Spanish 
Chinese 
Russian 
German 
French 
Japanese 
Portuguese 
Hindi Research Article
Evaluation of the Accuracy of Computer Automated Analysis of Esophageal 24- hour Impedance pH Studies
Mouhamed Amr Sabouni1*, Mohamad Ghalayini2, Sayf Bala2, Stephen A Petty2, Nasser Hajar2, Alon Yarkoni1 and Amine Hila21Department of Cardiology, United Health Services, 33-57 Harrison, St. Johnson City, New York, USA
2Department of Gastroenterology, United Health Services, 33-57 Harrison, St. Johnson City, New York, USA
- Corresponding Author:
- Mouhamed Amr Sabouni
United Health Services, Johnson City
New York, 13790, USA
Tel: 0016107301384
E-mail: Mouhamed.a.sabouni@hotmail.com
Received Date: April 30, 2017; Accepted Date: July 6, 2017; Published Date: July 13, 2017
Citation: Sabouni MA, Ghalayini MM, Bala S, Petty SA, Hajar N, et al. (2017) Evaluation of the Accuracy of Computer Automated Analysis of Esophageal 24-hour Impedance pH Studies. J Gastrointest Dig Syst 7:516. doi:10.4172/2161-069X.1000516
Copyright: © 2017 Mohamed AS, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Abstract
Background: Esophageal pH monitoring in conjunction with multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII-pH) is now considered the most accurate method for detection and characterization of gastro-esophageal reflux (GER), with higher sensitivity and specificity in detecting reflux than esophageal pH monitoring alone.
Aims: One possibly limiting factor for using MII-pH testing is the time required to analyze the results. Automatic interpretation softwares have been produced to reduce this, in this study, we assessed the reliability of two 24 hour MII-pH analysis softwares compared to the interpretation provided by an expert.
Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 200 MII-pH studies done on patients with reflux symptoms between September 2009 and September 2014. The studies were split into two groups of 100 patients: one group’s testing was performed using MMS equipment and software, and the other group used Sandhill Scientific equipment and software. All tracings were additionally analyzed by an expert and the interpretations were compared.
Results: Our data indicated a strong correlation between the expert’s analysis and both automatic softwares in all positions, Demeester score, reflux episodes and symptoms index (p<0.0001). For studies interpreted as either normal or abnormal, there was concordance between the expert analysis and the software 95% of the time for the MMS software, and 93% of the instances for the Sandhill software.
Conclusions: The MII-pH data analysis software provide reliable diagnostic utility and are time-efficient at the present time, but it is advisable to seek interpretation from an experienced interpreting physician, prior to signing off the report in order to avert any possible troubles such as probe malfunctioning.
