Background: Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GERDQ) and Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia Questionnaire (QOLRAD) are reliable tools for evaluation of GERD. Aim: We aimed to test validity and reliability of Malay language translations of GERDQ and QOLRAD in a primary care setting. Methods: The questionnaires were first translated into the Malay language (GERDQ-M and QOLRAD-M). Patients from primary care clinics with suspected GERD were recruited to complete GERDQ-M, QOLRAD-M, and Malay-translated 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36 or SF-36-M), and underwent endoscopy and 24-h pH-impedance test. Results: A total of 104 (mean age 47.1 years, women 51.9%) participants were enrolled. The sensitivity and specificity for GERDQ-M cut-off score ≥8 were 90.2 and 77.4%, respectively. Based on this cut-off score, 54.7% had a high probability of GERD diagnosis. GERD-M score ≥8 vs. < 8 was associated with erosive esophagitis (p < 0.001), hiatus hernia (p = 0.03), greater DeMeester score (p = 0.001), and Zerbib scores for acid refluxes (p < 0.001) but not non-acid refluxes (p = 0.1). Mean total scores of QOLRAD-M and SF-36-M were correlated (r = 0.74, p < 0.001). GERDQ-M ≥8, erosive esophagitis, and DeMeester ≥14.72 were associated with impaired QOLRAD-M in all domains (all p < 0.02) but this was not seen with SF-36. Conclusions: GERDQ-M and QOLRAD-M are valid and reliable tools applicable in a primary care setting.

No abstract

Background: Bronchial carcinoid tumours are rare, indolent, malignant neuroendocrine tumours derived from Kulchitsky cells and are not related to smoking. As these tumours can be asymptomatic or present with nonspecific symptoms, a high index of suspicion is essential to make an early diagnosis which determines the prognosis. Surgery is curative and remains the mainstay of treatment. Case presentation: A 41-year-old female with no background medical illness first presented with a spontaneous left sided pneumothorax requiring a chest tube insertion. High-resolution CT (HRCT) thorax detected an incidental solitary pulmonary nodule. Bronchoscopy revealed a smooth round tumour sitting at the ostium of the basal right lower lobe bronchus. Endobronchial biopsy was complicated with massive bleeding requiring emergency exploration via rigid bronchoscopy. Multiple attempts to secure haemostasis using Watanabe spigot and argon plasma coagulation failed. She was intubated with a double lumen tube to isolate the healthy left lung. An urgent CT pulmonary angiogram (CTA) was performed to look for collaterals and feasibility of embolization, but no collaterals were seen. She was then referred to the cardiothoracic surgeon for an emergency right lobectomy. Histopathological examination revealed typical carcinoid tumour. She was discharged from the hospital in a stable condition. Discussion: Bronchial carcinoids embryologically originate from the foregut and patients rarely present with features suggestive of carcinoid syndrome and crisis. Mostly are asymptomatic resulting in late presentation and diagnosis. Majority of the typical carcinoids are centrally located and may present with obstructive symptoms and recurrent pneumonia. Bronchoscopists may face massive bleeding following endobronchial biopsy in bronchial carcinoids. Conclusion: Massive bleeding after endobronchial biopsy can occur and therefore the bronchoscopist should have anaesthesia, interventional radiology, and cardiothoracic support to handle this complication. Using tumour markers may obviate the need for biopsy in typical bronchial carcinoids to prevent massive bleeding after endobronchial biopsy.