Significant pressure differences between solid-state and water-perfused systems in lower esophageal sphincter measurement

Endoluminal Procedures and Devices for Esophageal Tract Investigation: A Critical Review

Diseases of the esophageal tract represent a heterogeneous class of pathological conditions for which diagnostic paradigms continue to emerge. In the last few decades, innovative diagnostic devices have been developed, and several attempts have been made to advance and standardize diagnostic algorithms to be compliant with medical procedures. To the best of our knowledge, a comprehensive review of the procedures and available technologies to investigate the esophageal tract was missing in the literature. Therefore, the proposed review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of available endoluminal technologies and procedures to investigate esophagus health conditions. The proposed systematic review was performed using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Studies have been divided into categories based on the type of evaluation and measurement that the investigated technology provides. In detail, three main categories have been identified, i.e., endoluminal technologies for the (i) morphological, (ii) bio-mechanical, and (iii) electro-chemical evaluation of the esophagus.

Linear or circular: Anastomotic ulcer after gastric bypass surgery

Background

After laparoscopic Gastric Bypass Procedure (GBP), anastomotic ulcers (AU) at the gastrojejunostomy (GJ) occur in up to 16% of the patients. Surgical techniques seem to influence the development of AU, but this is still a matter of discussion. This study aims to compare the incidence of AU in circular-stapled (CS) versus linear-stapled (LS) gastrojejunostomy.

Methods

Single-centre retrospective analysis of 241 (m 77 /f 164) consecutive patients (126 CS, 115 LS) with primary or revisional GBP including Roux-Y-Gastric Bypass (RYGB) and One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) between 01/2014 and 01/2018. Follow-up with oesophagogastroduodenoscopy was only performed in symptomatic patients. Age, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, smoking and medication were analyzed in both groups. The data are reported as total numbers (%) and mean ± standard deviation.

Results

AU occurred significantly more often in the CS group than in the LS group (p = 0.0034). Moreover, refractory AU and the need for revisional surgery were higher in the CS group. Smoking correlates significantly with the development of AU, whereas other risk factors had no impact on its incidence.

Conclusion

Linear-stapled gastrojejunostomy with a long and narrow pouch should be the preferable procedure for reducing AU development risk. Smoking cessation minimizes the risk for AU and is a necessary part of the treatment.

Evaluation of the Esophagogastric Junction on High Resolution Manometry

The esophagogastric junction (EGJ) is a complex barrier between the thoracic and abdominal luminal gut compartments, comprised primarily of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and crural diaphragm. Although closed at rest, the EGJ relaxes to allow antegrade bolus transit and retrograde venting of air. Abnormal relaxation is the hallmark of achalasia spectrum disorders, while increased frequency of transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations and/or EGJ disruption are seen in gastroesophageal reflux disease. High resolution manometry (HRM) is the modern day gold standard for assessment of EGJ morphology and function, with better performance characteristics compared with endoscopy and barium esophagography. Conventional LES metrics defining EGJ function include resting LES pressure as well as postswallow residual pressures. Newer HRM-based metrics include EGJ contractile integral, which measures static barrier function at rest, and EGJ morphology, which characterizes the relationship between LES and crural diaphragm. Provocative maneuvers assess dynamic EGJ function during physiological or pharmacologic stress. The most useful of these maneuvers, the rapid drink challenge, assesses for latent obstruction, while multiple rapid swallows evaluate adequacy of deglutitive inhibition. Amyl nitrate and cholecystokinin administration can segregate motor from structural obstruction. Newer provocative tests (straight leg raise maneuver, abdominal compression) and novel diagnostic tools (functional lumen imaging probe) complement HRM evaluation of the EGJ. Although current HRM metrics and maneuvers show promise in identifying clinically relevant EGJ abnormalities, future investigations evaluating management outcomes will improve segregation of normal from abnormal EGJ morphology and function.

Revisional Gastric Bypass After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding-One-Stage or Two-Stage Procedure?

BACKGROUND

Revisional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (R-LRYGB) is the preferred procedure after failed adjustable gastric banding. Little is known about whether a one-stage procedure (one surgery for band removal and R-LRYGB) or a two-stage procedure (first band removal and later R-LRYGB) is superior. Aim of this study is to compare early- and long-term results of both methods at our institution.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 165 (m 26/f 139) consecutive patients (98 one-stage, 67 two-stage) with R-LRYGB. Mean follow-up time was 50.1 ± 38.8 months. Indications for one-stage vs. two-stage procedures, operating time, peri- and postoperative complications, morbidity, mortality, and length of stay (LOS) were analyzed. Data are reported as total numbers (%) and mean ± standard deviation.

RESULTS

Mean age at R-LRYGB was 43.9 ± 10.7 vs. 44.3 ± 10.7 years with a BMI of 37.1 ± 6.8 vs. 39.8 ± 7.1 (one-stage vs. two-stage). In the one-stage group, the main indication for revisional surgery was weight regain (57.1%), followed by dilatation of the esophagus or pouch (37.7%) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (36.7%), whereas in the two-stage group, it was band erosion (52.2%) and dilatation of the esophagus or pouch (17.9%) and GERD (11.9%). There was no significant difference in operative time (208.5 ± 61.2 vs. 206.3 ± 73.5 min), LOS (8.6 ± 3.4 vs. 9.3 ± 5.7 days) or mortality (0% overall). Major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa) occurred similarly often in both groups: 15.3% vs. 16.9% (one-stage vs. two-stage).

CONCLUSION

Both approaches achieve good results. However, the one-stage R-LRYGB is the preferable procedure because it reduces costs and LOS by doing without an additional surgical procedure.

Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding: an Underestimated Risk Factor for the Development of Esophageal Cancer?-a Nationwide Survey

BACKGROUND

Approximately 14% of Austria's 8.5 million inhabitants have a body mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m². The laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) was introduced in Austria in 1994, where about 10.300 patients have received it so far. One of our LAGB patients developed an adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus 13 years after implantation.

OBJECTIVES

In order to calculate whether after LAGB patients are at higher risk for carcinoma of the esophagus, we performed a nationwide survey.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to all surgical departments in Austria, primarily in order to detect cases with esophageal carcinoma after LAGB, but also to evaluate the policy in Austria concerning preoperative work-up, operation, and follow-up in LAGB patients.

RESULTS

Since 1994, 37 of the 119 surgical departments in Austria have performed a total of about 10.300 LAGB implantations. Six patients have been identified with esophageal cancer following LAGB. The WHO statistical report on esophageal cancer shows an incidence of 2.8/100.000 per year in Austria, about 1/3 of which cases are adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus.

CONCLUSION

Following LAGB, the incidence of esophageal cancer might be up to fivefold higher than the aged standardized overall population of Austria.

NORMATIVE VALUES FOR A NEW WATER-PERFUSED HIGH RESOLUTION MANOMETRY SYSTEM

BACKGROUND

Esophageal manometry is the most reliable method to evaluate esophageal motility. High resolution manometry (HRM) provides topographic contour colored plots (Clouse Plots) with simultaneous analysis from the pharynx to the stomach. Both solid state and water-perfused systems are available.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determinate the normative data for a new water-perfused HRM.

METHODS

HRM was made in 32 healthy volunteers after 8 hours fasting. HRM system used consisted of a 24-channel water-perfused catheter (Multiplex, Alacer Biomedica, São Paulo, Brazil). The reusable catheter is made of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) with 4.7 mm of diameter. Side holes connected to pressure transducers are spaced 2 cm for the analysis from the pharynx to the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). Holes are spaced 5 mm and 120° in a spiral disposition in the LES area. The sensors encompass 34 cm in total. Upper esophageal sphincter (UES) parameters studied were basal and relaxation pressures. Esophageal body parameters were distal contractile integral (DCI), distal latency (DL) and break. LES parameters studied were basal pressure, integrated residual pressure (IRP), total and abdominal length. Variables are expressed as mean ± standard deviation, median (interquartile range) and percentiles 5-95th.

RESULTS

All volunteers (17 males, aged 22-62 years) completed the study and tolerated the HRM procedure well. Percentiles 5-95th range were calculated: Upper Esophageal Sphincter (UES) basal pressure 16.7-184.37 (mmHg), DL: 6.2-9.1 (s), DCI: 82.72-3836.61 (mmHg.s.cm), break: <7.19 (cm), LES basal pressure: 4.89-37.16 (mmHg), IRP: 0.55-15.45 (mmHg).

CONCLUSION

The performance and normative values obtained for this low-cost water-perfused HRM seems to be adequate for clinical use.

The Esophageal Manometry with Gas-perfused Catheters

Background

The well-established methods for esophageal manometry have some disadvantages: the-water-perfused catheters needs calibration by gravity and measuring in supine position, and the solid-state catheters are very expensive. Manometry using gas-perfused catheters is a suitable alternative. There have been only a few publications about this.

Objectives and methods

The results for esophageal manometry in 1700 patients were retrospectively analyzed based on the clinical reports and the manometry data. The gas-perfusion manometry was critically assessed.

Results

The mean age was 54 years. The indications for esophageal manometry were GER symptoms in 58.5% (pathological DeMeester score in 41.8%), dysphagia in 12.4%, and already known achalasia in 8.9%. Motility disorders could be found in 40% of the patients with GER symptoms (51% of the patients with pathological DeMeester score), and in 88% of achalasia patients. The resting LES pressure was 8.9±5.94 mmHg with GER symptoms, 16.4±12.79 mmHg without GER symptoms, and 26.8±14.03 mmHg with achalasia. The relaxation LES pressure was 20.0±10.93 mmHg in achalasia patients, and 8.3±5.77 mmHg in the others.The gas-perfusion manometry was well tolerated by all patients without any serious complications.

Discussion

Manometry using gas-perfused catheters is an easy to handle and inexpensive method to investigate the esophageal motility. The suitability of gas perfusion with helium for esophageal manometry depends on physical and technical requirements, such as a constant gas flow, a dead space in the transducer, and the catheter being as small as possible. In consideration of this, the detection of the pressure changing in swallowing acts is excellent. The measured LES pressures are generally lower than with other methods like with water-perfused or solid-state catheters, possibly because of the higher compliance in a gas-filled surrounding. The normal values in gas-perfusion manometry are comparable but not identical with the values of other manometric methods.

Variation in esophageal physiology testing in clinical practice: Results from an international survey

BACKGROUND

Advances in clinical measurement of esophageal motility and function have improved the assessment of swallowing disorders and reflux symptoms. Variation in data acquisition, analysis, and reporting exists and impacts on diagnosis and management.

AIMS AND METHODS

This study examined variation in esophageal manometry methodology between institutions to establish the status in current practice. A structured survey was distributed through international NGM societies using an Internet-based platform. Questions explored infrastructure, technology, analysis, and reporting.

KEY RESULTS

Responses were received from 91 centers from 29 countries. Eighteen (20%) centers used "conventional" manometry, 75 (82%) high-resolution manometry, and 53 (58%) HR impedance manometry. All centers documented motility for single water swallows. The Chicago Classification was applied by 65 (71.4%) centers. In contrast, analysis of EGJ morphology varied widely. Adjunctive testing was often applied: multiple rapid swallows (77%), rapid drink challenge (77%), single solid swallows (63%), and a standard test meal (18%). Of 86 (94.5%) units that offered pH impedance (pH-Z) studies, approximately half (53.5%) performed tests on acid-suppressant medication in patients with a high pretest probability (eg, erosive esophagitis). Most (75.6%) centers manually reviewed every reflux event. Others examined pH-Z data only prior to symptoms. To assess symptom association with reflux events, 73.6% centers analyzed each symptom separately, whereas 29.7% centers pooled symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

There is marked variation in the data acquisition, analysis, and reporting of esophageal manometry studies. Further efforts to improve quality and uniformity in testing and reporting are required. This survey provides information upon which best-practice guidelines can be developed.

Standard values for gas-perfusion manometry of the esophagus

The manometry with water-perfused or solid-state catheters is the predominant diagnostic procedure to detect motility disorders of the esophagus. Another method is the manometry using gas-perfused catheters. Although the high-resolution manometry is the method of first choice, the conventional manometry with helium has some advantages: the simple and hygienically unproblematic use and the absence of any artefacts by the perfusion medium compared with water-perfusion, and the considerably lower costs compared with the solid-state catheters. Every method has own normal values because of the specific pressure transmission and the design of the catheter probes. To our knowledge, normal values for gas-perfusion manometry of the esophagus have not yet been published.The esophageal manometry with helium-perfused catheters was performed in 30 healthy volunteers. The main parameters of the esophageal motility and the lower esophageal sphincter were analyzed by liquid and bolus-like swallows and compared with the previous published values in other manometric procedures.The values of the motility in the distal esophagus are consistent; the pressure of the lower esophageal sphincter is generally lower than with other methods. The distal wave amplitude and the propagation velocity are significant higher in the distal esophagus than in the middle. The perfusion medium is well tolerated by the investigated volunteers.

High-resolution anorectal manometry: A comparison of solid-state and water-perfused catheters

BACKGROUND

Anorectal manometry is the most commonly performed investigation for assessment of anorectal dysfunction. Findings from previous studies comparing water-perfused (WP) and solid-state (SS) techniques in the anorectum are conflicting. We compared anal sphincter pressure at rest and during dynamic maneuvers (squeezing and coughing) in healthy volunteers using SS and WP high-resolution anorectal manometry (HR-ARM) employing equivalent catheter configurations, a standardized protocol, and identical data acquisition and analysis software.

METHODS

Sixty healthy volunteers (40F; median age: 40; range: 18-74) underwent WP and SS HR-ARM in randomized order. Anal resting pressure, and squeeze and cough increments were measured. Median pressure and 5th and 95th percentiles were calculated for each maneuver and compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Bland and Altman plots were used to assess agreement between the systems. The impact of gender and parity was also explored.

KEY RESULTS

Anal sphincter pressure measurements during squeeze (P<.001) and cough (P<.001) were significantly higher using SS HR-ARM than WP HR-ARM. No differences were seen at rest between the two types of catheter (nulliparous: P=.304; parous: P=.390; males: P=.167). Normal ranges for SS and WP manometry from this small group of healthy volunteers are presented.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Greater sensitivity to rapid pressure change is one of the advantages associated with SS HR-ARM. This is reflected in the differences observed during dynamic maneuvers performed during this study. Catheter type should be taken into consideration when selecting normal ranges for comparison to disease states.