Non-adrenergic nerve mechanism involving the NO nerve can regulate gastrointestinal smooth muscles and then affect the gastric fundus tension (61).

Bad lifestyle and eating habits

A study on the risk factors of GERD reported that unhealthy lifestyles, such as obesity; smoking; after-dinner and strenuous physical activity; consumption of high-fat, fried, and spicy food; excessive coffee/tea consumption; and consumption of carbonated drinks and alcohol, contribute to GERD (15). Being overweight and obese increases the risk of various digestive system-related diseases, such as GERD and erosive oesophagitis (62). In particular, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and obesity might also increase the risk of GERD (63). On the other hand, metabolic syndrome, hyperglycaemia, and obesity are independent risk factors for L of chronic hepatitis B (64). Therefore, metabolic factors might reveal the relationship between GERD and chronic liver disease. Several studies have indicated that ethanol can damage the mucosal barrier, cause oesophageal mucosal inflammation, and increase the risk of oesophageal acid injury. Alcohol-induced acute oesophageal necrosis might occur in patients with high alcohol intake, particularly in patients with immunosuppressive alcoholic hepatitis, which further reveals that excessive alcohol intake might be the key factor for oesophageal lesions and cirrhosis (17,18,65). In addition, a prospective study reported that there is a significant correlation between chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and GERD, particularly in women and HBV carriers with a high aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio, and the incidence of erosive oesophagitis increases (66).

The potential interactions between LC, TLESR, increased IAP, increased intragastric pressure, excessive NO production, and unhealthy lifestyle and eating habits are presented in Fig. 1.

5. Clinical intervention

RE might result in haemorrhagic oesophagitis and variceal bleeding in patients with LC (8,67-69). Although PPIs have been widely used in LC patients with EV in recent years, it lacks strong evidence-based practice. On the one hand, most patients with RE lack reflux symptoms; on the other hand, almost two-thirds of the untreated patients with typical GERD symptoms do not take acid inhibitors because of normal endoscopic findings (70,71), thereby increasing the risk of oesophageal bleeding. In a study on RE, only 36% of all RE patients with UGIB were taking acid inhibitors before severe UGIB bleeding, which might have resulted in an increase in UGIB incidence caused by RE in recent years (8). The question remains whether LC patients with reflux tendencies should use acid inhibitors. A recent report on optimising GERD patient management stated that if GERD diagnosis is clear after oesophageal gastroscopy, PPIs can be used twice a day (before breakfast and dinner). If necessary, another PPI should be administered. In the case of nocturnal symptoms, any histamine-2 receptor antagonist and/or alginate could be administered before bedtime (72). These drugs could alleviate the symptoms of most patients with reflux, as they help cure oesophageal injuries (such as oesophagitis and stenosis), improve the quality of life, and improve sleep difficulties (73). However, long-term PPI use is associated with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) in patients with LC. SBP is one of the most common complications in patients with LC. At present, a popular dogma holds that frequent PPI use could aggravate SBP occurrence. A recent meta-analysis reported a weak correlation between SBP occurrence and PPI use; therefore, this meta-analysis suggested that PPIs should be administered with caution in patients with ascites in LC (74). Similar suggestions were made by some other researchers. PPI should be administered to patients who will benefit from its use. In elderly patients with severe liver injury, particularly those with ascites in LC, PPI treatment should be avoided or administered with caution to lower the risk of SBP (75-77).

In the past decades, several studies have reported a significant increase in the prevalence of RE that causes UGIB (8-10). Therefore, for LC patients with severe reflux tendency, surgical treatment might be considered to reduce the risk of variceal bleeding (78,79). The results of a recent study on refractory GERD revealed that during the 12-month follow-up period, patients who underwent laparoscopic fundoplication had the best control of reflux symptoms compared with those who received anti-reflux drugs (78). UGIB following variceal rupture is the main cause of death in patients with LC (80). Two types of endoscopic treatments are considered the first choice to control oesophageal variceal bleeding, namely endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy (EVS) and endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) (81,82). However, several research findings have reported that EVL is more effective and safer than EVS in improving oesophageal motility disorder and eradicating EV (83-85). Once varicose veins are treated, patients should undergo an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy every 3-6 months to evaluate the recurrence of varicose veins and the need for repeated treatment (86). However, although EVL is a relatively safe surgical method, there is a risk of postoperative bleeding. In rare cases, early spontaneous slippage of the rubber band or rupture of the residual vein at the base of the oesophageal ulcer could cause fatal bleeding (87,88).

The question remains whether long-term PPI use can prevent varicose vein rupture and bleeding. Although there is insufficient evidence currently, additional benefits might be obtained from consistent PPI use after the endoscopic intervention of varicose veins. Ulcer bleeding might rupture varicose veins after EVL treatment, and the combination of PPIs and surgical treatment might help lower the risk. The best evidence supports that short-term (10 days) PPI use for patients with EV and oesophageal ulcers after EVL treatment could decrease the oesophageal ulcer size after selective oesophageal ligation and even cure the ulcers after EVL (89,90). Long-term PPI use (>1 month) could decrease the rebleeding rate of patients with LC after endoscopic treatment while not affecting bleeding-related mortality. Therefore, acid inhibition should also be considered as a supplementary therapy after endoscopic treatment (91-93). Reportedly, chronic PPI use could increase the severity of hepatic encephalopathy in patients with LC compared with patients who do not use PPI (94). However, there is a lack of higher-quality evidence proving the existence of an association between them. Two isoenzymes (CYP2C19 and CYP3A4) are involved in PPI metabolism in the liver, of which CYP2C19 is the main metabolic pathway (95,96). Older PPIs (including omeprazole, lansoprazole, and pantoprazole) are primarily metabolised by CYP2C19, while rabeprazole is primarily metabolised via the non-enzymatic pathway, which has advantages over old PPIs. In the standard dose (20 mg once a day), rabeprazole and esomeprazole provide better acid control than omeprazole (97,98). Severe liver damage results in a 7- to 9-fold increase in the area under the curve of all PPIs and an extended half-life of 4 to 8 h (95). Therefore, when PPIs are used in patients with LC, the increased half-life of these drugs in this group of patients should be considered, and the dosage should be reduced.

Brain toxicity caused by hyperammonaemia should also be avoided in LC patients with excessive NO production. Several studies have reported that the serum ammonia level can be decreased by using lactulose, probiotics, and prebiotics. This is because these agents regulate the intestinal flora and normalise the intestinal flora. The reduction of blood ammonia level, endotoxemia, and neurocognitive impairment lower the risk of hepatic encephalopathy (99-101).

6. Lifestyle adjustment

Several patients with LC are accustomed to a sedentary lifestyle owing to the decreased quality of life, which might be associated with the occurrence of GERD. During drug treatment, lifestyle changes such as weight loss, raising the bedside, avoiding strenuous activities for a few hours after meals, and refraining from consuming alcohol, coffee, carbonated drinks, etc., should be incorporated before or during drug treatment. This combination therapy helps relieve GERD symptoms (102). LC patients with varicose veins should eat digestible soft food, stop alcohol consumption, avoid staying up late, and be administered multivitamins. Patients with hepatic encephalopathy should strictly limit their protein intake.

7. Summary and comments

Herein, we outlined the possible relationship between LC and GERD in terms of the pathological mechanisms. The pathogenesis of GERD in LC is multifactorial. There are potential interactions among TLESR, increased IAP, increased intragastric pressure, and excessive NO production in patients with LC. Increased intragastric pressure and an increased TLESR frequency might be key factors for GERD development in LC. In view of the evidence, we recommend that for LC patients with reflux tendency (without ascites and EV), without other contraindications, acid inhibitors are the appropriate choice for early protection of the oesophageal mucosa, preferably with regular upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for dynamically monitoring the oesophagus. For patients with decompensated LC, such as portal hypertension, coagulation dysfunction, and ascites (without EV), particularly those with severe liver function damage, long-term PPI use should be avoided to reduce the risk of SBP occurrence and further liver function damage. In contrast, for decompensated patients with EV with a high risk of bleeding, endoscopic oesophageal variceal eradication should be considered, and acid inhibitors might be considered postoperatively to reduce the rate of rebleeding after endoscopic treatment in patients with LC. At the same time, LC patients with unhealthy lifestyles should be given health education for lifestyle modification. Finally, we eagerly anticipate more new evidence of GERD in LC.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

Funding: The present study was supported by the research plan of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 325019038).

Availability of data and materials

All data generated and/or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

Authors' contributions

FY, XYH and YZ conceived the entire article, and designed and drafted the manuscript. NL and HFF revised it critically for important intellectual content. NL, HFF, ZJ and XYZ investigated the present area of research and gathered relevant and important information. LZ edited and modified the mechanism diagram and table. FY and XYH approved the final version of the review. Data authentication is not applicable. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Patient consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

1 

Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, Dent J and Jones R: Global Consensus Group. The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: A global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol. 101:1900–1920, 1943. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

2 

Dent J, El-Serag HB, Wallander MA and Johansson S: Epidemiology of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review. Gut. 54:710–717. 2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

3 

Suzuki K, Suzuki K, Koizumi K, Takada H, Nishiki R, Ichimura H, Oka S and Kuwayama H: Effect of symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease on quality of life of patients with chronic liver disease. Hepatol Res. 38:335–339. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

4 

Cappell MS: Clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Med Clin North Am. 89:243–291. 2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

5 

Zhang J, Cui PL, Lv D, Yao SW, Xu YQ and Yang ZX: Gastroesophageal reflux in cirrhotic patients without esophageal varices. World J Gastroenterol. 17:1753–1758. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

6 

Li B, Zhang B, Ma JW, Li P, Li L, Song YM and Ding HG: High prevalence of reflux esophagitis among upper endoscopies in Chinese patients with chronic liver diseases. BMC Gastroenterol. 10(54)2010.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

7 

Hassanin TM, Foaud Y, Mohamed H, Saad Z, Elsayed A, Refaei S and Soliman W: Prevalence and risk factors of endoscopically confirmed gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in patients with liver cirrhosis. Egypt Liver J. 11(27)2021.

8 

Wangrattanapranee P, Khrucharoen U, Jensen DM, Wongpongsalee T and Jensen ME: Severe Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage Caused by Reflux Esophagitis. Dig Dis Sci. 67:159–169. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

9 

Wuerth BA and Rockey DC: Changing epidemiology of upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage in the last decade: A Nationwide Analysis. Dig Dis Sci. 63:1286–1293. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

10 

Kim JJ, Sheibani S, Park S, Buxbaum J and Laine L: Causes of bleeding and outcomes in patients hospitalized with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. J Clin Gastroenterol. 48:113–118. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

11 

Eusebi LH, Ratnakumaran R, Yuan Y, Solaymani-Dodaran M, Bazzoli F and Ford AC: Global prevalence of, and risk factors for, gastro-oesophageal reflux symptoms: A meta-analysis. Gut. 67:430–440. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

12 

Wong BCY and Kinoshita Y: Systematic review on epidemiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease in Asia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 4:398–407. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

13 

Zhang D, Liu S, Li Z and Wang R: Global, regional and national burden of gastroesophageal reflux disease, 1990-2019: Update from the GBD 2019 study. Ann Med. 54:1372–1384. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

14 

Corley DA and Kubo A: Body mass index and gastroesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 101:2619–2628. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

15 

Taraszewska A: Risk factors for gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms related to lifestyle and diet. Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig. 72:21–28. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

16 

Liu Z, Wei L and Ding H: Clinical characteristics of reflux esophagitis among patients with liver cirrhosis: A case-control study. Scand J Gastroenterol. 57:384–391. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

17 

Minatsuki C, Yamamichi N, Shimamoto T, Kakimoto H, Takahashi Y, Fujishiro M, Sakaguchi Y, Nakayama C, Konno-Shimizu M, Matsuda R, et al: Background factors of reflux esophagitis and non-erosive reflux disease: A cross-sectional study of 10,837 subjects in Japan. PLoS One. 8(e69891)2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

18 

Bor S, Bor-Caymaz C, Tobey NA, Abdulnour-Nakhoul S and Orlando RC: Esophageal exposure to ethanol increases risk of acid damage in rabbit esophagus. Dig Dis Sci. 44:290–300. 1999.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

19 

Mikami DJ and Murayama KM: Physiology and pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surg Clin North Am. 95:515–525. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

20 

Iwakiri K, Hayashi Y, Kotoyori M, Tanaka Y, Kawakami A, Sakamoto C and Holloway RH: Transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations (TLESRs) are the major mechanism of gastroesophageal reflux but are not the cause of reflux disease. Dig Dis Sci. 50:1072–1077. 2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

21 

Bhatia SJ, Narawane NM, Shalia KK, Mistry FP, Sheth MD, Abraham P and Dherai AJ: Effect of tense ascites on esophageal body motility and lower esophageal sphincter pressure. Indian J Gastroenterol. 18:63–65. 1999.PubMed/NCBI

22 

Mittal RK and McCallum RW: Characteristics and frequency of transient relaxations of the lower esophageal sphincter in patients with reflux esophagitis. Gastroenterology. 95:593–599. 1988.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

23 

Simpson JA and Conn HO: Role of ascites in gastroesophageal reflux with comments on the pathogenesis of bleeding esophageal varices. Gastroenterology. 55:17–25. 1968.PubMed/NCBI

24 

Polish E and Sullivan BH: Esophagitis associated with hemorrhage from esophageal varices. Ann Intern Med. 54:908–911. 1961.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

25 

Nebel OT: Lower esophageal sphincter function in cirrhosis. Am J Dig Dis. 22:1101–1105. 1977.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

26 

Navarro-Rodriguez T, Hashimoto CL, Carrilho FJ, Strauss E, Laudanna AA and Moraes-Filho JPP: Reduction of abdominal pressure in patients with ascites reduces gastroesophageal reflux. Dis Esophagus. 16:77–82. 2003.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

27 

Mittal RK and Balaban DH: The esophagogastric junction. N Engl J Med. 336:924–932. 1997.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

28 

Schechter RB, Lemme EMO and Coelho HSM: Gastroesophageal reflux in cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices without endoscopic treatment. Arq Gastroenterol. 44:145–150. 2007.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

29 

Souza RC and Lima JHC: Helicobacter pylori and gastroesophageal reflux disease: A review of this intriguing relationship. Dis Esophagus. 22:256–263. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

30 

Abraldes JG, Iwakiri Y, Loureiro-Silva M, Haq O, Sessa WC and Groszmann RJ: Mild increases in portal pressure upregulate vascular endothelial growth factor and endothelial nitric oxide synthase in the intestinal microcirculatory bed, leading to a hyperdynamic state. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 290:G980–G987. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

31 

Fernandez M, Mejias M, Angermayr B, Garcia-Pagan JC, Rodés J and Bosch J: Inhibition of VEGF receptor-2 decreases the development of hyperdynamic splanchnic circulation and portal-systemic collateral vessels in portal hypertensive rats. J Hepatol. 43:98–103. 2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

32 

Tsai MH, Iwakiri Y, Cadelina G, Sessa WC and Groszmann RJ: Mesenteric vasoconstriction triggers nitric oxide overproduction in the superior mesenteric artery of portal hypertensive rats. Gastroenterology. 125:1452–1461. 2003.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

33 

Iwakiri Y and Kim MY: Nitric oxide in liver diseases. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 36:524–536. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

34 

Hirsch DP, Holloway RH, Tytgat GN and Boeckxstaens GE: Involvement of nitric oxide in human transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations and esophageal primary peristalsis. Gastroenterology. 115:1374–1380. 1998.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

35 

Hirsch DP, Tiel-Van Buul MM, Tytgat GN and Boeckxstaens GE: Effect of L-NMMA on postprandial transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations in healthy volunteers. Dig Dis Sci. 45:2069–2075. 2000.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

36 

Fortune B and Cardenas A: Ascites, refractory ascites and hyponatremia in cirrhosis. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf). 5:104–112. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

37 

Vanderstappen G and Texter EC Jr: Response of the physiologic gastroesophageal sphincter to increased intra-abdominal pressure. J Clin Invest. 43:1856–1868. 1964.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

38 

Mittal RK, Fisher M, McCallum RW, Rochester DF, Dent J and Sluss J: Human lower esophageal sphincter pressure response to increased intra-abdominal pressure. Am J Physiol. 258:G624–G630. 1990.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

39 

van Herwaarden MA, Samsom M and Smout AJPM: The role of hiatus hernia in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 16:831–835. 2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

40 

Sloan S and Kahrilas PJ: Impairment of esophageal emptying with hiatal hernia. Gastroenterology. 100:596–605. 1991.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

41 

Iwakiri Y, Tsai MH, McCabe TJ, Gratton JP, Fulton D, Groszmann RJ and Sessa WC: Phosphorylation of eNOS initiates excessive NO production in early phases of portal hypertension. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 282:H2084–H2090. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

42 

Battista S, Bar F, Mengozzi G, Zanon E, Grosso M and Molino G: Hyperdynamic circulation in patients with cirrhosis: Direct measurement of nitric oxide levels in hepatic and portal veins. J Hepatol. 26:75–80. 1997.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

43 

Delclaux C, Mahut B, Zerah-Lancner F, Delacourt C, Laoud S, Cherqui D, Duvoux C, Mallat A and Harf A: Increased nitric oxide output from alveolar origin during liver cirrhosis versus bronchial source during asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 165:332–337. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

44 

Asano K, Chee CB, Gaston B, Lilly CM, Gerard C, Drazen JM and Stamler JS: Constitutive and inducible nitric oxide synthase gene expression, regulation, and activity in human lung epithelial cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 91:10089–10093. 1994.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

45 

Iwakiri Y: Pathophysiology of portal hypertension. Clin Liver Dis. 18:281–291. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

46 

Huang X, Thansamay S, Yang K, Luo T and Chen S: Measurement of exhaled nitric oxide in cirrhotic patients with esophageal and gastric varices. Biomed Res Int. 2019(9673162)2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

47 

Matsumoto A, Ogura K, Hirata Y, Kakoki M, Watanabe F, Takenaka K, Shiratori Y, Momomura S and Omata M: Increased nitric oxide in the exhaled air of patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis. Ann Intern Med. 123:110–113. 1995.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

48 

Chen Y, Ji F, Guo J, Shi D, Fang D and Li L: Dysbiosis of small intestinal microbiota in liver cirrhosis and its association with etiology. Sci Rep. 6(34055)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

49 

Kang DJ, Betrapally NS, Ghosh SA, Sartor RB, Hylemon PB, Gillevet PM, Sanyal AJ, Heuman DM, Carl D, Zhou H, et al: Gut microbiota drive the development of neuroinflammatory response in cirrhosis in mice. Hepatology. 64:1232–1248. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

50 

Zhang Z, Zhai H, Geng J, Yu R, Ren H, Fan H and Shi P: Large-scale survey of gut microbiota associated with MHE via 16S rRNA-based pyrosequencing. Am J Gastroenterol. 108:1601–1611. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

51 

Rao VLR: Nitric oxide in hepatic encephalopathy and hyperammonemia. Neurochem Int. 41:161–170. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

52 

Swamy M, Zakaria AZ, Govindasamy C, Sirajudeen KNS and Nadiger HA: Effects of acute ammonia toxicity on nitric oxide (NO), citrulline-NO cycle enzymes, arginase and related metabolites in different regions of rat brain. Neurosci Res. 53:116–122. 2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

53 

Abu-Amara M, Yang SY, Seifalian A, Davidson B and Fuller B: The nitric oxide pathway-evidence and mechanisms for protection against liver ischaemia reperfusion injury. Liver Int. 32:531–543. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

54 

La Mura V, Pasarín M, Rodriguez-Vilarrupla A, García-Pagán JC, Bosch J and Abraldes JG: Liver sinusoidal endothelial dysfunction after LPS administration: A role for inducible-nitric oxide synthase. J Hepatol. 61:1321–1327. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

55 

Carnovale CE and Ronco MT: Role of nitric oxide in liver regeneration. Ann Hepatol. 11:636–647. 2012.PubMed/NCBI

56 

Fujita K, Nozaki Y, Yoneda M, Wada K, Takahashi H, Kirikoshi H, Inamori M, Saito S, Iwasaki T, Terauchi Y, et al: Nitric oxide plays a crucial role in the development/progression of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in the choline-deficient, l-amino acid-defined diet-fed rat model. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 34 (Suppl 1):S18–S24. 2010.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

57 

Langer DA, Das A, Semela D, Kang-Decker N, Hendrickson H, Bronk SF, Katusic ZS, Gores GJ and Shah VH: Nitric oxide promotes caspase-independent hepatic stellate cell apoptosis through the generation of reactive oxygen species. Hepatology. 47:1983–1993. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

58 

Xie G, Wang X, Wang L, Wang L, Atkinson RD, Kanel GC, Gaarde WA and Deleve LD: Role of differentiation of liver sinusoidal endothelial cells in progression and regression of hepatic fibrosis in rats. Gastroenterology. 142:918–927.e6. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

59 

Boulant J, Fioramonti J, Dapoigny M, Bommelaer G and Bueno L: Cholecystokinin and nitric oxide in transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation to gastric distention in dogs. Gastroenterology. 107:1059–1066. 1994.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

60 

Kuiken SD, Vergeer M, Heisterkamp SH, Tytgat GNJ and Boeckxstaens GEE: Role of nitric oxide in gastric motor and sensory functions in healthy subjects. Gut. 51:212–218. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

61 

Russo A, Fraser R, Adachi K, Horowitz M and Boeckxstaens G: Evidence that nitric oxide mechanisms regulate small intestinal motility in humans. Gut. 44:72–76. 1999.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

62 

Nam SY: Obesity-Related digestive diseases and their pathophysiology. Gut Liver. 11:323–334. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

63 

Lee YC, Yen AM, Tai JJ, Chang SH, Lin JT, Chiu HM, Wang HP, Wu MS and Chen TH: The effect of metabolic risk factors on the natural course of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Gut. 58:174–181. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

64 

Wong GL, Wong VW, Choi PC, Chan AW, Chim AM, Yiu KK, Chan HY, Chan FK, Sung JJ and Chan HL: Metabolic syndrome increases the risk of liver cirrhosis in chronic hepatitis B. Gut. 58:111–117. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

65 

Săftoiu A, Cazacu S, Kruse A, Georgescu C, Comănescu V and Ciurea T: Acute esophageal necrosis associated with alcoholic hepatitis: Is it black or is it white? Endoscopy. 37:268–271. 2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

66 

Hsu CS, Wang CC, Wang PC, Lin HH, Tseng TC, Chen CH, Su WC, Liu CJ, Chen CL, Lai MY, et al: Increased incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection. Hepatol Int. 4:585–593. 2010.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

67 

Ahmed AM, al Karawi MA, Shariq S and Mohamed AE: Frequency of gastroesophageal reflux in patients with liver cirrhosis. Hepatogastroenterology. 40:478–480. 1993.PubMed/NCBI

68 

Sakaguchi M, Manabe N, Ueki N, Miwa J, Inaba T, Yoshida N, Sakurai K, Nakagawa M, Yamada H, Saito M, et al: Factors associated with complicated erosive esophagitis: A Japanese multicenter, prospective, cross-sectional study. World J Gastroenterol. 23:318–327. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

69 

Costa ND, Cadiot G, Merle C, Jolly D, Bouche O, Thiéfin G and Zeitoun P: Bleeding reflux esophagitis: A prospective 1-year study in a university hospital. Am J Gastroenterol. 96:47–51. 2001.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

70 

El-Serag HB, Sweet S, Winchester CC and Dent J: Update on the epidemiology of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review. Gut. 63:871–880. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

71 

Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, Dent J and Jones R: Global Consensus Group. The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: A global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol. 101:1900–1920. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

72 

Törnblom H, Tsoposidis A, Wallenius V, Kostic S, Axelsson H, Lundell L, Håkanson B, Simrén M and Thorell A: Management of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease can be optimized. Lakartidningen. 119(21177)2022.PubMed/NCBI(In Swedish).

73 

Spechler SJ: Proton Pump Inhibitors: What the Internist Needs to Know. Med Clin North Am. 103:1–14. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

74 

Alhumaid S, Al Mutair A, Al Alawi Z, Zaidi ARZ, Rabaan AA, Elhazmi A and Al-Omari A: Proton Pump inhibitors use and risk of developing spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhotic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gut Pathog. 13(17)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

75 

Zhang M, Liu W, Xu X, Chen T and Qi JY: Association between Proton pump inhibitor therapy and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis occurrence in cirrhotic patients: A clinical review. Curr Med Sci. 42:673–680. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

76 

Dahabra L, Kreidieh M, Abureesh M, Abou Yassine A and Deeb L: Proton Pump inhibitors use and increased risk of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhotic patients: A retrospective cohort analysis. Gastroenterology Res. 15:180–187. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

77 

Shaikh BA, Shaikh ZA, Shah AH and Kumar A: Determining the Risk of Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis due to increase use of Proton Pump Inhibitors among cirrhotic patients with ascites. Pak J Med Sci. 37:1075–1079. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

78 

Spechler SJ, Hunter JG, Jones KM, Lee R, Smith BR, Mashimo H, Sanchez VM, Dunbar KB, Pham TH, Murthy UK, et al: Randomized trial of medical versus surgical treatment for refractory heartburn. N Engl J Med. 381:1513–1523. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

79 

Roark R, Sydor M, Chatila AT, Umar S, Guerra RDL, Bilal M and Guturu P: Management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dis Mon. 66(100849)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

80 

Holster IL, Tjwa ET, Moelker A, Wils A, Hansen BE, Vermeijden JR, Scholten P, van Hoek B, Nicolai JJ, Kuipers EJ, et al: Covered transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus endoscopic therapy + β-blocker for prevention of variceal rebleeding. Hepatology. 63:581–589. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

81 

D'Amico G, Pagliaro L and Bosch J: The treatment of portal hypertension: A meta-analytic review. Hepatology. 22:332–354. 1995.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

82 

Laine L and Cook D: Endoscopic ligation compared with sclerotherapy for treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding. A meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 123:280–287. 1995.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

83 

Viazis N, Armonis A, Vlachogiannakos J, Rekoumis G, Stefanidis G, Papadimitriou N, Manolakopoulos S and Avgerinos A: Effects of endoscopic variceal treatment on oesophageal function: A prospective, randomized study. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 14:263–269. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

84 

Berner JS, Gaing AA, Sharma R, Almenoff PL, Muhlfelder T and Korsten MA: Sequelae after esophageal variceal ligation and sclerotherapy: A prospective randomized study. Am J Gastroenterol. 89:852–858. 1994.PubMed/NCBI

85 

Hou MC, Yen TC, Lin HC, Kuo BI, Chen CH, Lee FY, Liu RS, Chang FY and Lee SD: Sequential changes of esophageal motility after endoscopic injection sclerotherapy or variceal ligation for esophageal variceal bleeding: A scintigraphic study. Am J Gastroenterol. 92:1875–1878. 1997.PubMed/NCBI

86 

Cremers I and Ribeiro S: Management of variceal and nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis. Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 7:206–216. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

87 

Mishin I and Dolghii A: Early spontaneous slippage of rubber bands with fatal bleeding: A rare complication of endoscopic variceal ligation. Endoscopy. 37:275–276. 2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

88 

Toyoda H, Fukuda Y, Katano Y, Ebata M, Nagano K, Morita K, Yokozaki S, Takeuchi M and Hayakawa T: Fatal bleeding from a residual vein at the esophageal ulcer base after successful endoscopic variceal ligation. J Clin Gastroenterol. 32:158–160. 2001.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

89 

Lo EA, Wilby KJ and Ensom MH: Use of proton Pump inhibitors in the management of gastroesophageal varices: A systematic review. Ann Pharmacother. 49:207–219. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

90 

Boo GB, Oh JC, Lee BJ, Lee DM, Kim YD, Park CG and Kim MW: The effect of proton pump inhibitor on healing of post-esophageal variceal ligation ulcers. Korean J Gastroenterol. 51:232–240. 2008.PubMed/NCBI(In Korean).

91 

Lin L, Cui B, Deng Y, Jiang X, Liu W and Sun C: The efficacy of proton pump inhibitor in cirrhotics with variceal bleeding: A systemic review and meta-analysis. Digestion. 102:117–127. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

92 

Kang SH, Yim HJ, Kim SY, Suh SJ, Hyun JJ, Jung SW, Jung YK, Koo JS and Lee SW: Proton pump inhibitor therapy is associated with reduction of early bleeding risk after prophylactic endoscopic variceal band ligation: A retrospective cohort study. Medicine (Baltimore). 95(e2903)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

93 

Hidaka H, Nakazawa T, Wang G, Kokubu S, Minamino T, Takada J, Tanaka Y, Okuwaki Y, Watanabe M, Tanabe S, et al: Long-term administration of PPI reduces treatment failures after esophageal variceal band ligation: A randomized, controlled trial. J Gastroenterol. 47:118–126. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

94 

Fasullo M, Rau P, Liu DQ, Holzwanger E, Mathew JP, Guilarte-Walker Y and Szabo G: Proton pump inhibitors increase the severity of hepatic encephalopathy in cirrhotic patients. World J Hepatol. 11:522–530. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

95 

Thjodleifsson B: Treatment of acid-related diseases in the elderly with emphasis on the use of proton pump inhibitors. Drugs Aging. 19:911–927. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

96 

Ishizaki T and Horai Y: Review article: Cytochrome P450 and the metabolism of proton pump inhibitors-emphasis on rabeprazole. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 13 (Suppl 3):S27–S36. 1999.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

97 

Lind T, Rydberg L, Kylebäck A, Jonsson A, Andersson T, Hasselgren G, Holmberg J and Röhss K: Esomeprazole provides improved acid control vs. omeprazole in patients with symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 14:861–867. 2000.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

98 

Williams MP, Sercombe J, Hamilton MI and Pounder RE: A placebo-controlled trial to assess the effects of 8 days of dosing with rabeprazole versus omeprazole on 24-h intragastric acidity and plasma gastrin concentrations in young healthy male subjects. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 12:1079–1089. 1998.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

99 

Liu Q, Duan ZP, Ha DK, Bengmark S, Kurtovic J and Riordan SM: Synbiotic modulation of gut flora: Effect on minimal hepatic encephalopathy in patients with cirrhosis. Hepatology. 39:1441–1449. 2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

100 

Prasad S, Dhiman RK, Duseja A, Chawla YK, Sharma A and Agarwal R: Lactulose improves cognitive functions and health-related quality of life in patients with cirrhosis who have minimal hepatic encephalopathy. Hepatology. 45:549–559. 2007.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

101 

Shukla S, Shukla A, Mehboob S and Guha S: Meta-analysis: The effects of gut flora modulation using prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics on minimal hepatic encephalopathy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 33:662–671. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

102 

Chapelle N, Ben Ghezala I, Barkun A and Bardou M: The pharmacotherapeutic management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Expert Opin Pharmacother. 22:219–227. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar

Related Articles

Journal Cover

September-2023
Volume 26 Issue 3

Print ISSN: 1792-0981
Online ISSN:1792-1015

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Yu F, Zhu Y, Li N, Fu H, Jiang Z, Zhang X, Zeng L and Hu X: Gastro‑oesophageal reflux disease in liver cirrhosis: Possible pathogenesis and clinical intervention (Review). Exp Ther Med 26: 414, 2023
APA
Yu, F., Zhu, Y., Li, N., Fu, H., Jiang, Z., Zhang, X. ... Hu, X. (2023). Gastro‑oesophageal reflux disease in liver cirrhosis: Possible pathogenesis and clinical intervention (Review). Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 26, 414. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12113
MLA
Yu, F., Zhu, Y., Li, N., Fu, H., Jiang, Z., Zhang, X., Zeng, L., Hu, X."Gastro‑oesophageal reflux disease in liver cirrhosis: Possible pathogenesis and clinical intervention (Review)". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 26.3 (2023): 414.
Chicago
Yu, F., Zhu, Y., Li, N., Fu, H., Jiang, Z., Zhang, X., Zeng, L., Hu, X."Gastro‑oesophageal reflux disease in liver cirrhosis: Possible pathogenesis and clinical intervention (Review)". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 26, no. 3 (2023): 414. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12113