Manometric Subtypes of Ineffective Esophageal Motility

Quality Indicator Development for the Approach to Ineffective Esophageal Motility: A Modified Delphi Study

GOALS

Develop quality indicators for ineffective esophageal motility (IEM).

BACKGROUND

IEM is identified in up to 20% of patients undergoing esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) based on the Chicago Classification. The clinical significance of this pattern is not established and management remains challenging.

STUDY

Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methods, we employed a modified-Delphi approach for quality indicator statement development. Quality indicators were proposed based on prior literature. Experts independently and blindly scored proposed quality statements on importance, scientific acceptability, usability, and feasibility in a 3-round iterative process.

RESULTS

All 10 of the invited esophageal experts in the management of esophageal diseases invited to participate rated 12 proposed quality indicator statements. In round 1, 7 quality indicators were rated with mixed agreement, on the majority of categories. Statements were modified based on panel suggestion, modified further following round 2's virtual discussion, and in round 3 voting identified 2 quality indicators with comprehensive agreement, 4 with partial agreement, and 1 without any agreement. The panel agreed on the concept of determining if IEM is clinically relevant to the patient's presentation and managing gastroesophageal reflux disease rather than the IEM pattern; they disagreed in all 4 domains on the use of promotility agents in IEM; and had mixed agreement on the value of a finding of IEM during anti-reflux surgical planning.

CONCLUSION

Using a robust methodology, 2 IEM quality indicators were identified. These quality indicators can track performance when physicians identify this manometric pattern on HRM. This study further highlights the challenges met with IEM and the need for additional research to better understand the clinical importance of this manometric pattern.

The Impact of Ineffective Esophageal Motility on Patients Undergoing Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and characterize outcomes of MSA in patients with IEM.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

MSA improves patients with gastroesophageal reflux and normal motility. However, many patients have IEM, which could impact the outcomes of MSA and discourage use.

METHODS

An international, multi-institutional case control study of IEM patients undergoing MSA matched to normal patients was performed. Primary outcomes were new onset dysphagia and need for postoperative interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 105 IEM patients underwent MSA with matching controls. At 1 year after MSA: GERD-Health Related Quality of Life was similar; DeMeester scores in IEM patients improved to 15.7 and 8.5 in controls ( P = 0.021); and normalization of the DeMeester score for IEM = 61.7% and controls = 73.1% ( P = 0.079).In IEM patients, 10/12 (83%) with preop dysphagia had resolution; 11/66 (17%) had new onset dysphagia and 55/66 (83%) never had dysphagia. Comparatively, in non-IEM patients, 22/24 (92%) had dysphagia resolve; 2/24 (8%) had persistent dysphagia; 7/69 (10%) had new onset dysphagia, and 62/69 (90%) never had dysphagia.Overall, 19 (18%) IEM patients were dilated after MSA, whereas 12 (11%) non-IEM patients underwent dilation ( P = 0.151). Nine (9%) patients in both groups had their device explanted.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IEM undergoing MSA demonstrate improved quality of life and reduction in acid exposure. Key differences in IEM patients include lower rates of objective GERD resolution, lower resolution of existing dysphagia, higher rates of new onset dysphagia and need for dilation. GERD patients with IEM should be counselled about these possibilities.

Assessment of Esophageal Motility in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Scoping Review

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated condition causing esophageal symptoms, particularly dysphagia. Despite the important progress in the treatment of EoE, a significant proportion of patients continue to report symptoms that negatively impact quality of life. Esophageal manometry is used to assess motility and function, but is not routinely used in EoE. We aimed to systematically review and describe current literature evaluating esophageal manometry in EoE. Forty-eight studies meeting the criteria were identified, describing 802 patients. Using standard water swallow protocols, the proportion of abnormalities detected was not dissimilar to other populations, apart from disorders of esophago-gastric outflow, which were found in 5%. Twelve studies described pretreatment and posttreatment manometry, with motility normalization after pharmacological therapy reported in 20%. Early, brief panesophageal pressurization was described in a number of studies and was more prevalent in the few studies utilizing additional provocation testing. Reports in the literature regarding temporal relationships between manometric findings and symptoms are variable. Esophageal manometry may be capable of detecting clinically relevant changes to esophageal function in EoE. Possible mechanisms are altered neuromuscular function because of secretory products of EoE and/or fibroinflammatory processes, manifesting as pressurization because of altered esophageal compliance. Some changes may be reversible with therapy. Drawing strong conclusions from the literature is difficult, with bias toward case reports and retrospective observation. Adaptations to assessment protocols to include provocation testing may provide more robust evaluation and detect clinically relevant, subtle changes in esophageal function, earlier within the patient pathway.

Evaluation of Therapeutic Effect of Buspirone in Improving Dysphagia in Patients with GERD and Ineffective Esophageal Motility: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is the most common esophageal motility disorder associated with low-to-moderate amplitude contractions in the distal esophagus in manometric evaluations. Despite recent new conceptions regarding the pathophysiology of esophageal motility and IEM, there are still no effective therapeutic interventions for the treatment of this disorder. This study aimed to investigate the effect of buspirone in the treatment of concomitant IEM and GERD. Methods and Materials: The present study was a randomized clinical trial conducted at the Imam Khomeini Hospital, Tehran. Patients with a history of gastroesophageal reflux disease and dysphagia underwent upper endoscopy to rule out any mechanical obstruction and were diagnosed with an ineffective esophageal motility disorder based on high-resolution manometry. They were given a package containing the desired medication(s); half of the packets contained 10 mg (for 30 days) of buspirone and 40 mg (for 30 days) of pantoprazole, and the other half contained only 40 mg (for 30 days) of pantoprazole. Dysphagia was scored based on the Mayo score, as well as a table of dysphagia severity. Manometric variables were recorded before and after the treatment. Results: Thirty patients (15 pantoprazole and 15 pantoprazole plus buspirone) were included. Females comprised 63.3% of the population, with a mean age of 46.33 ± 11.15. The MAYO score and resting LES pressure significantly changed after treatment. The MAYO and Swallowing Disorder Questionnaire scores significantly decreased after treatment in both groups of patients. Our results revealed that the post-intervention values of manometric variables differed significantly between the two groups after controlling for the baseline values of the variables. This analysis did not demonstrate the superiority of buspirone. Conclusion: Buspirone seems to have no superiority over PPI. Treatment with concomitant IEM and GERD using proton pump inhibitors improves the patient’s clinical condition and quality of life. However, adding buspirone to the treatment regimen did not appear to make a significant difference in patient treatment.

Effect of electrical stimulation therapy of the lower esophageal sphincter in GERD patients with ineffective esophageal motility

BACKGROUND

Electrical stimulation therapy (EST) of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) is a novel technique in antireflux surgery. Due to the minimal alteration at the LES during surgery, LES-EST is meant to be ideal for patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). The aim of this prospective trial (NCT03476265) is to evaluate health-related quality of life and esophageal acid exposure after LES-EST in patients with GERD and IEM.

METHODS

This is a prospective non-randomized open-label study. Patients with GERD and IEM undergoing LES-EST were included. Follow-up (FUP) at 12 months after surgery included health-related quality of life (HRQL) assessment with standardized questionnaires (GERD-HRQL) and esophageal functional testing.

RESULTS

According to the study protocol, 17 patients fulfilled eligibility criteria. HRQL score for heartburn and regurgitation improved from 21 (interquartile range (IQR) 15-27) to 7.5 (1.25-19), p = 0.001 and from 17 (11-23.5) to 4 (0-12), p = 0.003, respectively. There was neither significant improvement of esophageal acid exposure nor reduction of number of reflux events in pH impedance measurement. Distal contractile integral improved from 64 (11.5-301) to 115 (IQR 10-363) mmHg s cm, p = 0.249. None of the patients showed any sign of dysphagia after LES-EST. One patient needed re-do surgery and re-implantation of the LES-EST due to breaking of the lead after one year.

CONCLUSION

Although patient satisfaction improved significantly after surgery, this study fails to demonstrate normalization or significant improvement of acid exposure in the distal esophagus after LES-EST.

Pressure-impedance analysis: Assist the diagnosis and classification of ineffective esophageal motility disorder

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We elucidated the clinical significance of distal contractile integral-to-esophageal impedance integral (EII) ratio (DCIIR) in ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) adult patients.

METHODS

We recruited 101 patients with IEM (48.38 ± 1.58 years) and 42 matched healthy volunteers (44.28 ± 1.85 years) in this case-control study. All subjects underwent esophageal high-resolution impedance manometry from October 2014 to May 2018. The diagnosis of IEM was based on the Chicago Classification version 3.0. The EII, EII ratio, and DCIIR were analyzed by matlab software.

RESULTS

The EII, EII ratio, and DCIIR calculated at an impedance threshold of 1500 Ω (EII1500, EII ratio1500, and DCIIR1500, respectively) were significantly lower in the IEM group than in healthy controls (P < 0.0001, < 0.0001, and < 0.0001, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that DCIIR1500 < 0.008 mmHg/Ω, EII1500 > 71 000 Ω.s.cm, and EII ratio1500 > 0.43 were all predictive of IEM. Only DCIIR1500 < 0.008 mmHg/Ω remained significant in diagnosing IEM in the multivariate logistic regression analysis (odds ratio = 72.13, P < 0.001). The DCIIR1500 is negatively correlated with Eckardt score and the Reflux Disease Questionnaire (correlation coefficient = -0.2844 and -0.3136; P = 0.0006 and 0.0002, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic analysis further showed that a DCIIR1500 cut-off of 0.002 mmHg/Ω achieved the best differentiation between the IEM-alternans and IEM-persistens subtypes among IEM patients (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The novel pressure-impedance parameter of high-resolution impedance manometry, DCIIR1500, may assist in the diagnosis and classification of IEM and correlated with clinical symptoms.

Role of esophageal manometry in children with refractory gastroesophageal reflux symptoms

BACKGROUND

We investigated the prevalence of psychiatric referral, frequency of repeat upper gastrointestinal (UGI) contrast studies, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in children with ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) before the confirmation of esophageal dysmotility.

METHODS

A total of 19 children (nine boys, 10 girls; mean age, 13.80 ± 5.10 years) with symptoms of refractory gastroesophageal reflux (GER) who underwent high-resolution esophageal impedance manometry (HRIM) were enrolled in this retrospective analysis. Refractory GER symptoms were defined as persistent symptoms even under acid-suppression therapy for 8 weeks in this study. Clinical data including age, gender, time from symptom onset to diagnosis, and number of UGI contrast studies and EGD before diagnosis were obtained. HRM parameters and the prevalence of psychiatric referral were also analyzed.

RESULTS

There are 14 children (73.68%) diagnosed with IEM by HRIM, and another 5 children (26.32%) diagnosed as GER disease (GERD) by EGD. A significant proportion of IEM children were misdiagnosed with psychological problems compared with the GERD children (78.57% vs 20.00%, P = 0.04). Three IEM children (21.43%) received antipsychotic and antidepressant agents before diagnosis of IEM, and all of them discontinued these medications after diagnosis. IEM children underwent a greater number of UGI contrast studies (1.07 ± 0.92 vs 0.20 ± 0.45; P = 0.02) and EGD (2.36 ± 2.50 vs 0.60 ± 0.55; P = 0.03) before HRM than GERD children.

CONCLUSIONS

Esophageal manometry for the diagnosis of IEM should be considered in children with GER symptoms refractory to acid-suppression therapy for 8 weeks to avoid repeat UGI contrast studies, EGD, and psychological therapy.

In ineffective esophageal motility, failed swallows are more functionally relevant than weak swallows

BACKGROUND

Esophageal pressure topography (EPT) diagnosis of ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) can be non-specific with unclear clinical significance.

AIMS

To determine whether peristaltic vigor or lower esophageal sphincter (LES) integrity is associated with poor clearance and acid reflux in IEM.

METHODS

Bolus clearance on high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) and available reflux studies in patients with IEM were retrospectively reviewed. Bolus clearance was assessed using both line tracing and colored contour methods on HRIM. EPT parameters, bolus clearance, and acid reflux variables were explored.

KEY RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients with IEM were included. Bolus clearance occurred in 71% of all swallows, and 55.7% of patients had complete bolus transit (CBT, bolus clearance in ≥80% of swallows). Bolus clearance was impaired in swallows with distal contractile integral (DCI) <100 mmHg•cm•s compared to DCI 100-450 (0.43 vs 0.79, P < .0001). A cutoff at DCI 100 mmHg•cm•s was associated with clearance with an accuracy of 76% compared to 49% at DCI 450 (P = .0001 for both). A median DCI <100 was associated with a higher Eckardt score (9 vs 3, P = .03), and on reflux testing available in 47 patients, with abnormal acid exposure time (P = .002). Peristaltic reserve (PR) defined as (DCI of multiple rapid swallow/median DCI of wet swallows), integrated relaxation pressure, and resting lower esophageal sphincter pressure were not associated with clearance or acid exposure.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Failed peristalsis, as defined by DCI <100 mmHg•cm•s, is associated with impaired bolus clearance and more severe dysphagia in IEM, and likely abnormal acid exposure.

Severity of ineffective esophageal motility is associated with utilization of skeletal muscle relaxant medications

BACKGROUND

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is the most common finding on high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM). The underlying mechanisms for IEM remain to be fully elucidated. The aim of this study was to determine if utilization of skeletal muscle relaxants is associated with IEM, and with more severe subtypes of the disorder.

METHODS

Patients with diagnosis of IEM were gender and age matched to patients with normal HREM. Demographic information, symptoms, endoscopic findings, medication usage and medical comorbidities were recorded. Patients with a diagnosis of IEM were divided into subgroups based on mean distal contractile integral (DCI) and percentage of ineffective swallows, and assessed for clinically significant differences among patients with varying severity of underlying IEM.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 118 patients were included in each group. There were no significant clinical differences between the group of patients with IEM and the group of patients with normal manometry. Within the group of IEM patients, those with mean DCI < 250 mm Hg/s/cm were more likely to be prescribed skeletal muscle relaxants (27.8% vs 11.0%, P = .044), and those using skeletal muscle relaxants had a larger mean percentage of ineffective swallows (81.1% vs 71.5%, P = .029). There were no significant differences across mean DCI subgroups in usage of any other medication, or in any of the demographic variables or disease comorbidities examined in this study.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Use of skeletal muscle relaxants is associated with more severe IEM, which may suggest a causal association between this class of medications and weaker esophageal peristalsis.