Esophageal motility disorders-Symptomatic and manometric spectrum in Punjab, northern India

Spectrum of esophageal manometry and 24-h pH impedance findings in non-erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease and response to phenotype-based treatment-A prospective observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is classified into erosive reflux disease (ERD) and non-erosive reflux disease (NERD). NERD includes three phenotypes: true NERD, functional heartburn (FH) and reflux hypersensitivity (RH). The management of these NERD phenotypes differs. We aimed at studying the spectrum of high-resolution manometry (HRM) and 24-hour impedance-pH findings in Indian patients with NERD, classifying the phenotypes and assessing the response to phenotype-based treatment.

METHODS

We prospectively studied the clinical characteristics, endoscopy, HRM, 24-hour impedance-pH findings, symptom association and response to phenotype-specific treatment in patients with NERD.

RESULTS

Of 53 patients with NERD, the following phenotypes were diagnosed namely: 35 (66%) true NERD, 12 (22.7%) RH and six (11.3%) FH. The esophagogastric junction-contractile integral (EGJ-CI) was low in 60.4% and ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) was present in 53% of patients. The respective median values for true NERD, RH and FH groups were as follows: proximal mean nocturnal baseline impedance (P-MNBI) 2250Ω, 2241Ω, 2550Ω, (p = 0.592), distal (D-MNBI) 1431Ω, 2887.5Ω, 2516Ω (p < 0.001), post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index (PSPWI) 11.1%, 16%, 18.7% (p = 0.127). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses showed that D-MNBI and PSPWI discriminated FH and RH from true NERD, respectively, with a cut-off of 2376.5Ω (area under curve [AUC]:0.919, p < 0.001), 22.6% (AUC:0.671, p = 0.184) and 2318Ω (AUC:0.919, p =  < 0.001), 16.2% (AUC:0.671, p = 0.079). The median P-MNBI was lower in patients with GERD-associated cough than other symptoms 1325 (1250, -). Fifty (94.3%) patients showed significant improvement in symptom severity scores (p < 0.001) following phenotype-specific treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In NERD patients, EGJ-CI and IEM were low. D-MNBI and PSPWI could effectively discriminate true NERD from FH and RH, whereas P-MNBI could help diagnose GERD-associated cough. The phenotype-specific treatment provides better symptom relief for patients.

Clinical and high-resolution manometry of 801 patients with esophageal dysmotility, including achalasia, in relation to age

Background and Aim

Spectrum of esophageal motility disorders may differ according to age, but studies on this are scanty, contradictory, and included small number of patients. Accordingly, we retrospectively analyzed data of a large sample of patients to study the spectrum of esophageal motility disorders in relation to age, and to evaluate the clinical profile and high-resolution manometry parameters and achalasia subtypes according to Chicago IV criteria.

Methods

Of 909 patients evaluated by high-resolution water perfusion or solid-state manometry during a 3-year period, data on 801 were finally analyzed.

Results

Achalasia cardia was the commonest motility disorder of esophagus in this large study and type II was the commonest subtype. There was no difference in clinical and manometry parameters among elderly patients as compared to younger patients with achalasia. Type I achalasia patients less often had chest pain and tended to have nocturnal coughing spells more often, and patients with achalasia experiencing chest pain tended to have higher distal contractile integral (DCI) than those not having pain irrespective of age.

Conclusion

The clinical and high-resolution manometry parameters among young and elderly patients with esophageal motility disorders are quite comparable. However, these differed in relation to achalasia subtypes and symptoms. Type I achalasia patients less often had chest pain and those experiencing chest pain tended to have higher DCI values than those not having pain irrespective of age.

Diagnostic Utility of High-resolution Esophageal Manometry and Its Correlation with Symptoms

BACKGROUND

Primary esophageal motility disorders present with a spectrum of symptoms where manometry plays an important role. We designed this study to evaluate the utility of esophageal manometry among various symptoms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a single-center observational study conducted over 5 years in a tertiary referral center. A total of 564 patients who underwent high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) using a 16-channel water perfusion system were included in the study. Their clinical profile and manometric findings, as per the Chicago classification version 4.0, were recorded, and the diagnostic utility of HREM with respect to symptoms was studied.

RESULTS

Motility disorders were identified in 48.8% of patients, the most common being Achalasia cardia (32.4%). Dysphagia (55.5%) was the most common indication of manometry, followed by gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (34.9%), chest pain (6.2%), and symptoms such as belching, globus, and hiccoughs (3.4%). Among those who were re-classified from Chicago classification v3.0 to v4.0, 21.2% had a newer diagnosis. Among the patients with dysphagia, HREM revealed the highest yield of detecting an abnormal esophageal motility test (70.6%); meanwhile, this yield was much lower in those with GERD (21.8%), chest pain (22.8%), and other symptoms (15.7%). The most common finding among those with dysphagia was Achalasia cardia (55.9%), while the study was normal among those with GERD (78.1%), chest pain (77.1%), and other symptoms (84.2%). The sensitivity and specificity of dysphagia for major motility disorders were 65% and 91%, respectively, with a positive predictive value of 90%.

CONCLUSION

HREM has high accuracy and a good diagnostic yield among patients with dysphagia, with the most common finding being Achalasia cardia.

Esophageal manometry findings in patients with refractory symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common gastrointestinal disorder. High-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) and 24-h pH study help to properly evaluate GERD patients. The aim of the present study was to classify patients with refractory GERD symptoms into various groups based on endoscopic and physiological testing. The present study is a retrospective analysis of patients referred for HREM and 24-h pH recording between 2019 and 2021. We included all adult patients (age > 18 years) who were referred for evaluation of refractory GERD symptoms. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy findings, HREM, and 24-h pH findings were noted. Patients were divided into erosive reflux disease (ERD), non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), reflux hypersensitivity (RH), and functional heartburn (FH) based on test results. Demographic details and HREM parameters were compared in the four groups. Statistics used are one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Chi-squared tests. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. A total of 144 patients were included-NERD (56, 38.9%), ERD (42, 29.2%), RH (28, 19.5%), and FH (18, 12.5%). Age (p 0.74), and sex distribution (p 0.47), and symptom profile (p 0.12) were similar. The presence of type 2/3 esophagogastric junction (EGJ) morphology was commoner in ERD and NERD (p <0.001). Moreover, the esophagogastric junction contractile integral (EGJ-CI) and basal inspiratory pressures were significantly lower in these two groups (p<0.05). EGJ-CI was low in 32 cases of ERD (76.2%), 41 cases with NERD (73.2%), 7 cases with RH (25%), and 3 cases with FH (16.7%), respectively (p-value < 0.00001). FH and RH account for 32% of cases with refractory GERD symptoms. Impaired EGJ function was  more common in ERD and NERD patients compared to FH and RH patients.

Different patterns of esophageal motility disorders among patients with dysphagia and normal endoscopy: A 2-center experience

Esophageal motility disorders (EMDs) are the main etiology of nonobstructive dysphagia (NOD), but they are underestimated in Egypt. High-resolution manometry (HRM) with Chicago Classification version 3.0 (CC v3.0) is the current gold standard diagnostic modality to assess EMD in patients with NOD. In this HRM-based study, we aimed to classify EMD among Egyptian patients and explore the relationship between the severity of symptoms and the various groups of EMD. From January 2020 to January 2021, patients with dysphagia were subjected to diagnostic workup, which included symptom questionnaire for Eckardt score, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, barium esophagogram, and HRM. All patients were categorized based on the HRM results using CC version 3.0 after exclusion of those with obstructive esophageal lesions. Of 252 patients with dysphagia, 55 patients with NOD were analyzed according to CC version 3.0. Achalasia was diagnosed in 31 patients (56.4%) (type I: 18 [58.06%]; type II: 9 [29.03%], and type III: 4 [12.9%]), 3 patients (5.5%) with esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction, 2 patients (3.6%) with absent contractility, 4 patients (7.3%) with distal esophageal spasm, 7 patients (12.7%) with ineffective esophageal motility, and 8 patients (14.5%) with normal manometry. Patients with achalasia experienced significantly high regurgitation (96.8% vs 70.8%; P = .016) compared with those without achalasia. Achalasia was the most common EMD in Egyptian patients with NOD. Eckardt score was higher in patients with outflow obstruction and major motor disorder, but it could not differentiate different categories of CC of EMD. HRM is effective in characterization of EMD.

Esophageal Motility Disorders: Are We Missing in Our Busy Endoscopy Practice?

Esophageal motility disorders (EMDs) form a significant part of a busy endoscopist's practice. Endoscopy plays an all-encompassing role in the diagnosis and management of EMDs including achalasia cardia. The focus on in-vogue third-space endoscopic procedures such as per-oral endoscopic myotomy often digresses the important role of endoscopy. Endoscopic evaluation forms the part of standard first-line evaluation of any dysphagia and serves to rule out a secondary cause such as an esophagogastric junction malignancy and eosinophilic esophagitis. Moreover, endoscopic evaluation may itself provide corroborative evidence that may contribute to the diagnosis of the motility disorder. Achalasia cardia may present with a wide spectrum of endoscopic findings from being entirely normal and the well-known and pathognomonic dilated sigmoid-shaped esophagus with food residue, to lesser-known ornate signs. The evidence on the role of endosonography in EMDs is conflicting and largely restricted to evaluation of pseudoachalasia. High-resolution manometry (HRM) remains the gold standard in the diagnosis of EMDs. Endoscopists must also keep abreast of the latest iteration of the Chicago classification version 4.0, which differs significantly from its predecessor in being more stringent in making diagnosis of esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction and disorders of peristalsis since these manometric findings may be seen in normal individuals and may be mimicked by opioid use and gastroesophageal reflux. The latest rendition also includes the use of provocative maneuvers and testing in both supine and sitting posture. Despite being the gold standard, there are certain lacunae in the use and interpretation of the Chicago classification of which the users should be well aware. Emerging technologies such as functional lumen imaging probe and planimetry, and timed barium esophagogram fill the lacuna in diagnosis of these motility disorders, which at times is beyond the resolution of HRM.

Prevalence of Different Types of Primary Esophageal Motility Disorders and Their Associated Factors in Patients Referring to Shariati Hospital during 2018-2019

BACKGROUND: Esophageal motility disorders (EMDs) are common in patients with dysphagia and are effectively diagnosed with high-resolution manometry (HREM). In this study, we aimed to evaluate the prevalence of different types of primary EMDs in patients referred for HREM and to further investigate the factors associated with EMDs. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, all patients referred to the endoscopy section of Shariati Hospital during 2018-2019 (279 patients) were subjected to HREM and were evaluated according to their diagnosis, and the effect of each factor and each symptom on motility disorders was investigated. RESULTS: 84.5% (235) of the participants were diagnosed with at least one esophageal motility disorder; of them, achalasia was the most common form (52.6%). None of the predictive factors showed a statistically significant correlation with EMDs. However, regarding the symptoms, regurgitation and nocturnal cough were significantly more common in patients with EMD (P=0.001 and 0.009, respectively). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the high prevalence of EMDs in patients undergoing manometry. None of the factors studied, such as age, sex, diabetes, hypothyroidism, smoking, and alcohol and opium consumption, had a statistically significant correlation with EMDs.

Diagnostic Yield of High-resolution Esophageal Manometry With Chicago Classification Version 3.0 in Thai Patients

Background/Aims

High-resolution manometry with the Chicago classification scheme has been introduced in clinical practice as a gold standard for esophageal motility test. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic yield of high-resolution manometry in Thai patients.

Methods

All available high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) studies performed during the study period were retrospectively reviewed and interpreted according to the Chicago classification version 3.0. The main esophageal symptoms and coexisting factors were correlated with the HREM findings.

Results

Of the 201 patients, nearly half (49.8%) were documented to have dysphagia. The second most common condition was refractory reflux symptoms (17.4%). More than 70.0% of dysphagia patients showed abnormal esophageal motility, contrary to globus patients who mostly had normal test findings (65.4%). Dysphagia still was the most often correlated condition with major esophageal motility disorders (88.7%), particularly the elderly patients who have coexisting weight loss. Endoscopic and/or surgical procedures were revealed for the highest rate among patients with dysphagia but no one in the globus group needed this intervention. The sensitivity and specificity of dysphagia for major esophageal motility disorders were 70.0% and 67.0%. A much lower sensitivity and higher specificity were found in other non-dysphagia symptoms, especially nausea/vomiting or belching (3.0% or 89.0%). The highest positive likelihood ratio (2.10) to detect major abnormalities was also observed in dysphagia.

Conclusion

Esophageal manometry provided the highest yield in dysphagia; it was not a strongly beneficial test in patients presenting with nondysphagia to identify clinically relevant esophageal motor disorders.

Ineffective esophageal motility assessment in patients with and without pathological esophageal acid reflux

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), defined as minor esophageal motility disorder, is also the most common esophageal motility disorder. The relationship between gastro-esophageal reflux disease is still controversial. Our aim in this study is to evaluate whether there are differences in terms of demographic, endoscopic, or motility findings between IEM patients with pathological esophageal acid reflux and physiological reflux.Patients diagnosed with IEM according to the Chicago classification v3 with high-resolution manometry (HRM) before acid monitoring constituted the study group of our investigation. The patients were divided into 2 groups as patients with pathological esophageal reflux and patients with physiological reflux according to 24-hour acid monitoring. Demographic data, endoscopic findings, and HRM findings were compared between 2 groups.A total of 62 patients who were diagnosed with IEM according to the Chicago classification v3 were included in the study. Patients in the physiological reflux group were 7 years younger on average than the pathological reflux group. Esophagitis rates were significantly higher in the pathological reflux group (P = .033). Lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure, integrated relaxation pressure, and the presence of hernia were found to be similar in the 2 groups (P = 392, P = 182, P = 657, respectively). The rate of severe IEM was also similar between the 2 groups (P = .143).The fact that the physiological reflux patient group is younger may suggest that the IEM develops in the early period and then reflux accompanies the picture with advancing age.

Spectrum and Clinical Outcome of Motility Disorders on High-Resolution Esophageal Manometry: A Study From a Tertiary Center on Patients With Dysphagia in Pakistan

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of high-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM) in the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders in a Pakistani population. It also evaluates the outcomes of management of patients with esophageal dysphagia and no structural abnormality on endoscopy. Methods This is a cross-sectional study. Patients with symptoms of dysphagia with normal endoscopy were subjected to esophageal manometry and to barium swallow as a part of routine workup. Esophageal motility disorders diagnosed by HRM were compared to barium swallow findings. A follow-up of these patients was done after a one-year interval to evaluate improvement in their symptoms. Results A total of 202 patients underwent HRM. There were abnormal findings in 160 patients (79.2%) with achalasia being the most common diagnosis in 35.6% of the total patients. Out of 72 patients diagnosed to have achalasia on HRM, only 46 (32.6%) had similar findings on barium esophagram and this difference is statistically significant, p < 0.001). Among achalasia patients, laparoscopic surgery was performed in 22 (30.5%) patients with 59% patients reporting a good to excellent improvement (>50%) in their symptoms, balloon dilatations were done in 47 (65.27%) patients with a good to excellent improvement in symptoms in 55% patients. Only three patients (5.5%) were given botulinum toxin injections, and two of them had an improvement of >50% in their symptoms. Patients with motility disorders other than achalasia were treated with a combination of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), calcium channel blockers and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Conclusion Achalasia was the most common esophageal motility disorder in our population. HRM can diagnose significantly more patients with achalasia compared to barium swallow. Likewise, HRM was helpful in detecting other esophageal motility disorders and planning their management.

Frequency and factors associated with malnutrition among patients with achalasia and effect of pneumatic dilation

Background

Although achalasia patients are undernourished, studies are scant. We studied: (i) the frequency of malnutrition among these patients and (ii) the effect of pneumatic dilatation (PD) on malnutrition.

Methods

A total of 70 adult achalasia patients and 70 healthy controls were evaluated through dietary recall, anthropometry, and biochemical parameters, and patients were reevaluated 6 months after PD.

Results

Patients had lower intake of calories (median, interquartile range [IQR]: 1835.0 [1682.5–1915.0] vs 2071.5 [1950–2276.2] kcal/day, P < 0.001), protein (40.9 [36.3–42.2] vs 52.9 [45.7–62] g/day, P < 0.001), calcium (310 [192.5–392.4] vs 477.5 [350–560] mg/day, P < 0.001), and iron (6.7 [4.7–8.8] vs 10.1 [7.5–11.50] mg/day, P < 0.001) than controls. Patients had lower body mass index (BMI: 19.6 [16.6–22] vs 22.8 [19.5,29.1], P < 0.001), midarm circumference (MAMC; 20 [17.5–23] vs 24.1 [21.4–28.5], P < 0.001), biceps (BSFT; 3.1 [1.9–3.9] vs 5.5 [3.8–9.2] mm, P < 0.001), triceps’ skin fold thickness (TSFT; 5 [2.4–7] vs 7.8 [5.1–9.4] mm, P < 0.001), serum protein (7.2 ± 0.8 vs 7.6 ± 0.8 g/dL, P = 0.005), and albumin (4.0 [3.5–4.4] vs 4.1 [3.9–4.2] g/dL, P = 0.009). PD increased calories (1803 [950–2400] vs 2050 [1470–2950] kcal/day), protein intake (41.0 [22–70] vs 45.0 [37.5–80.0] gm/day), BMI (19.6 [12.8–30.0] vs 22.2[15.9–30.0] P = 0.001 for all), and MAMC (21 [14.1–32.0] vs 24.2 [15–32.0] cm, P = 0.03). Reduced intake was a determinant of malnutrition.

Conclusions

Malnutrition is common in achalasia patients, and PD improved it.

High-Resolution Manometry Diagnosis of Ineffective Esophageal Motility Is Associated with Higher Reflux Burden

INTRODUCTION

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is the most commonly diagnosed abnormality on high-resolution manometry (HRM). However, the clinical significance of IEM and associated reflux burden remains unclear.

AIM

Our primary aim was to compare reflux patterns between IEM versus normal motility on HRM.

METHODS

HRM and reflux studies in patients with IEM and normal motility were retrospectively reviewed. Esophageal pressure topography parameters, reflux variables, and patient-reported outcome questionnaires were explored.

RESULTS

A total of 239 patients with IEM were explored. Of these, 146 underwent reflux monitoring. Additionally, 100 patients with normal HRM all of whom had undergone reflux monitoring were included. IEM patients were more likely to have an abnormal number of reflux events compared to normal (22.7% vs. 9.0%, p < 0.01). Including only off-proton pump inhibitor (PPI) testing, IEM patients had higher mean total acid exposure time (AET) and total reflux events compared to normal motility (p = 0.02). Within IEM patients, higher AET modestly correlated with increased percentage of impaired swallows. Increased reflux events modestly correlated with higher impaired swallows and decreased lower esophageal sphincter (LES) resting pressure. Reflux burden increased with higher esophagogastric junction (EGJ) subtype, driven mostly by subtype III, although there was no difference in the distribution of EGJ subtypes between the IEM and normal HRM cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HRM diagnosis of IEM may be more prone to acid reflux while off-PPI and non-acid reflux while on-PPI. Reflux burden appears to be worse in IEM patients who have lower resting LES pressure, higher EGJ subtype, or higher percentage of impaired swallows.

High-resolution esophageal manometry in a Mexican population: diagnostic outcome

High-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) has become the method of choice for evaluation of esophageal motility disorders. There is a paucity of data with this technique from Hispanic countries. This study aims to characterize the diagnostic outcome of HREM in a large cohort of consecutive patients in Mexico.This study was conducted in Monterrey, Mexico from March 1, 2013 to March 31, 2015. Our diverse study population included patients from a major academic institution and the community. HREM was done applying the Chicago Classification 3. Diagnostic outcome was grouped as weak peristaltic disorders, gastroesophageal junction disorders, and hypertensive/uncoordinated peristalsis.We studied 670 consecutive patients, 57% were women, mean age was 43.8 years. The majority (465 [69%]) were referred for preoperative evaluation of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), 365 (78%) of whom had a normal study. Overall, 193 (29%) patients had abnormal motility, the most common disorder being weak peristalsis (104 [54%]). In patients with dysphagia, the most frequent finding was achalasia (23/46 [50%]).To our knowledge, this is the first study to characterize the diagnostic outcome of HREM in a large cohort of Hispanic patients in Latin America. At our open access center, 69% of patients were referred for preoperative evaluation of GERD, reflecting the popularity of antireflux surgery. This study confirms the high prevalence of weak peristalsis and highlights the importance of addressing its pathophysiology and management. The finding of achalasia in 50% of our patients with dysphagia is consistent with recent reports regarding the rising incidence of this disorder and underscores the need of prompt motility testing in this population.