1. The Loginov Moscow Clinical Scientifi c Center (111123, Moscow, Russia)
2. Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education “National Research Ogarev Mordovia State University” (43000 5 Saransk, Russia)
3. “SM-Klinika” (Saint-Petersburg, Russia)
4. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University (117997, Moscow, Russia)
5. . I. Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry, Ministry of Health of Russia (127473, Moscow, Russia)
6. Novosibirsk State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia (630091, Novosibirsk, Russia)
7. Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of th e Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenov University) (119991, Moscow, Russia)
8. North-Western State Medical University named after I. I. Mechnikov (191015, Saint-Petersburg, Russia)
9. State Scientifi c Center Of Coloproctology (123423, Moscow, Russia)

Keywords: Irritable bowel syndrome, diagnosis, treatment, ROMERUS

Abstract: The irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is the most common functional disorder of gastrointestinal tract which can lead to reduced quality of life in a considerable proportion of youn g working-age population. Global prevalence of IBS is 10–20%, and clinical particulars of the disease depend on the region of habitation and race. Currently, the IBS is considered as a polyetiologic condit ion with underlying complex multicomponent pathophysiologi- cal mechanisms. Despite there are international standards of IBS diagnosis and treatment, this disorder remains one of the most complex gastroenterology diagnoses which imperfection is evidenced by the fact that diagnostic criteria for IBS have been revised three times. Besides, the similarity of IBS clinical symptoms with those of other gastroenterology diseases does not always enable to avoid the diagnostic errors. Medication treatment of IBS includes the use of drugs relievin g pain syndrome and normalizing intestinal motor function and frequency of bowel movements. However, as a rule symptomatic therapy is not suffi ciently eff ective and seldom results in prolonged remission leaving both do ctor and patient dissatisfi ed with treatment. In Russia no epidemiologic data on the IBS are avai lable. Also, there are diagnostic and therapeutic diffi culties with the IBS partly associated with limited access to IBS medicinal products not authorized in the Russian Federation. Therefore, currently in Russia we have the prerequisites for conducting a multicenter study to build the IBS patient registry (ROMERUS) which would allow us to collect the up-to-da te information on the particul ars of the IBS clinical picture and to evaluate current therapy and the possibility of applying modern Rome criteria for IBS to the population of Russian patients.

• References total 56 ⇓ :: .
  1. Everhart J.E., Renault P. F. Irritable bowel syndrome in of- fi ce-based practice in the United States. Gastroenterology 1991;100 (4):998–1005.
  2. Canavan C., West J., Card T. Th e epidemiology of irritable bowel syndrome. Clin Epidemiol 2014; 6: 71–80.
  3. Drossman D.A., Camilleri M., Mayer E.A, et al. AGA tech- nical review on irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology 2002;123(6):2108–31
  4. Ford A.C., Forman D., Bailey A. G. et al. Irritable bowel syndrome: a 10-yr natural history of symptoms and factors that infl uence consultation behavior. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 1229–39.
  5. Halder S.L., Locke G. R. 3rd, Schleck C. D. et al. Natural history of functional gastrointestinal disorders: a 12-year longitudinal population-based study. Gastroenterology 2007; 133: 799–807
  6. Lovell, R.M.; Ford, A. C. Global prevalence of and risk fac- tors for irritable bowel syndrome: A meta-analysis. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2012, 10, 712–721.
  7. Chey, W.D.; Kurlander, J.; Eswaran, S. Irritable bowel syn- drome: A clinical review. JAMA 2015, 313, 949–958
  8. Everhart J.E, Ruhl C. E. Burden of digestive diseases in the United States, part II: lower gastrointestinal diseases. Gas- troenterology. 2009;136(3):741–754.
  9. Agarwal N., Spiegel B. M. Th e eff ect of irritable bowel syn- drome on health-related quality of life and health care ex- penditures. Gastroenterol. Clin. North Am. 2011, 40: 11–19
  10. Gibson, P.R.; Varney, J.; Malakar, S.; Muir, J. G. Food com- ponents and irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology 2015, 148: 1158–1174
  11. Mayer E. A. Irritable Bowel Syndrome. N Engl J Med 2008;358(16):1692–9.
  12. Lacy BE, Mearin F, Chang L, et al. Bowel disorders. Gastro- enterology 2016;150(6):1393–407.
  13. Brandt L.J., Chey W. D., Foxx-Orenstein A.E. et al. An ev- idence-based systematic review on the management of irritable bowel syndrome. Am. J. Gastroenterol. – 2009. – Vo l . 104 (Suppl. I). – S. 8–35,
  14. Tack J., Muller-Lissner S., Bytzer P. et al. A randomised con- trolled trial assessing the effi cacy and safety of repeated tegaserod therapy in women with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation. Gut. – 2005. -Vol. 54. – Р. 1707–1713.
  15. Yakovenko E.P, Ivanov A. N., Pryanishnikova A. S. et al. Pato- geneticheskiye podkhody v lechenii sindroma razdrazhenno- go kishechnika. [Pathogenetic approaches in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome] Lechashchiy vrach. 2011, 7: 36–41
  16. Yakovenko E.P, Agafonova N. A. Yakovenko A. V. et al. Rol mo- tornykh narusheniy v mekhanizmakh formirovaniya klinich- eskikh proyavleniy sindroma razdrazhennogo kishechnika (SRK) i SRK-podobnykh narusheniy. Voprosy terapii. [Th e role of motor disorders in the formation of clinical mani- festations of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and IBS-like disorders], Consilium medicum. 2011, Vol. 1. P. 69–73.
  17. Ruchkina I. N. Sindrom razdrazhennogo kishechnika Kand. Diss. [Irritable bowel syndrome. Kand. Diss.] Moscow, 1996. 22 p.
  18. Saha L. Irritable bowel syndrome: Pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, and evidence-based medicine. World J. Gastro- enterol. 2014, 20: 6759–6773.
  19. Vanner SJ, et al. Fundamentals of neurogastroenterology: basic science. Gastroenterology 2016;150:1280–91.
  20. Th abane M, Kottachchi DT, Marshall JK. Systematic review and meta-analysis: the incidence and prognosis of post-in- fectious irritable bowel syndrome. Aliment Pharmacol Th er 2007;26(4):535–44.
  21. Parfenov A.I., Ruchkina I. N. Postinfektsionnyy sindrom razdrazhennogo kishechnika. [Pos tinfection irritable bowel syndrome]. Lechashchiy vrach 2010;7:16–19.
  22. Parfenov A.I., Albulova E. A., Ruchkina I. N. Irritable bowel syndrome in the light of Rome consensus III (2006): 10 years later Ter Arkh. 2016;88(2):4–9.
  23. Barbara G, et al. Th e intestinal microenvironment and functional gastrointestinal disorders. Gastroenterology 2016;150: 1305–18
  24. DiNicolantonio, J.J.; Lucan, S. C. Is fructose malabsorption a cause of irritable bowel syndrome? Med. Hypotheses 2015, 85, 295–297
  25. Saito YA, Larson JJ, Atkinson EJ, Ryu E, Almazar AE, Petersen GM, Talley NJ. Th e role of 5-HTT LPR and GNβ3 825C& gt; T polymorphisms and gene-environment interactions in irri- table bowel syndrome (IBS). Dig Dis Sci. 2012;57: 2650–2657.
  26. Drossman DA. Functional gastrointestinal disorders: history, pathophysiology, clinical features, and Rome IV. Gastroen- terology 2016;150(6):1262–79.
  27. Iorio, N.; Makipour, K.; Palit, A.; Friedenberg, F. K. Post-trau- matic Stress Disorder Is Associated With Irritable Bowel Syndrome in African Americans. J. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2014, 20, 523–530.
  28. Van Oudenhove L, et al. Biopsychosocial aspects of function- al gastrointestinal disorders: how central and environmental processes contribute to the development and expression of functional gastrointestinal disorders. Gastroenterology 2016; 150:1355–67. 17.
  29. Wilkins T, Pepitone C, Alex B, et al. Treatment of irritable bow- el syndrome in adults. Am Fam Physician 2012;86(5):419–26.
  30. Johannesson E, Simre ́n M, Strid H, et al. Physical activity im- proves symptoms in irritable bowel syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106(5):915–22
  31. Halmos, E.P.; Power, V.A.; Shepherd, S.J.; Gibson, P.R.; Muir, J.G. A diet low in FODMAPs reduces symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology 2014, 146, 67–75
  32. de Roest RH, Dobbs BR, Chapman BA, et al. Th e low FOD- MAP diet improves gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: a prospective study. Int J Clin Pract 2013;67(9):895–903
  33. Vazquez-Roque MI, Camilleri M, Smyrk T, et al. A controlled trial of gluten-free diet in patients with irritable bowel syn- drome-diarrhea: eff ects on bowel frequency and intestinal function. Gastroenterology 2013;144(5):903–11
  34. Odunsi-Shiyanbade ST. Effects of chenodeoxycholate and a bile acid sequestrant, colesevelam, on intestinal transit and bowel function. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;8(2):159–65.
  35. Guandalini S. Are probiotics or prebiotics useful in pedi- atric Irritable Bowel Syndrome or Infl ammatory Bowel Disease? Front Med (Lausanne) 2014;1:23.
  36. Pimentel M, Lembo A, Chey WD, et al. TARGET Study Group. Rifaximin therapy for patients with irritable bowel syndrome without constipation. N Engl J Med 2011;364(1):22–32.
  37. Chey WD, Maneerattaporn M, Saad R. Pharmacologic and complementary and alternative medicine therapies for irri- table bowel syndrome. Gut Liver 2011;5:253–266.
  38. Chey WD, Maneerattaporn M, Saad R. Pharmacologic and complementary and alternative medicine therapies for irri- table bowel syndrome. Gut Liver 2011;5:253–266.
  39. Evangelista S. Benefi ts from long-term treatment in irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2012;2012:936960.
  40. Poynard T, Naveau S, Mory B, Chaput JC. Meta-analysis of smooth muscle relaxants in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. Aliment Pharmacol Th er. 1994;8:499–510
  41. Dumitrascu DL, Chira A, Bataga Set al. Th e use of me- beverine in irritable bowel syndrome. A Position paper of the Romanian Society of Neurogastroenterology based on evidence. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2014 Dec;23(4):431–5
  42. Ritchie JA, Truelove SC. Comparison of various treatments for irritable bowel syndrome. Br Med J. 1980;281:1317–1319.
  43. Berthelot J, Centonze M. Controlled double blind trial of Duspatalin (mebeverine) against placebo, in the treatment of irritable colon. Gaz Med de France. 1981;85:2341–2343.
  44. Prout BJ. The treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. Two doses of mebeverine compared. Practitioner. 1983;227:1607–1608.
  45. Connell AM. Physiological and clinical assessment of the eff ect of the musculotropic agent mebeverine on the human colon. Br Med J. 1965;2:848–851.
  46. Baume P. Mebeverine, an eff ective agent in the irritable colon syndrome. Aust N Z J Med. 1972;2:34–36.
  47. Eisenburg J, Kruis W, Schüssler P, Weinzierl M. [Th e ir- ritable colon syndrome. New therapeutic possibilities in the treatment of a frequent syndrome] Fortschr Med. 1978;96:2064–2070.
  48. Hürzeller Castamer JC. Functional colitis: A multi cen- tre study with mebeverine in 380 patients. Der Inf Arzl. 1986;2:54–56.
  49. Liem KS, Timmermans HS. Final report on a double-blind placebo controlled tolerance study of mebeverine in healthy volunteer subjects. 1973, Duphar Report No. 56638/1482/7.
  50. Lüttecke K. A three-part controlled study of trimebutine in the treatment of irritable colon syndrome. Curr Med Res Opin. 1980;6:437–443.
  51. Ruepert L, Quartero AO, de Wit NJ, et al. Bulking agents, antispasmodics and antidepressants for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;(8): CD003460.
  52. Flik CE, Bakker L, Laan W, van Rood YR, Smout AJ, de Wit NJ Systematic review: Th e placebo eff ect of psychological interventions in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. World J Gastroenterol. 2017 Mar 28;23(12):2223–2233.
  53. Den Hertog A, Van den Akker J. Th e action of mebeverine and metabolites on mammalian non-myelinated nerve fi bres. Eur J Pharmacol. 1987;139:353–5.
  54. Daly J, Bergin A, Sun WM, Read NW. Eff ect of food and anti-cholinergic drugs on the pattern of rectosigmoid con- tractions. Gut 1993;34:799–802
  55. Evans PR, Bak YT, Kellow JE. Aliment Pharmacol Th er. 1996 Oct;10(5)
  56. Lacy BE, Mearin F, Chang L, Chey WD, Lembo AJ, Sim- ren M, Spiller R. Bowel Disorders. Gastroenterology 2016;150:1393–1407

Full text is published :
Maev I. V., Bordin D. S., Eremina E. U., Ilchishina T. A. et al. Irritable bowel syndrome. Modern aspects of epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment (a review). Experimental and Clinical Gastroenterology. 2018;158(10): 68–73. DOI: 10.31146/1682-8658-ecg-158-10-68-73
Read & Download full text

1. FSBEI HE “Moscow State Medical and Dental University named after A. I. Evdokimov” of Ministry of Health of Russian Federation (Moscow, Russia)

Keywords: heartburn, Rome criteria, gastroesophageal refl ux disease, hypersensitive esophagus, functional heartburn, esophageal pH-impedance, high resolution esophageal manometry

Abstract: The literature review represents current understanding of the spectrum of disorders, such as non-erosive refl ux disease, hypersensitive esophagus and functional heartburn, occurring in the absence of endoscopic data for damage to the mucous membrane of the esophagus and the main symptom of which is heartburn. Particular attention is paid to the importance of diff erential diagnosis of these disorders, which is carried out using various diagnostic methods and is necessary to choose proper treatment. 24-hour esophageal pH-impedance is the “gold standard” for the diagnosis of patients with heartburn and normal endoscopic picture. The article presents data on the main parameters of daily monitoring, diagnostic criteria that allow to establish the correct diagnosis with high accuracy. The diagnostic capabilities of high-resolution esophageal manometry and therapeutic approaches used in patients with non-erosive refl ux disease, hypersensitive esophagus and functional heartburn are also highlighted.

• References total 33 ⇓ :: .
  1. Ivashkin V. T., Mayev I. V., Trukhmanov A. S., et al. Diagnostics and treatment of gastroesophageal refl ux disease: clinical guidelines of the Russian gastroenterological Association. Ross z gastroenterol gepatol koloproktol 2017; 27(4):75–95. DOI: 10.22416/1382–4376–2017–27– 4–75–95
  2. Clouse R.E., Richter J. E., Heading R. C.J. et al. Functional esophageal disorders. Gut. 1999;45(Suppl 2): II31–II36
  3. Galmiche J.P., Clouse R. E., Bálint A. et al. Functional esophageal disorders. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:1459– 1465
  4. Drossman D.A., Hasler W. L. Rome IV – Functional GI disorders: disorders of gut-brain interaction. Gastroenterology 2016; 150(6): 1257–61
  5. Savarino E., Zentilin P., Tutuian R. et al. Impedance-hY refl ux patterns can diff erentiate non-erosive refl ux disease from functional heartburn patients. J Gastroenterol 2012;47:159–168
  6. Yamasaki T., O’Neil J., Fass R. Update on Functional Heartburn. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y) 2017 Dec; 13(12): 725–734
  7. Aziz Q., Fass R., Gyawali C. et al. Functional Esophageal Disorders. Gastroenterology 2016;150:1368–1379
  8. El-Serag H.B., Sweet S., Winchester C. C. et al. Update on the epidemiology of gastro-oesophageal refl ux disease: a systematic review. Gut 2014;63:871–80
  9. Vakil N., Zanten S., Kahrilas P. et al. Global Consensus Group Th e Montreal defi nition and classifi cation of gastroesophageal refl ux disease: a global evidence-based consensus Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101(8):1900–20
  10. Ivashkin V. T., Maev I. V., Trukhmanov A. S. Pishchevod Barreta [Barrett’s esophagus]. Vol. 1, Moscow, pp.45–47
  11. Katz P.O., Gerson L. B., Vela M. F. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of gastroesophageal refl ux disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108:308–28
  12. Dent J., Vakil N., Jones R. et al. Accuracy of the diagnosis of GORD by questionnaire, physicians and a trial of proton pump inhibitor treatment: the Diamond Study. Gut 2010;59:714–21
  13. Gyawali C., Kahrilas P., Savarino E. et al. Modern diagnosis of GERD: the Lyon Consensus Gut Published Online First: 03 February 2018
  14. Roman S., Gyawali C. P., Savarino E. et al. Ambulatory refl ux monitoring for diagnosis of gastro-esophageal refl ux disease: update of the Porto consensus and recommendations from an international consensus group. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2017;29:1–15
  15. Lundell L.R., Dent J., Bennett J. R. et al. Endoscopic assessment of esophagitis: clinical and functional correlates and further validation of the Los Angeles classifi cation. Gut 1999;45:172–180
  16. Patel A., Sayuk G. S., Gyawali C. P. Parameters on esophageal pH-impedance monitoring that predict outcomes of patients with gastroesophageal refl ux disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015;13:884–91
  17. Maev I. V., Barkalova E. V., Ovsepyan M. A., Kucheryavyi Y. A., Andreev D. N. Possibilities of pH impedance and high-resolution manometry in managing patients with refractory gastroesophageal refl ux disease. Ter Arkh. 2017;89(2):76–83.
  18. Kushnir V.M., Sathyamurthy A., Drapekin J. et al. Assessment of concordance of symptom refl ux association tests in ambulatory pH monitoring. Aliment Pharmacol Th er 2012;35:1080–7
  19. MC, Weusten B. L., Numans M. E. et al. Eff ect of proton-pump inhibitor treatment on symptoms and quality of life in GERD patients depends on the symptom-refl ux association. J Clin Gastroenterol 2008;42:441–7
  20. Frazzoni M., de Bortoli N., Frazzoni L. et al. Impairment of chemical clearance and mucosal integrity distinguish es 2017;52:444–451
  21. Patel A., Wang D., Sainani N. et al. Distal mean nocturnal baseline impedance on pH-impedance monitoring predicts refl ux burden and symptomatic outcome in gastro-oesophageal refl ux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Th er 2016;44:890–8
  22. Frazzoni M., Savarino E., de Bortoli N. et al. Analyses of the post-refl ux swallowinduced peristaltic wave index and nocturnal baseline impedance parameters increase the diagnostic yield of impedance-pH monitoring of patients with refl ux disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016;14:40–6
  23. Frazzoni M., Manta R., Mirante V. G. et al. Esophageal chemical clearance is impaired in gastro-esophageal refl ux disease – a 24-h impedance-pH monitoring assessment. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2013;25:399–406
  24. Martinucci I., de Bortoli N., Savarino E. et al. Esophageal baseline impedance levels in patientswith pathophysiological characteristics of functional heartburn. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2014;26:546–55
  25. Farrе R., Blondeau K., Clement D. et al. Evaluation of oesophageal mucosa integrity by the intraluminal impedance technique. Gut 2011;60:885–92
  26. Kessing B., Bredenoord A., Weijenborg P. et al. Esophageal acid exposure decreases intraluminal baseline impedance levels. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:2093– 209710
  27. Frazzoni L., Frazzoni M., de Bortoli N. et al. Critical appraisal of Rome IV criteria: hypersensitive esophagus does belong to gastroesophageal refl ux disease spectrum. Annals of Gastroenterology. 2018;31(1):1–7
  28. Ivashkin V. T., Maev I. V., Trukhmanov A. S., et al. High resolution manometry and new classifi cation of esophageal motility disorders. Ter Arkh. 2018; (5):93–100.
  29. Th e Chicago Classifi cation of Esophageal Motility Disorders, v3.0. International High Resolution Manometry Working Group. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2015 February; 27(2): 160–174
  30. Kessing B.F., Bredenoord A. J., Smout A. J. Erroneous diagnosis of gastroesophageal refl ux disease in achalasia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011 Dec;9(12):1020–4.
  31. Zerbib F., Belhocine K., Simon M. et al. Clinical, but not esophageal pH-impedance, profi les predict response to proton pump inhibitors in gastro-esophageal refl ux desiase. Gut. 2012;61(4):501–506
  32. Riehl M.E., Pandolfi no J. E., Palsson O. S. et al. Feasibility and acceptability of esophageal-directed hypnotherapy for functional heartburn. Dis Esophagus. 2016 Jul;29(5):490–6
  33. Khajanchee Y.S., Hong D., Hansen P. D., Swanstrom L. L. Outcomes of antireflux surgery in patient with normal preoperative 24-hour pH test result. Am J Surg. 1999;3930:292–300

Full text is published :
Barkalova E. V., Kucheryavyy Y. A., Ovsepian M. A., Maev I. V., Andreev D. N. Heartburn in patients without esophagitis. diff erential diagnosis. Experimental and Clinical Gastroenterology. 2018;158(10): 74–79. DOI: 10.31146/1682-8658-ecg-158-10-74-79
Read & Download full text

1. Omsk State Medical University (Omsk, Russia)
2. Siberian State Automobile and Highway University (SibADI) (Omsk, Russia)

Keywords: connective tissue dysplasia, acid-related disease, 24-hour pH-monitirig, acidity variants

Abstract: Aim. Study of the gastric acid features and acidity variants formation in patients with connective tissue dysplasia. Materials and methods: Gastric acidity variants had selected by Kohonen Self-Organizing Feature Maps. The 24-pH-metry was performed in patients with acid-dependent diseases and connective tissue dysplasia (n=42), patients acid-dependent diseases withоut connective tissue dysplasia (n=37), patients with connective tissue dysplasia withоut acid-dependent diseases (n=39), control group (n=36). Results. 1. The 5 gastric acidity variants had selected: hypoacidity, normally, hyperacidity, biliary and refl ux. 2. It was detected that biliary and refl ux variants diagnosed in patients with acid-dependent diseases and connective tissue dysplasia, hyperacidity variant diagnosed in patients with acid-dependent diseases withоut connective tissue dysplasia, hypoacidity variant diagnosed in patients with connective tissue dysplasia withоut acid-dependent diseases (n=39), normally variant diagnosed in control group patients (n=36). Conclusion. The acidity variants described in this study can be used in the work of general practitioner, therapist, gastroenterologist. The symptoms of the connective tissue dysplasia suggests a violation of the acidity so that can improve diagnostic of acid-related diseases in patients with connective tissue dysplasia.

• References total 13 ⇓ :: .
  1. Ivashkin V. T., Mayev I. V., Trukhmanov A. S., Baranskaya Ye.K., et al. Diagnostics and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease: clinical guidelines of the Russian gastroenterological Association. Ross z gastroenterol gepatol koloproktol 2017; 27(4):75–95. DOI: 10.22416/1382–4376–2017–27–4–75–95
  2. Hunt RH, Camilleri M, Crowe SE, et al. Th e stomach in health and disease. Gut 2015;64:1650–68.
  3. New Medical Approach to Functional Dyspepsia, from Core Symposium 3, Japan Gastroenterological Association 2015–2017.Suzuki H
  4. Two distinct etiologies of gastric cardia adenocarcinoma: interactions among pH, Helicobacter pylori, and bile acids. Mukaisho K, Nakayama T, Hagiwara, at al. Front. Microbiol., 11 May 2015
  5. Ivashkin V. T., Trukhmanov A. S. Sovremennyy podkhod k terapii gastroezofageal’noy refl yuksnoy bolezni vo vrachebnoy praktike [Modern approach to the treatment of gastroesophageal refl ux disease in medical practice]. RMZ Diseases of the digestive organs. 2003;5(2):43.
  6. Regiony Rossii. Sotsial’no-ekonomicheskiye pokazateli [Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators]. 2017: P32 Stat. Sat / Rosstat, 1402 p.
  7. Ivashkin V. T., Baranskaya Ye.K., Ivashkin K. V., et al. Statement of Th e expert council on acid-related diseases diagnostics and treatment. Russian Journal of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Coloproctology. 2015, Vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 91–92.
  8. Bart L Loeys, MD, PhD and Harry C Dietz, MD LoeysDietz Syndrome. GeneReviews, 2018.
  9. Martynov A. I., Nechaeva G. I. Natsional’nyye rekomendatsii po diagnostike, lecheniyu i reabilitatsii patsiyentov s displaziyami soyedinitel’noy tkani. [National guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of patients with connective tissue dysplasia]. Moscow, 2016, Bionics Media LLC Publ. pp. 12–80.
  10. Nechayeva G. I., Lyalyukova Ye.A., Akimova M. A., et al. YAzvennaya bolezn’ dvenadtsatiperstnoy kishki na fone displazii soyedinitel’noy tkani: osobennosti techeniya zabolevaniya, terapevticheskaya taktika [Duodenal ulcer on the background of connective tissue dysplasia:features of the disease, therapeutic tactics]. Moscow, Publishing House «Medpraktika-M», 2012, 100 p.
  11. Osipenko M. F., Livzan M. A. Approaches to diagnostic and therapy of gastritis associated with bile refl ux. Lechaschi Vrach Journal. 2012, no.2–12
  12. Kononov A. V. Cytoprotection of the stomach mucosa: molecular and cellular mechanisms. Russian Journal of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Coloproctology. 2006, Vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 12–16.
  13. Pasechnikov V. D., Pasechnikov D. V. Klinicheskoye znacheniye fenomena nochnogo kislotnogo proryva pri primenenii ingibitorov protonnoy pompy [Th e clinical signifi cance of the phenomenon of nocturnal acid breakthrough in the use of proton pump inhibitors]. Farmateka. 2004;13(90):28–32

Full text is published :
Rozhkova M. Yu., Nechaeva G. I., Lyalukova E. A., Kulikova O. M. Variants of acid-breasting function of the stomach in patients with connective tissue dysplasia. Experimental and Clinical Gastroenterology. 2018;158(10): 80–85. DOI: 10.31146/1682-8658-ecg-158-10-80-85
Read & Download full text