Primary Motility  Disorders of the  Esophagus
 The Esophageal
 Mucosa
 The
 Esophagogastric  Junction
 Barrett's
 Esophagus

  Browse by Author
  Browse by Movies
OESO©2011
 
Volume: The Esophagogastric Junction
Chapter: EGJ and GER disease
 

What is the relation between acid reflux, esophageal glycoconjugate (mucin) secretion, and viscosity?

M. Marcinkiewicz, T. Zbroch,
Z. Namiot, J. Sarosiek (Kansas City),

The integrity of the esophageal mucosa depends upon an equilibrium between aggressive factors and protective mechanisms. Aggressive factors are represented by components of gastric (acid and pepsin) and duodenal (bile acids, trypsin, chymotrypsin, potentially phospholipase A2 and lysolecithin) secretions [1-4]. Protective mechanisms are operating within three overlapping dimensions: 1) pre-epithelial barrier, 2) epithelial barrier, and 3) post-epithelial barrier [1, 2, 5].

Although protective role of epithelial and postepithelial barriers has been well explored in an experimental setting, it is hard to address their role in humans due to daunting technical challenges [5-11]. Therefore, in humans only the role of pre-epithelial defense mechanisms can be adequately explored [2, 5, 12-17].

There are two major components of pre-epithelial defense in humans: 1) protective factors secreted by the salivary glands and, 2) protective factors elaborated within the esophageal mucosa and submucosal mucous glands. Since aggressive components of the gastroesophageal refluxate act always on the luminal aspect of the esophageal mucosa, the mucus-bicarbonate barrier on the surface of the esophageal mucosa, generated by combined salivary and esophageal mucosal protective components, is the vanguard of mucosal protection [2, 3, 5, 13, 14, 16-18].

We have recently demonstrated that the esophageal mucosal exposure to saline resulted in a continuous release of esophageal glycoconjugate (predominantly mucin) into the perfusate [13]. This indicates a steady rate of glycoconjugate secretion from submucosal mucous glands and deposition on the surface of the mucosa. Mucus layer components, including glycoconjugate, were subsequently released into the perfusing solution [13]. Lowering the intraluminal pH to 2.1 resulted in inhibition of the rate glycoconjugate release into the perfusate solution suggesting inhibition of glycoconjugate secretion from submucosal glands or inhibition of its luminal release from the mucus layer.

Subsequent exposure of the esophageal mucosa to HCl/pepsin, mimicking the natural GER scenario, resulted in a significant increase in the rate of glycoconjugate release into the perfusing solution [13]. This was accompanied by a significant decline of esophageal secretion viscosity from its value of 137 ± 21 to 93 ± 15 [13]. Since the content of glycoconjugate in the esophageal perfusate during the mucosal exposure to HCl/pepsin increased and its viscosity declined, this indicates that the released glycoconjugates were partially degraded by proteolytically active pepsin. Therefore, the decline of the viscosity of the esophageal secretion was observed.

In patients with grade II reflux esophagitis (RE) the basal rate of esophageal glycoconjugate (mucin) release was similar to corresponding values recorded in controls [14]. This rate, however, was significantly lower during the mucosal exposure to HCl/pepsin solution which suggests decline of its content within the mucus layer. This hypothesis has been confirmed by a significant decline of esophageal glycoconjugate secretion both in basal conditions and after mucosal exposure to HCl/pepsin in patients with grade III RE [14]. This impairment in the rate of release of the esophageal glycoconjugate persisted even after healing of endoscopic changes implying that the esophageal glycoconjugate deficiency is a preexisting condition and may facilitate the development of RE.

The measurement of esophageal secretion viscosity in patients with RE revealed their significantly lower values than in controls, especially during the mucosal exposure to HCl/pepsin (117 ± 8 vs 182 ± 28 centipoises, p < 0.05, unpublished results).

These data indicate that the viscosity of the esophageal secretion is strictly related to the content of its major component, esophageal glycoconjugate, predominantly mucin, and that its value may also be decisive in determining the protective potential of the mucus layer covering the esophageal mucosa.

References

1. McCallum RW, Feng T, Frierson HF, Sarosiek J. A new experimental model esophagitis in the cat: the role of esophageal mucus and bicarbonate in mucosal protection against peptic erosion and back diffusion of hydrogen ion. Exp Clin Gastroenterol 1992;2:90-96.

2. Sarosiek J, McCallum RW. The evolving appreciation of the role of esophageal mucosal protection in the pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Pract Gastroenterol 1994;18:20J-20Q.

3. Champion G, Richter JE, Vaezi MF, Singh S, Alexander R. Duodenogastric reflux: relationship to pH and importance in Barrett's esophagus. Gastroenterology 1994;107:747-754.

4. Mittal RK, Reuben A, Whitney JO, McCallum RW. Do bile acids reflux into the esophagus? Gastroenterology 1994;92:371-375.

5. Orlando RC. Pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease: Esophageal epithelial resistance. In: Castell DO, ed.The esophagus. Boston: Little Brown & Co., 1992:463-478.

6. Orlando RC, Powell DW, Carney CN. Pathophysiology of acute acid injury in rabbit esophageal epithelium. J Clin Invest 1981;68:286-293.

7. Orlando RC, Powell DW, Bryson JC, Kinard HB, Carney CN, Jones JD, Bozymski EM. Esophageal potential difference measurements in esophageal disease. Gastroenterology 1982;83:1026-1032.

8. Carney CN, Orlando RC, Powell DW, Dotson MM. Morphologic alterations in early acid-induced epithelial injury of the rabbit esophagus. Lab Invest 1981;45:198-208.

9. Orlando RC, Bryson JC, Powell DW. Mechanism of H+ injury in rabbit esophageal epithelium. Am J Physiol 1984;246:G718-G724.

10. Orlando RC, Powell DW. Studies of esophageal epithelial electrolyte transport and potential difference in man. In: Allen AE, Garner A, Flemstrom G, Silen W Turnberg LA, eds. Mechanisms of mucosal protection in the upper gastrointestinal tract. New York: Raven Press, 1984:75-78.

11. Tobey NA, Reddy SP, Keku TO, Cragoe EJ, Orlando RC. Studies of PHi in rabbit esophageal basal and squamous epithelial cells in culture. Gastroenterology 1992;103:830-839.

12. Mohammed R, Kumar S. Incidence of Campylobacter pylori in a consecutive series of surgical patients referred for endoscopy. J R Coll Surg Edinb 1991;36:422-423.

13. Namiot Z, Sarosiek J, Rourk RM, McCallum RW. Human esophageal secretion: mucosal response to luminal acid and pepsin. Gastroenterology 1994;106:973-981.

14. Namiot Z, Sarosiek J, Marcinkiewicz M, Edmunds MC, McCallum RW. Declined human esophageal mucin secretion in patients with severe reflux esophagitis. Dig Dis Sci 1994;39:2523-2529.

15. Namiot Z, Rourk RM, Piascik R, Hetzel DP, Sarosiek J, McCallum RW. Interrelationship between esophageal challenge with mechanical and chemical stimuli and salivary protective mechanisms. Am J Gastroenterol 1994;89:581-587.

16. Rourk RM, Namiot Z, Sarosiek J, Yu Z, McCallum RW. Diminished content of esophageal epidermal growth factor in patients with reflux esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol 1994;89:1177-1184.

17. Rourk RM, Namiot Z, Sarosiek J, Yu Z, McCallum RW. Impairment of salivary epidermal growth factor secretory response to esophageal mechanical and chemical stimulation in patients with reflux esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol 1994;89:237-244.

18. Sarosiek J, Namiot Z, Piascik R, Hetzel DP, Rourk RM, Edmunds MC, Daniel TM, McCallum RW. What part do the mucous cells of submucosal mucous glands play in the esophageal pre-epithelial barrier ? In: Giuli R, Tytgat GNJ, DeMeester TR Galmiche JP, eds. The esophageal mucosa. Amsterdam, Lausanne, New York, Oxford, Shannon, Tokyo: Elsevier, 1994:278-290.


Publication date: May 1998 OESO©2011