• airway foreign body
• complication
• endoscopy
• gastroesophageal reflux disease
• pediatric

The catheter of the esophageal pH monitoring is associated with nasal and throat discomfort, and different behave in patients. The capsule of the wireless pH monitoring may cause chest pain and complications.

To compare the wireless and conventional pH monitoring concerning the degree of discomfort and limitations in daily activities, complications, ability to diagnose pathological reflux, and costs.

Methods: Twenty-five patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux were prospectively submitted, in a simultaneous initial period, to 24-hour catheter esophageal pH monitoring and 48-hour wireless system. After removing each system, patients underwent a specific clinical questionnaire.

Fifteen patients (60%) pointed a higher discomfort in the introduction of the capsule (p=0.327). Discomfort and limitations in daily activities were lower on 2^nd day (p<0.05); however, continued to be expressive (32% to 44%). Chest pain occurred in 13 (52%) patients. The diagnostic gain of pathological reflux was 12% with the wireless system (p=0.355).

1) There is no significant difference between the discomfort mentioned in the introduction of the capsule and the catheter; 2) during reflux monitoring, the wireless system provides significant less discomfort and limitations in daily activities; 3) there is no significant difference between the two methods in the ability to diagnose pathological reflux; 4) wireless pH monitoring has higher cost.

The wireless pH capsule is widely used to evaluate gastroesophageal reflux disease in patients. Common complications include premature capsule detachment, dysphagia, chest pain, and technical malfunctions. We present a 6-year-old boy who presented to our institution with a 2-day history of coffee-ground emesis. A pH capsule was found to be lodged in his distal esophagus 45 days after initial placement. We explore the possible reasons for capsule retention and briefly discuss the safety implications of this finding because we believe that this complication may be underreported.

Bravo® capsule (BC) (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) endoscopy is a reliable, viable, and well-tolerated diagnostic modality for resistant gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Common complications of the procedure include early dislodgment, poor transmission, and premature removal due to intractable pain, while aspiration of the capsule is exceedingly rare. This paper reports a case of BC aspiration in a 52-year-old female who presented after being ventilated when her oxygen saturation dropped. The initial chest radiograph revealed that the BC was in the right main bronchus; the site was further elaborated by flexible endoscopy and the capsule was found to be in the right lower lobe bronchus distal to the bronchus intermedius. This was followed by a rigid bronchoscopy and extraction of the capsule with rigid grasper forceps. Although this occurs rarely, immediate endotracheal intubation and ventilator support is the preferred emergency step in such cases until bronchoscopic removal can be performed. 

• endoscopy
• gastroesophageal reflux
• ventilation

We report an unexpected, previously unreported complication of Bravo pH capsule dislodgement. During Bravo pH testing of a 44-year-old man with gastroesophageal reflux disease, we were unable to endoscopically visualize the capsule attached to the esophageal wall after deployment. After multiple attempts to detect the capsule, it was visualized in the left pyriform sinus. As there was significant risk for pulmonary dislodgement, ENT and pulmonary physicians were immediately consulted to review options for safe removal. Ultimately, ENT successfully retrieved the capsule with a foreign body removal forceps. The Bravo pH test is generally a well-tolerated diagnostic tool used to confirm the presence of abnormal esophageal acid reflux. While few complications have been reported, technical difficulties can occur, including poor data reception, misplacement, and early dislodgement. Rarely, more serious complications can occur, ranging from esophageal wall trauma to capsule aspiration. Gastroenterologists performing this procedure should be aware of the low, but non-trivial, risk of complications.

• Gastroesophageal reflux disease
• Esophageal pH monitoring
• Bravo capsule
• Dislodgement
• Esophagogastroduodenoscopy

AIM: To investigate the feasibility and safety of pH capsule to monitor pH in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS: Ninety-one patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD were enrolled in this study, 46 of whom were randomized to the pH capsule group; the remaining 45 patients used the conventional catheter and pH capsule simultaneously. The pH data and traces were recorded via automatic analysis, and capsule detachment was assessed using X-ray images. All of the patients were required to complete a questionnaire regarding tolerance with the capsule.

RESULTS: The capsules were successfully attached on the first attempt, and no early detachment of the capsules was observed. Compared to the 24-h pH data recorded with the conventional catheter, the data collected with the pH capsule showed no significant differences in 24-h esophageal acid exposure. The measurements of esophageal acid exposure over 24 h collected with the two devices showed a significant correlation (r² = 0.996, P < 0.001). Capsule detachment occurred spontaneously in 89 patients, and 2 capsules required endoscopic removal due to chest pain. The capsule was associated with less interference with daily activity.

CONCLUSION: The wireless pH capsule provides a feasible and safe method for monitoring gastroesophageal reflux and therefore may serve as an important tool for diagnosing GERD.

• Wireless pH capsule
• Feasibility
• Safety
• Conventional catheter
• Gastroesophageal reflux disease

• Adult
• Aged
• Capsule Endoscopes/adverse effects
• Capsule Endoscopy/adverse effects
• Capsule Endoscopy/instrumentation
• China
• Esophageal pH Monitoring/adverse effects
• Esophageal pH Monitoring/instrumentation
• Esophagus/metabolism
• Feasibility Studies
• Female
• Gastric Acid/metabolism
• Gastroesophageal Reflux/diagnosis
• Gastroesophageal Reflux/metabolism
• Humans
• Hydrogen-Ion Concentration
• Male
• Middle Aged
• Patient Satisfaction
• Predictive Value of Tests
• Prospective Studies
• Surveys and Questionnaires
• Time Factors
• Wireless Technology
• Young Adult

AIM: To evaluate the technical failures of the Bravo pH test in a population with nonerosive gastroesophageal reflux disease.

METHODS: Over the course of a year, we prospectively studied a population of 66 nonerosive reflux disease patients who received a Bravo pH test. The number and frequency of all technical failures were documented, quantified and analyzed.

RESULTS: A total of 66 patients, with a mean age of 41.7 years, were studied. Technical failures occurred in 15.15% of the sample. The most frequent failures were due to poor data reception (4.5%), early dislodgement (4.5%) and capsule removal (6.1%).

CONCLUSION: The Bravo capsule pH test involves a low but non-negligible rate of technical problems, a fact that must always be considered by physicians.

• Bravo test
• Capsule dislodgement
• Nonerosive reflux disease
• Poor data reception
• Technical problems

• Aspiration
• Capsule endoscopy
• Cough