Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Hill classification is superior to the axial length of a hiatal hernia for assessment of the mechanical anti-reflux barrier at the gastroesophageal junction
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Oncology.
Show others and affiliations
2016 (English)In: Endoscopy International Open, ISSN 2364-3722, Vol. 4, no 3, E311-E317 p.Article in journal (Refereed) PublishedText
Abstract [en]

Background and study aims: The pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is multifactorial, including the mechanical anti-reflux barrier of the gastroesophageal junction. This barrier can be evaluated endoscopically in two ways: by measuring the axial length of any hiatal hernia present or by assessing the gastroesophageal flap valve. The endoscopic measurement of axial length is troublesome because of the physiological dynamics in the area. Grading the gastroesophageal flap valve is easier and has proven reproducible. The aim of the present study was to compare the two endoscopic grading methods with regard to associations with GERD. Patients and methods: Population-based subjects underwent endoscopic examination assessing the axial length of hiatus hernia, the gastroesophageal flap valve using the Hill classification, esophagitis using the Los Angeles (LA) classification, and columnar metaplasia using the Z-line appearance (ZAP) classification. Biopsies were taken from the squamocolumnar junction to assess the presence of intestinal metaplasia. Symptoms were recorded with the validated Abdominal Symptom Questionnaire. GERD was defined according to the Montreal definition. Results: In total, 334 subjects were included in the study and underwent endoscopy; 86 subjects suffered from GERD and 211 presented no symptoms or signs of GERD. Based on logistic regression, the estimated area under the curve statistic (AUC) for Hill (0.65 [95 % CI 0.59-0.72]) was higher than the corresponding estimate for the axial length of a hiatal hernia (0.61 [95 % CI 0.54-0.68]), although the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.225). Conclusion: From our data, and in terms of association with GERD, the Hill classification was slightly stronger compared to the axial length of a hiatal hernia, but we could not verify that the Hill classification was superior as a predictor. The Hill classification may replace the axial length of a hiatal hernia in the endoscopic assessment of the mechanical anti-reflux barrier of the gastroesophageal junction.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 4, no 3, E311-E317 p.
National Category
Gastroenterology and Hepatology
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-119288DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-101021ISI: 000372725100014PubMedID: 27004249OAI: diva2:928630
Available from: 2016-05-16 Created: 2016-04-15 Last updated: 2016-05-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(983 kB)19 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 983 kBChecksum SHA-512
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Björ, Ove
By organisation
Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 19 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 97 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link