Author Name : Hamdi Saleh Al-Mutori
1 The Correlation between Body mass Index and Esophagogastroduodenoscopic Finding in Patients with Dyspepsia
- Hamdi Saleh Al-Mutori* ,
- Mazin . Saleh ,
- Muhammad . Siddiqui ,
- Ahmed F. Omar
- Abstract
- Show Article
- Download : 187
- Certificate
Abstract : Due to its substantially increasing prevalence, obesity has become a worldwide concern. A tremendous number of studies existing nowadays highlighting the negative impacts of obesity on human health, however the potential role of obesity in gastrointestinal symptoms is unclear and, furthermore, inconsistent results reported from many studies. We, in this study, tried to answer the question whether obesity carry a higher risk for specific endoscopic diagnoses in patients with dyspepsia. This is a cross sectional study conducted at Sohar Hospital, Sultanate of Oman, on patients who complained from dyspepsia and referred as a candidate for esopagogastorduodenoscopy (EGD) due to either persistence of symptom, presence of alarming feature(s) or being more than 50 years. Clear definitions of obesity, dyspepsia, EGD findings and alarming features were made according to the general consensus. EGD was done to all patients who were included in the study for gross endoscopic abnormality as well as for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. The endoscopic findings were analysed by the two the endoscopists independently. Among 118 participants, 61 were obese (51.8%) and 57 (48.2%) were non-obese. There were no statistical differences in term of patients’ gender and ethnicity. Eighty four (71.2%) patients presented with one of the alarming features. Weight loss, as a presentation, was particularly more common in obese patients (p < 0.001). Among all patients, 14 (11.9%) had normal EGD, majority were non obese (p < 0.033). For obese patients, the majority, 58 (95.1%), showed abnormal EGD findings (p < 0.001). A significant difference was observed between obese and non-obese patients presented with respect to hiatus hernia with esophagitis (p <0.001), gastritis with positive H. pylori (p = 0.046), gastritis with negative H. pylori (p = 0.021) and gastritis due to bile reflux (p = 0.002). Obese patients in our study showed a significantly higher abnormal EGD findings compared to non-obese. Bile reflux related gastritis represented the commonest abnormality. With these findings, EGD might be considered more frequently in obese patients who presented with dyspepsia for early diagnosis and treatment.
Keyword : Esophagogastroduodenoscopic, Helicobacter pylori
Login
Loading....
Author Guideline
Copyright Form
News Update
Archive List
- Volume-11
- Volume-10
- January 2023 Issue 1
- January 2023 Issue 1
- February 2023 Issue 2
- March 2023 Issue 3
- March 2023 Issue 3
- April 2023 Issue 4
- April 2023 Issue 4
- May 2023 Issue 5
- May 2023 Issue 5
- May 2023 Issue 5
- June 2023 Issue 6
- June 2023 Issue 6
- July 2023 Issue 7
- July 2023 Issue 7
- August 2023 Issue 8
- August 2023 Issue 8
- September 2023 Issue 9
- October 2023 Issue 10
- November 2023 Issue 11
- December 2023 Issue 12
- Volume-9
- January 2022 Issue 1
- February 2022 Issue 2
- March 2022 Issue 3
- April 2022 Issue 4
- May 2022 Issue 5
- June 2022 Issue 6
- July 2022 Issue 7
- July 2022 Issue 7
- July 2022 Issue 7
- July 2022 Issue 7
- August 2022 Issue 8
- September 2022 Issue 9
- October 2022 Issue 10
- October 2022 Issue 10
- November 2022 Issue 11
- November 2022 Issue 11
- November 2022 Issue 11
- December 2022 Issue 12
- Volume-8
- January 2021 Issue 1
- February 2021 Issue 2
- February 2021 Issue 2
- March 2021 Issue 3
- April 2021 Issue 4
- May 2021 Issue 5
- June 2021 Issue 6
- June 2021 Issue 6
- June 2021 Issue 6
- July 2021 Issue 7
- August 2021 Issue 8
- September 2021 Issue 9
- October 2021 Issue 10
- November 2021 Issue 11
- December 2021 Issue 12
- Volume-7
- January 2020 Issue 1
- January 2020 Issue 1
- February 2020 Issue 2
- March 2020 Issue 3
- March 2020 Issue 3
- March 2020 Issue 3
- April 2020 Issue 4
- April 2020 Issue 4
- May 2020 Issue 5
- May 2020 Issue 5
- May 2020 Issue 5
- June 2020 Issue 6
- June 2020 Issue 6
- June 2020 Issue 6
- July 2020 Issue 7
- August 2020 Issue 8
- September 2020 Issue 9
- October 2020 Issue 10
- November 2020 Issue 11
- December 2020 Issue 12
- December 2020 Issue 12
- Volume-6
- January 2019 Issue 1
- February 2019 Issue 2
- March 2019 Issue 3
- April 2019 Issue 4
- April 2019 Issue 4
- May 2019 Issue 5
- May 2019 Issue 5
- June 2019 Issue 6
- June 2019 Issue 6
- July 2019 Issue 7
- July 2019 Issue 7
- August 2019 Issue 8
- September 2019 Issue 9
- September 2019 Issue 9
- September 2019 Issue 9
- October 2019 Issue 10
- November 2019 Issue 11
- November 2019 Issue 11
- November 2019 Issue 11
- December 2019 Issue 12
- Volume-5
- January 2018 Issue 1
- January 2018 Issue 1
- February 2018 Issue 2
- March 2018 Issue 3
- April 2018 Issue 4
- May 2018 Issue 5
- June 2018 Issue 6
- July 2018 Issue 7
- August 2018 Issue 8
- September 2018 Issue 9
- September 2018 Issue 9
- October 2018 Issue 10
- October 2018 Issue 10
- November 2018 Issue 11
- December 2018 Issue 12
- December 2018 Issue 12
- Volume-4
- January 2017 Issue 1
- February 2017 Issue 2
- February 2017 Issue 2
- March 2017 Issue 3
- April 2017 Issue 4
- April 2017 Issue 4
- May 2017 Issue 5
- June 2017 Issue 6
- June 2017 Issue 6
- June 2017 Issue 6
- June 2017 Issue 6
- July 2017 Issue 7
- August 2017 Issue 8
- August 2017 Issue 8
- September 2017 Issue 9
- October 2017 Issue 10
- November 2017 Issue 11
- December 2017 Issue 12
- December 2017 Issue 12
- December 2017 Issue 12
- Volume-3
- January 2016 Issue 1
- February 2016 Issue 2
- March 2016 Issue 3
- April 2016 Issue 4
- May 2016 Issue 5
- June 2016 Issue 6
- June 2016 Issue 6
- July 2016 Issue 7
- July 2016 Issue 7
- July 2016 Issue 7
- August 2016 Issue 8
- September 2016 Issue 9
- October 2016 Issue 10
- October 2016 Issue 10
- November 2016 Issue 11
- November 2016 Issue 11
- December 2016 Issue 12
- Volume-2
- Volume-1
Statastics
Download of Articles
115,504