Rapid Communication
Copyright ©2008 The WJG Press and Baishideng.
World J Gastroenterol. Sep 21, 2008; 14(35): 5442-5447
Published online Sep 21, 2008. doi: 10.3748/wjg.14.5442
Table 1 Comparisons between participants with and without erosive esophagitis (n = 5037)
With erosive esophagitis (n = 1679)Without erosive esophagitis (n = 3358)P
Age (yr, mean ± SD)45.2 ± 9.345.2 ± 9.70.873
Gender (M/F, %)86/1459/41< 0.001
BMI (kg/m2)24.8 ± 2.923.5 ± 3.0< 0.001
Waist circumference (cm)86.8 ± 8.781.5 ± 9.8< 0.001
Current smoking724 (43%)786 (23%)< 0.001
Alcohol use (≥ 3-4/wk)360 (21%)387 (12%)< 0.001
Metabolic syndrome352 (21%)433 (13%)< 0.001
Hiatal hernia38 (2.2%)24 (0.7%)< 0.001
Reflux symptoms1194 (12%)265 (8.0%)< 0.001
Systolic BP (mmHg)118.3 ± 12.7114.8 ± 13.5< 0.001
Diastolic BP (mmHg)77.7 ± 8.874.8 ± 9.5< 0.001
Fatty liver on abdominal USG809 (48%)1014 30%)< 0.001
Fasting plasma glucose98.4 ± 20.595.2 ± 17.2< 0.001
HbAlc5.6 ± 0.75.5 ± 0.60.001
Triglycerides (mg/dL, mean ± SD)158.9 ± 110.4123.5 ± 78.6< 0.001
HDL-C (mg/dL) (mean ± SD)54.1 ± 12.056.4 ± 12.8< 0.001
HOMA22.41 ± 1.102.18 ± 0.89< 0.001
H pylori positive211/555 (38%)498/922 (54%)< 0.001
Education (college and higher)894/1184 (75%)1639/2391 (69%)< 0.001
Table 2 Multivariate analyses of the risk for erosive esophagitis by gender, smoking, hiatal hernia, reflux symptoms, metabolic syndrome, fatty liver on abdominal USG and HOMA
Adjusted odds ratio95% CIP
Gender0.290.25-0.35< 0.001
Current smoking1.601.39-1.83< 0.001
Alcohol use (≥ 3-4/wk)1.801.53-2.14< 0.001
Hiatal hernia3.271.87-5.70< 0.001
Reflux symptoms11.571.28-1.94< 0.001
Metabolic syndrome1.251.04-1.490.017
Fatty liver on abdominal USG1.391.20-1.60< 0.001
HOMA20.910.85-0.980.011
Table 3 Risk of individual components of metabolic syndrome for erosive esophagitis
OR (95% CI)1POR (95% CI)2P
Increased waist circumference1.46 (1.28-1.67)< 0.0011.33 (1.15-1.54)< 0.001
Hypertension1.22 (1.06-1.40)0.0061.16 (1.00-1.35)0.047
DM or elevated FBS1.09 (0.77-1.54)0.6270.95 (0.66-1.38)0.798
Increased TG1.98 (1.74-2.26)< 0.0011.47 (1.14-1.90)0.003
Low HDL-C0.67 (0.56-0.80)< 0.0010.90 (0.74-1.09)0.267
Table 4 Associations of grade of erosive esophagitis, according to LA classification, with risk factors for erosive esophagitis n (%)
Control (n = 3358)A (n = 1326)B (n = 328)C or D (n = 25)P for linear trend
Age (yr, mean ± SD)45.2 ± 9.744.8 ± 9.746.4 ± 9.349.9 ± 10.70.094
Males1991 (59)1122 (85)300 (92)22 (88)< 0.001
Current smoking786 (23)554 (42)162 (49)8 (32)< 0.001
Alcohol use (≥ 3-4/wk)387 (12)251 (19)101 (31)8 (32)< 0.001
Hiatal hernia24 (0.2)32 (2)3 (1)3 (12)< 0.001
Reflux symptoms1265 (8.0)141 (11)50 (15)3 (12)< 0.001
Metabolic syndrome433 (13)255 (19)87 (27)10 (40)0.001
Fatty liver on Abdominal USG1014 (30)625 (47)166 (51)18 (72)< 0.001
HOMA2 (mean ± SD)2.18 ± 0.892.39 ± 1.102.50 ± 1.102.70 ± 1.120.007
Table 5 Associations of grade of erosive esophagitis, according to LA classification, with individual components of the metabolic syndrome n (%)
Control (n = 3358)A (n = 1326)B (n = 328)C or D (n = 25)P for linear trend1
Increased waist circumference942 (28)504 (38)159 (48)19 (76)< 0.001
Hypertension722 (22)378 (29)103 (31)8 (32)0.244
DM or elevated FBS84 (2.5)49 (4)11 (3)00.346
Increased TG850 (25)561 (42)138 (42)11 (44)0.004
Low HDL-C497 (15)164 (12)37 (11)5 (20)0.582