instruction:
Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.
question:
Context: Current diagnostic tests for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) do not consistently measure chronicity of reflux. Mucosal impedance (MI) is a minimally invasive measurement to assess esophageal conductivity changes due to GERD. We aimed to investigate MI pattern in patients with symptoms of extraesophageal reflux (EER) in a prospective longitudinal cohort study.', 'Patients with potential symptoms of EER undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) with wireless pH monitoring were studied. Participants included those with erosive esophagitis (E+), normal EGD/abnormal pH (E-/pH+), and normal EGD/normal pH (E-/pH-). MI was measured from the site of injury in patients with E+, as well as at 2, 5, and 10 cm above the squamocolumnar junction (SCJ) in all participants.', 'Forty-one patients with symptoms of EER were studied. MI measurements at 2cm above the SCJ were significantly (P=0.04) different among the three groups, with MI lowest for E+ and greatest for E-/pH- patients. Although not statistically significant, there is a graded increase in median (interquartile range) MI axially along the esophagus at 5cm (P=0.20) and at 10cm (P=0.27) above the SCJ, with those with reflux (E+ and E-/pH+) having a lower MI than those without.
Answer: Patients with symptoms of EER and evidence of acid reflux have an MI lower than those without at 2cm above the SCJ, with a trend at 5cm and 10cm as well. MI may be a tool to assess presence of GERD in patients presenting with EER symptoms.
answer:
Is esophageal Mucosal Impedance Pattern Distinct in Patients With Extraesophageal Reflux Symptoms and Pathologic Acid Reflux?

question:
Context: The clinical value of oesophageal histology in non-complicated gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) is controversial. Our aim was to explore the role of histology in preoperative diagnosis and postoperative follow-up in GORD.', 'From 40 patients 2 histopathologists graded and scored 191 oesophageal biopsies in a blinded manner to evaluate inter- and intraobserver variation pre- and postoperatively. Correlation between preoperative histology and objective clinical findings (endoscopy, esophageal 24-hour pH monitoring, and manometry) was calculated as well.', 'Pathologist I interpreted 16 (50%) preoperative biopsies as normal, 5 (16%) with mild, 4 (12.5%) moderate, and 7 (21.9%) severe reflux changes. Pathologist II interpreted 11 (35.5%) preoperative biopsies as normal, 11 (35.5%) with mild, 6 (19.4%) moderate, and 3 (9.7%) severe reflux changes. In preoperative biopsies, interobserver variation was 33.8% and intraobserver variation 9.7%. A positive correlation was detectable between preoperative endoscopic and morphologic findings; no correlation existed between either acid reflux or LES pressure and oesophageal morphology. Normal pH monitoring and fundic wrap were noted postoperatively in all cases. In postoperative histology no significant differences according to pathologist I existed when compared with preoperative changes: 22 normal (69%), 7 mild (22%), 1 moderate (3.1%), and 2 severe (6.3%). Compared to preoperative analysis, pathologist II interpreted 24 (77%, p = 0.001) of the postoperative findings as normal, 1 (3%, p = 0.003) as mild, 4 (12.9%, n.s.) as moderate, and 2 (6.5% n.s.) as severe reflux changes. In postoperative biopsies interobserver variation was 21.1% and intraobserver variation 5.6%.
Answer: The role of oesophageal histology in preoperative diagnosis and postoperative follow-up of GORD may be considered limited.
answer:
Is oesophageal histology in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease of minor pre- and postoperative diagnostic value?

question:
Context: In several malignant tissues, the angiopoietins are principal regulators of vascular growth and regression, but in normal prostate and prostate tumors the role of the angiopoietins is unknown.', 'Angiopoietin (ang) 1 and 2 were immunolocalized in TUR-diagnosed prostate tumors with long follow-up and the expression was related to vascular density and clinicopathological variables.', 'Ang 1 was strongly expressed in the basal epithelial cell layer in non-malignant tissue, whereas tumors had lower levels localized to the epithelial cells. A weak ang 2 immunoreaction was observed in non-malignant tissue and in low to intermediate Gleason score (GS) tumors, with a similar expression pattern. However, most high GS tumors showed an intense ang 2 staining. Ang 2 was significantly correlated to GS, density of endoglin stained blood vessels, metastases, and to cancer specific survival.
Answer: We conclude that ang 2 probably is an important regulator of angiogenesis in prostate cancer.
answer:
Is angiopoietin 2 expression related to histological grade , vascular density , metastases , and outcome in prostate cancer?