Objective To date, two questionnaires investigating the symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (Quality of Life Reflux and Dyspepsia and Reflux Disease Questionnaire) are validated in Italian, but neither of the two questionnaires was correlated with an instrumental examination. The aim of the present study is to improve the GERD-Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) questionnaire, to evaluate the reliability and validity of its Italian translation, and its sensitivity and specificity. Methods A modified Italian GERD-HRQL (MI-GERD-HRQL) questionnaire was developed adding six questions investigating on regurgitation, for a total of 15 questions. The forward-backward translation process was employed to obtain a definitive from-English-to-Italian version. Data obtained from the questionnaire were compared to upper gastrointestinal endoscopy findings. Results The questionnaire was administered twice to 130 Italian-speaking patients by two different and independent raters. Cronbach’s α of the first and second questionnaire was 0.944 and 0.942, respectively. Spearman correlation and inter-rater reliability were 0.923 and 0.929, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity were 73.3 and 64%, and 69.5 and 64%, respectively, for the first and second questionnaire. Conclusion The MI-GERD-HRQL questionnaire proved good consistency, reliability, sensitivity and specificity in the evaluation of typical GERD symptoms.

Purpose Aim of this systematic review is to assess the changes in esophageal motility and acid exposure of the esophagus through esophageal manometry and 24-hours pH-monitoring before and after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Methods Articles in which all patients included underwent manometry and/or 24-hours pH-metry or both, before and after LSG, were included. The search was carried out in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases, revealing overall 13,769 articles. Of these, 9702 were eliminated because they have been found more than once between the searches. Of the remaining 4067 articles, further 4030 were excluded after screening the title and abstract because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Thirty-seven articles were fully analyzed, and of these, 21 further articles were excluded, finally including 16 articles. Results Fourteen and twelve studies reported manometric and pH-metric data from 402 and 547 patients, respectively. At manometry, a decrease of the lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure after surgery was observed in six articles. At 24-hours pH-metry, a worsening of the DeMeester score and/or of the acid exposure time was observed in nine articles and the de novo gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) rate that ranged between 17.8 and 69%. A meta-analysis was not performed due to the heterogeneity of data. Conclusions After LSG a worsening of GERD evaluated by instrumental exams was observed such as high prevalence of de novo GERD. However, to understand the clinical impact of LSG and the burden of GERD over time further long-term studies are necessary.

The role of fibre intake in the management of patients with pancreatic disease is still controversial. In acute pancreatitis, a prebiotic enriched diet is associated with low rates of pancreatic necrosis infection, hospital stay, systemic inflammatory response syndrome and multiorgan failure. This protective effect seems to be connected with the ability of fibre to stabilise the disturbed intestinal barrier homeostasis and to reduce the infection rate. On the other hand, in patients with exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, a high content fibre diet is associated with an increased wet fecal weight and fecal fat excretion because of the fibre inhibition of pancreatic enzymes. The mechanism by which dietary fibre reduces the pancreatic enzyme activity is still not clear. It seems likely that pancreatic enzymes are absorbed on the fibre surface or entrapped in pectin, a gel-like substance, and are likely inactivated by anti-nutrient compounds present in some foods. The aim of the present review is to highlight the current knowledge on the role of fibre in the nutritional management of patients with pancreatic disorders.

INTRODUCTION: In the treatment of upper GI endoscopy-negative patients with heartburn and epigastric pain or burning, antacids, antireflux agents, and mucosal protective agents are widely used, alone or as add-on treatment, to increase response to proton-pump inhibitors, which are not indicated in infancy and pregnancy and account for significant cost expenditure. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter trial assessing the efficacy and safety of mucosal protective agent Poliprotect (neoBianacid, Sansepolcro, Italy) vs omeprazole in the relief of heartburn and epigastric pain/burning, 275 endoscopy-negative outpatients were given a 4-week treatment with omeprazole (20 mg q.d.) or Poliprotect (5 times a day for the initial 2 weeks and on demand thereafter), followed by an open-label 4-week treatment period with Poliprotect on-demand. Gut microbiota change was assessed. RESULTS: A 2-week treatment with Poliprotect proved noninferior to omeprazole for symptom relief (between-group difference in the change in visual analog scale symptom score: [mean, 95% confidence interval] −5.4, −9.9 to −0.1; −6.2, −10.8 to −1.6; intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations, respectively). Poliprotect's benefit remained unaltered after shifting to on-demand intake, with no gut microbiota variation. The initial benefit of omeprazole was maintained against significantly higher use of rescue medicine sachets (mean, 95% confidence interval: Poliprotect 3.9, 2.8–5.0; omeprazole 8.2, 4.8–11.6) and associated with an increased abundance of oral cavity genera in the intestinal microbiota. No relevant adverse events were reported in either treatment arm. DISCUSSION: Poliprotect proved noninferior to standard-dose omeprazole in symptomatic patients with heartburn/epigastric burning without erosive esophagitis and gastroduodenal lesions. Gut microbiota was not affected by Poliprotect treatment. The study is registered in Clinicaltrial.gov (NCT03238534) and the EudraCT database (2015-005216-15).