Oesophageal motor and sensitivity abnormalities in non-obstructive dysphagia

Comparison of motor diagnoses by Chicago Classification versions 2.0 and 3.0 on esophageal high-resolution manometry

BACKGROUND

The Chicago Classification (CC) uses high-resolution manometry (HRM) software tools to designate esophageal motor diagnoses. We evaluated changes in diagnostic designations between two CC versions, and determined motor patterns not identified by either version.

METHODS

In this observational cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing esophageal HRM over a 6-year period, proportions meeting CC 2.0 and 3.0 criteria were segregated into esophageal outflow obstruction, hypermotility, and hypomotility disorders. Contraction wave abnormalities (CWA), and 'normal' cohorts were recorded. Symptom burden was characterized using dominant symptom intensity and global symptom severity. Motor diagnoses, presenting symptoms, and symptom burden were compared between CC 2.0 and 3.0, and in cohorts not meeting CC diagnoses.

KEY RESULTS

Of 2569 eligible studies, 49.9% met CC 2.0 criteria, but only 40.3% met CC 3.0 criteria (P<.0001). Between CC 2.0 and 3.0, 82.8% of diagnoses were concordant. Discordance resulted from decreasing proportions of hypermotility (4.4%) and hypomotility (9.0%) disorders, and increase in 'normal' designations (13.0%); esophageal outflow obstruction showed the least variation between CC versions. Symptom burden was higher with CC 3.0 diagnoses (P≤.005) but not with CC 2.0 diagnoses (P≥.1). Within 'normal' cohorts for both CC versions, CWA were associated with higher likelihood of esophageal symptoms, especially dysphagia, regurgitation, and heartburn, compared to truly normal studies (P≤.02 for each comparison).

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Despite lower sensitivity, CC 3.0 identifies esophageal motor disorders with higher symptom burden compared to CC 2.0. CWA, which are associated with both transit and perceptive symptoms, are not well identified by either version.

Impact of symptom burden and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) on esophageal motor diagnoses

BACKGROUND

High-resolution manometry (HRM) categorizes esophageal motor processes into specific Chicago Classification (CC) diagnoses, but the clinical impact of these motor diagnoses on symptom burden remain unclear.

METHODS

Two hundred and eleven subjects (56.8±1.0 years, 66.8% F) completed symptom questionnaires (GERDQ, Mayo dysphagia questionnaire [MDQ], visceral sensitivity index, short-form 36, dominant symptom index, and global symptom severity [GSS] on a 100-mm visual analog scale) prior to HRM. Subjects were stratified according to CC v3.0 and by dominant presenting symptom; contraction wave abnormalities (CWA) were evaluated within "normal" CC. Symptom burden, impact of diagnoses, and HRQOL were compared within and between cohorts.

KEY RESULTS

Major motor disorders had highest global symptom burden (P=.02), "normal" had lowest (P<.01). Dysphagia (MDQ) was highest with esophageal outflow obstruction (P=.02), but reflux symptoms (GERDQ) were similar in CC cohorts (P=ns). Absent contractility aligned best with minor motor disorders. Consequently, pathophysiologic categorization into outflow obstruction, hypermotility, and hypomotility resulted in a gradient of decreasing dysphagia and increasing reflux burden (P<.05 across groups); GSS (P=.05) was highest with hypomotility and lowest with "normal" (P=.002). Within the "normal" cohort, 33.3% had CWA; this subgroup had symptom burden similar to hypermotility. Upon stratification by symptoms, symptom burden (GSS, MDQ, HRQOL) was most profound with dysphagia.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Chicago Classification v3.0 diagnoses identify subjects with highest symptom burden, but pathophysiologic categorization may allow better stratification by symptom type and burden. Contraction wave abnormalities are clinically relevant and different from true normal motor function. Transit symptoms have highest yield for a motor diagnosis.

High-resolution Impedance Manometry Criteria in the Sitting Position Indicative of Incomplete Bolus Clearance

BACKGROUND/AIMS

We used high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) to determine the length of breaks on the isobaric contour which would predict incomplete bolus clearance in patients in the sitting position.

METHODS

In total, 651 swallows in 71 patients with esophageal symptoms were studied using a solid-state HRIM system in the sitting position. Each swallow was classified as complete or incomplete bolus clearance by impedance criteria and peristaltic integrity was evaluated using 20- and 30-mmHg pressure topography isobaric contours. Correlations between the lengths of the breaks for 20- and 30-mmHg were analyzed.

RESULTS

Complete bolus clearance was observed in 83.3% (542/651) of swallows. Breaks of 3 and 7 cm or less were associated with a bolus clearance of 96.8% on the 20-mmHg and 94.7% on the 30-mmHg isobaric contour, respectively (P < 0.001). The areas under the ROC curves for the 20 and 30 mmHg isobaric contours were 0.900 and 0.950, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for complete bolus clearance were 75.6% and 89.3% for breaks 3 cm or less on the 20-mmHg isobaric contour and 87.9% and 78.7% for breaks 7 cm or less on the 30-mmHg contour (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Breaks of < 3 cm in the 20-mmHg isobaric contour or < 7 cm in the 30-mmHg isobaric contour were associated with com-plete bolus clearance. The threshold for breaks in the sitting position was greater than previous reports using the supine posi-tion and longer breaks predicted incomplete bolus clearance.(J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2014;20:491-496).

Combined impedance-manometry for the evaluation of esophageal disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Combined impedance-manometry was introduced just over 20 years ago for the assessment of esophageal motor function. Since then, technical developments have led to the introduction of high-resolution impedance-manometry (HRIM). However, analysis of the impedance and manometry recordings has remained separate and relatively unchanged since the introduction of HRIM, and it is unclear whether the addition of impedance has had a significant impact on the management of esophageal motor disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

The major technical advance over the past 12 months or so has been the development of automated impedance-manometry (AIM) analysis, in which the impedance and manometric data are analyzed together to assess the interactions between pressure and flow. This analysis has revealed subtle abnormalities in esophageal function in patients with nonobstructive dysphagia who have normal manometry and conventional impedance analyses. AIM analysis has also revealed preoperative characteristics in patients that may predict the occurrence of postfundoplication dysphagia.

SUMMARY

Through ongoing technical development, impedance-manometry is becoming increasingly useful clinically to assess esophageal motility disorders as well as to provide further insights into esophageal physiology.

Automated impedance manometry analysis as a method to assess esophageal function

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic evaluation of non-achalasia esophageal dysphagia remains challenging because of a lack of a clear relationship between symptoms, esophageal contraction patterns, and esophageal bolus flow. This study evaluates a novel approach to pressure-impedance analysis called automated impedance manometry (AIM) analysis in relation to bolus characteristics, Chicago classification metrics, bolus perception, and dysphagia.

METHODS

AIM analysis was performed on esophageal high resolution manometry-impedance recordings from 12 healthy controls and 15 patients with dysphagia. In each subject, 10 liquid, 10 semisolid, and 10 solid swallows were analyzed using AIMplot software.

KEY RESULTS

This study demonstrated that (i) esophageal pressure-flow parameters differ with bolus type (liquid, semisolid, and solids), (ii) impedance at peak pressure parameter can discriminate normal from dysphagic subjects with high accuracy on a cut-off threshold at 2400 Ohms (kappa 0.77, sensitivity 0.83, and specificity 0.93), and (iii) nadir impedance and impedance at peak pressure highly correlate with perception of esophageal bolus flow (r = -0.65, p = 0.02; r = -0.70, p = 0.01 resp).

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

This study presents novel esophageal pressure-flow variables in control subjects and in a cohort of patients with dysphagia. These variables are altered in relation to bolus consistency and can discriminate between subjects with and without symptoms of dysphagia. For the first time, we present high resolution esophageal pressure-flow variables that accurately link in with patient perception of esophageal bolus hold up.

Esophageal contractions, bolus transit and perception of transit after swallows of liquid and solid boluses in normal subjects

CONTEXT: Esophageal dysphagia is the sensation that the ingested material has a slow transit or blockage in its normal passage to the stomach. It is not always associated with motility or transit alterations. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate in normal volunteers the possibility of perception of bolus transit through the esophagus after swallows of liquid and solid boluses, the differences in esophageal contraction and transit with these boluses, and the association of transit perception with alteration of esophageal contraction and/or transit. METHODS: The investigation included 11 asymptomatic volunteers, 4 men and 7 women aged 19-58 years. The subjects were evaluated in the sitting position. They performed swallows of the same volume of liquid (isotonic drink) and solid (macaroni) boluses in a random order and in duplicate. After each swallow they were asked about the sensation of bolus passage through the esophagus. Contractions and transit were evaluated simultaneously by solid state manometry and impedance. RESULTS: Perception of bolus transit occurred only with the solid bolus. The amplitude and area under the curve of contractions were higher with swallows of the solid bolus than with swallows of the liquid bolus. The difference was more evident in swallows with no perception of transit (n = 12) than in swallows with perception (n = 10). The total bolus transit time was longer for the solid bolus than for the liquid bolus only with swallows followed by no perception of transit. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the perception of esophageal transit may be the consequence of inadequate adaptation of esophageal transit and contraction to the characteristics of the swallowed bolus.

Normative values and inter-observer agreement for liquid and solid bolus swallows in upright and supine positions as assessed by esophageal high-resolution manometry

BACKGROUND

High-resolution manometry (HRM) with spatiotemporal representation of pressure data is a recent advance in esophageal measurement. At present, normal values are available for 5mL water swallows in the supine position. This study provides reference values for liquid and solid bolus swallows in the upright seated and supine positions.

METHODS

A total of 23 asymptomatic volunteers (11M:12F, age 20-56) underwent HRM (Manoscan 360; Sierra Scientific Instruments) with 5mL water and 1cm3 bread swallows in the upright and supine positions. Normal values for primary parameters associated with effective bolus transport [proximal transition zone length (PTZ, assesses peristaltic coordination], contraction front velocity (CFV), distal contractile index (DCI) and integrated relaxation pressure (IRP)] are presented. For each parameter, median values along with the 5-95th percentile range are reported. Inter-observer agreement between independent observers is reported using the intra-class correlation coefficient.

KEY RESULTS

A higher proportion of swallows were peristaltic for liquids than solids in both the upright and supine positions (both P<0.05). As workload increases with solid bolus and on moving from the upright to the supine position the esophageal contractile response resulted in a shorter PTZ, a slower CFV, and a more vigorous DCI. Also IRP increased during solid bolus transit (all P<0.01). There was significant agreement between independent observers for HRM parameters.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Normative values for esophageal function for solids as well as liquids and in the 'physiologic', upright position will optimize the utility of HRM studies. The high level of inter-observer agreement indicates that these can be applied as reference values in clinical practice.

Failure to respond to physiologic challenge characterizes esophageal motility in erosive gastro-esophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Non-specific esophageal dysmotility with impaired clearance is often present in patients with gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD), especially those with erosive disease; however the physio-mechanic basis of esophageal dysfunction is not well defined.

METHODS

Retrospective assessment of patients with erosive reflux disease (ERD; n=20) and endoscopy negative reflux disease (ENRD; n=20) with pathologic acid exposure on pH studies (>4.2% time/24 h) and also healthy controls (n=20) studied by high resolution manometry. Esophageal motility in response to liquid and solid bolus swallows and multiple water swallows (MWS) was analyzed. Peristaltic dysfunction was defined as failed peristalsis, spasm, weak or poorly coordinated esophageal contraction (>3cm break in 30 mmHg isocontour).

KEY RESULTS

Peristaltic dysfunction was present in 33% of water swallows in controls, 56% ENRD and 76% ERD respectively (P<0.023 vs controls, P=0.185 vs ENRD). The proportion of effective peristaltic contractions improved with solid compared to liquid bolus in controls (18%vs 33%, P=0.082) and ENRD (22%vs 54%, P=0.046) but not ERD (62%vs 76%, P=0.438). Similarly, MWS was followed by effective peristalsis in 83% of controls and 70% ENRD but only 30% ERD patients (P<0.017 vs controls and P<0.031 vs ENRD). The association between acid exposure and dysmotility was closer for solid than liquid swallows (r=0.52 vs 0.27).

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Peristaltic dysfunction is common in GERD. ERD patients are characterized by a failure to respond to the physiologic challenge of solid bolus and MWS that is likely also to impair clearance following reflux events and increase exposure to gastric refluxate.

Clinical correlates of dysphagia to oesophageal dysmotility: studies using combined manometry and impedance

This study aimed to elucidate the mechanism of dysphagia by determining the simultaneous relationships between subjective perception of swallow with oesophageal motility and bolus transport in patients with non-obstructive dysphagia (NOD). Combined oesophageal manometry and impedance was performed in 18 consecutive NOD patients and 14 healthy controls. Swallow was abnormal if the amplitude of distal oesophageal contractions was less than 30 mmHg or simultaneous contractions occurred. Bolus transit was abnormal if bolus exit was not found at one or more of the measuring sites. Perception of each swallow was assessed using a standardized scoring system and was enhanced if score was >1. The prevalence of complete bolus transit was lower in NOD patients compared with healthy controls (P = 0.001). Abnormal liquid bolus transit was found in 40% of patients with normal motility and 38% of patients with abnormal motility, whereas abnormal viscous bolus transit was observed in 38% of patients with normal motility and 70% of patients with abnormal motility. Agreement between enhanced perception and impedance was poor during liquid (kappa = 0.12, 95% CI: -0.003 to 0.233) and viscous swallowing (kappa = 0.12, 95% CI: -0.004 to 0.244). Agreement between enhanced perception and manometry was even poorer during liquid (kappa = -0.16, 95% CI: -0.302 to 0.022) and viscous swallowing (kappa = -0.12, 95% CI: -0.25 to 0.002). NOD patients show poor correlation between dysphagia and oesophageal motility parameters. The results suggest that, in patients with NOD, oesophageal motor dysfunction may play a limited role, if any, in the generation of dysphagia.

Effects of manometrically discovered nonspecific motility disorders of the esophagus on the outcomes of antireflux surgery

Nonspecific motility disorders (NMDs) of the esophagus are common manometric findings in patients evaluated for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, it is unclear how these disorders affect the outcomes of antireflux surgery. The purpose of this study was to assess symptomatic outcomes of patients with and without NMDs undergoing surgical treatment for GERD. A prospectively gathered database of all patients undergoing antireflux surgery was retrospectively reviewed for preoperative symptoms, symptom severity using the GERD-HRQL (best score 0, worst score 50), esophageal manometry measurements, presence of NMD, type of operation, any transient or permanent postoperative dysphagia, severity of postoperative dysphagia (best score 0, worst score 5), and postoperative symptom severity. A total of 239 patients were studied; 24% had a NMD identified by preoperative esophageal manometry, and 17% of this +NMD group had preoperative dysphagia or atypical chest/epigastric pain compared to 28% of those without a NMD (-NMD group) (P=NS). Preoperative symptom scores were +NMD 33 vs. -NMD 27 (P=0.01). Postoperative symptom scores were +NMD 5 vs. -NMD 3 (P=NS). There were no differences in preoperative or postoperative dysphagia scores. Transient postoperative dysphagia was 15.8% in the +NMD group vs. 16.4% in the -NMD group (P=NS). Postoperative dilation was 0% in the +NMD group vs. 2% in the -NMD group (P=NS). Manometrically discovered NMDs do not appear to affect preoperative symptoms or symptomatic outcomes of patients surgically treated for GERD. These findings my reflect the severity of GERD and may improve with antireflux surgery.