Revised criterion for diagnosis of ineffective esophageal motility is associated with more frequent dysphagia and greater bolus transit abnormalities

Latin American consensus on diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) can be challenging given varying symptom presentations, and complex multifactorial pathophysiology. The gold standard for GERD diagnosis is esophageal acid exposure time (AET) measured by pH-metry. A variety of additional diagnostic tools are available. The goal of this consensus was to assess the individual merits of GERD diagnostic tools based on current evidence, and provide consensus recommendations following discussion and voting by experts.

METHODS

This consensus was developed by 15 experts from nine countries, based on a systematic search of the literature, using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) methodology to assess the quality and strength of the evidence, and provide recommendations regarding the diagnostic utility of different GERD diagnosis tools, using AET as the reference standard.

KEY RESULTS

A proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trial is appropriate for patients with heartburn and no alarm symptoms, but nor for patients with regurgitation, chest pain, or extraesophageal presentations. Severe erosive esophagitis and abnormal reflux monitoring off PPI are clearly indicative of GERD. Esophagram, esophageal biopsies, laryngoscopy, and pharyngeal pH monitoring are not recommended to diagnose GERD. Patients with PPI-refractory symptoms and normal endoscopy require reflux monitoring by pH or pH-impedance to confirm or exclude GERD, and identify treatment failure mechanisms. GERD confounders need to be considered in some patients, pH-impedance can identify supragrastric belching, impedance-manometry can diagnose rumination.

CONCLUSIONS

Erosive esophagitis on endoscopy and abnormal pH or pH-impedance monitoring are the most appropriate methods to establish a diagnosis of GERD. Other tools may add useful complementary information.

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.

Clinical efficacy and mechanism of transcutaneous neuromodulation on ineffective esophageal motility in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Esophageal motility disorder is one of the pathogenesis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The clinical and functional relationship between the ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) and GERD have been found. PPI is a widely used drug of this diaease, but some patients have poor efficacy. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and possible mechanism of Transcutaneous Neuromodulation in these patients.

METHODS

Fifty-six patients with GERD with IEM were enrolled and randomly divided into two groups, one group was TN ST-36 group, the other group was sham TN group. The GERD questionnaire (GerdQ), quality of life score, MOS item short from health survey (SF-36), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were used to assess the severity of symptoms. High-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM) test was performed to assess low esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure and distal contractile integral (DCI). The heart rate variability (HRV) test was performed to assess autonomic nervous function.

KEY RESULTS

Compared with sham TN, chronic TN treatment decreased the GERD-Q score (p < 0.001). The anxiety score (p = 0.058) and depression score (p = 0.156) were decreased, but there were no statistical differences. Chronic TN treatment also significantly improved the quality of life of patients, mainly in physical function, physical pain, overall health, vitality, social function, emotional function, and mental health. Acute TN treatment increased the DCI (p < 0.001) and LES pressure (p < 0.001) significantly and decreased the combined percentage of failed and weak peristalsis (p < 0.001). Concurrently, acute TN enhanced vagal activity (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

IEM is an important link in the pathogenesis of GERD. Chronic TN treatment can significantly improve the clinical symptoms of patients. Acute TN treatment can significantly increase LES pressure and DCI and reduce the frequency of esophageal lost peristalsis and weak peristalsis. The improvement of esophageal motility in GERD patients with IEM by TN treatment may be related to the regulation of autonomic nervous function.

The Supportive Role of Provocative Maneuvers and Impedance Clearance in Detecting Ineffective Esophageal Motility

BACKGROUND

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is one of the most common esophageal motility disorders. However, the definition of IEM has evolved. Chicago classification version 4.0 (CCv4.0) made IEM parameters more stringent with greater than 70% of ineffective wet swallows (WS) necessary to diagnose conclusive IEM. Of the ineffective swallows, 50-70% are deemed "inconclusive cases". This study sought to determine whether provocative maneuvers, including multiple rapid swallows (MRS) and apple viscous swallows (AVS), and impedance clearance can provide supportive information for inconclusive IEM disorders based on CCv4.0.

METHODS

Esophageal motility data on 100 patients were analyzed. All patients completed WS and at least one additional swallow test (MRS and/or AVS). Patients were classified as having conclusive IEM, inconclusive IEM, or normal motility. IEM features detected on MRS/AVS and incomplete bolus clearance were recorded. Percentage of agreement between IEM features and incomplete bolus clearance was calculated for each motility group.

RESULTS

Ten patients had conclusive IEM, nine had inconclusive IEM, and 32 had normal motility. There was 70% agreement between IEM features and incomplete bolus clearance with conclusive IEM, 33% agreement with inconclusive IEM, and 9% agreement with normal motility. There was significantly more agreement in the conclusive and inconclusive IEM groups than in the normal motility group (P = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

Combinational follow-up testing with provocative maneuvers and impedance clearance may assist with risk stratification of IEM patients and assist in further management of inconclusive IEM. MRS and AVS can detect unique IEM features that may help with preoperative management of inconclusive IEM.

Abnormal response after multiple rapid swallow provocation is not predictive of post-operative dysphagia following a tailored fundoplication approach

INTRODUCTION

The aim was to evaluate the clinical significance of multiple rapid swallows (MRS) during high-resolution manometry (HRM) prior to fundoplication. Despite pre-operative HRM, up to 38% of patients report post-fundoplication dysphagia. Suggestion that MRS improves prediction of dysphagia after fundoplication has not been investigated when using a tailored approach. We hypothesize response to MRS is predictive of dysphagia after tailored fundoplication.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed on patients undergoing HRM with MRS provocation 5/2019-7/2021 at a single institution. Patients who underwent subsequent index laparoscopic fundoplication, without peptic stricture or achalasia, were included. After performing standard 10-swallow HRM, MRS provocation was performed. Patient-reported dysphagia frequency scores were collected at initial consultation and post-operative follow-up. At least weekly symptoms were considered clinically significant. Normal MRS response was defined as adequate deglutitive inhibition and MRS contractile response. Fundoplications were tailored based on standard HRM values.

RESULTS

HRM was performed in 1201 patients, 220 met inclusion criteria. Clinically significant pre-operative dysphagia was reported by 85 (38.6%). Patients undergoing partial fundoplication (n = 123, 55.9%) had lower mean distal contractile integer, distal esophageal contraction amplitude, and percent peristalsis (p < 0.005). Post-operatively, 120 (54.5%) were without dysphagia, 59 (26.8%) had improved dysphagia, 26 (11.8%) had unchanged dysphagia, and 15 (6.8%) reported new dysphagia. There was no statistical difference in early or late dysphagia outcome between tailored fundoplication groups (p = 0.69). On univariate and multivariate analysis, neither MRS response, nor standard HRM metrics were significantly associated with post-operative dysphagia. Younger age (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.986, p = 0.042) and the presence of pre-operative dysphagia (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.17-5.65, p = 0.015) were significant predictors of post-operative dysphagia.

CONCLUSION

The risk of clinically significant dysphagia post-fundoplication is low when using a tailored approach based on standard HRM metrics. Additional data provided by MRS does not add to surgical decision-making using the investigated approach.

Advancing high-resolution manometry: evaluating the use of multiple rapid swallows versus apple viscous swallows in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

High-Resolution Manometry (HRM) with provocative maneuvers, such as Multiple Rapid Swallows (MRS) and Apple Viscous Swallows (AVS), is commonly utilized to diagnose esophageal disorders. Increasing standardization in HRM protocol can help save time and reduce patient discomfort. This study assesses AVS and MRS to determine their respective benefits and limitations.

METHODS

Retrospective reviews were performed on 100 patients to analyze their AVS and/or MRS results. Parameters included abnormal motility patterns, tolerance, and DCI. Diagnostic benefits from MRS and AVS were assessed. Based on the previous studies, additional benefit from MRS was defined as detection of good peristaltic reserve, weak peristaltic reserve, or an abnormal motility/pressurization pattern. Additional benefit from AVS was defined as detection of IEM features or abnormal motility/pressurization pattern.

RESULTS

When patients completed both MRS and AVS (n = 70), MRS provided additional benefit in assessing 36% of patients, while AVS provided additional benefit in 19% of patients (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, MRS detected significantly more abnormal motility/pressurization patterns than AVS (27% MRS; 8% AVS; p = 0.0005). Two unique strengths of AVS were higher tolerance for test completion (p = 0.009) and better detection of severe hypokinetic disorders in 4% of patients, which were missed by MRS.

CONCLUSIONS

MRS may uniquely identify abnormal motility/pressurization patterns, such as paradoxical LES response, distal pressurization, hypercontractile, and spasm patterns. These findings argue for a tailored approach when selecting provocative testing. MRS may be more useful for patients with abnormal pathophysiology, while AVS may help to supplement MRS in detecting severe hypokinetic disorders in preoperative management.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease: key messages for clinicians

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic common disorder for which patients often refer to specialists. In the last decades, numerous studies helped to clarify the pathophysiology and the natural history of this disease. Currently, in the clinical setting, GERD is defined by the presence of symptoms that, when endoscopic investigation is required, permit to distinguish between cases with or without associated esophageal mucosal injuries. These conditions are called erosive reflux disease and non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), respectively. The latter is the most common manifestation of GERD. Symptoms are defined typical, as heartburn and regurgitation, and atypical (also called extra-esophageal), as coughing and/or wheezing, hoarseness, sore throat, otitis media, and dental manifestations. In this context, it is crucial for clinicians to investigate the presence of features of suspected malignancy, as unexplained weight loss, anemia, dysphagia, persistent vomiting, familiar history of cancer, long history of GERD, and beginning of GERD symptoms after the age of 50 years. The presence of these risk factors should induce to perform an endoscopic examination. Particular attention should be given to functional conditions that can mimic GERD, such as functional heartburn and hypersensitive esophagus as well as, more rarely, eosinophilic esophagitis. The former ones have different pathophysiology and this explains the frequent non-response to proton pump inhibitor drugs. This narrative review provides to clinicians a useful and practical overview of the state-of-the-art on advancements in the knowledge of GERD.

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.

Ineffective Esophageal Motility Is Associated with Impaired Bolus Clearance but Does Not Correlate with Severity of Dysphagia

BACKGROUND

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is defined as a distal contractile integral < 450 mmHg/s/cm in at least 50% of ten liquid swallows on high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM). Whether this latest definition correlates with degree of symptoms has not been studied.

METHODS

Patients presenting for HREM prospectively rated their symptoms using the Eckardt score. Topography plots were retrospectively reviewed and classified according to the latest Chicago Classification. Patients with non-obstructive dysphagia and an Eckardt score of at least 1 were included. Patients with major motility disorders were excluded. Scores between patients with IEM (group A) and patients with normal classification (group B) were compared using two-tailed t-tests. Spearman's correlation coefficient was calculated to determine correlation between symptoms and percent bolus clearance.

RESULTS

A total of 241 patients were screened; 33 patients met criteria for group A and 44 patients for group B. There was no difference between the two groups in mean symptom severity for dysphagia (1.63 vs. 1.61, P = 0.89), chest pain (0.67 vs. 0.75, P = 0.64), regurgitation (1.06 vs. 0.85, P = 0.32), or weight loss (0.85 vs. 0.49, P = 0.11). The percent bolus clearance was significantly lower in group A (46.5% vs. 76.7%, P > 0.01). There was a moderate inverse correlation between dysphagia and percent bolus clearance (R = - 0.37) in group A, but none in group B (R = 0.09).

CONCLUSION

The classification of IEM did not discriminate from normal studies for symptom severity in our cohort. However, patients with IEM did have an inverse correlation between dysphagia score and bolus clearance, but those without IEM did not. Adding impedance information to the motor pattern classification should be considered in the symptom assessment in minor motility disorders.

Acid exposure in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease is associated with esophageal dysmotility

OBJECTIVE

To explore the correlation between reflux disease and abnormal esophageal motility in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

Participants (patients with GERD and controls) who underwent 24-h impedance-pH monitoring (MII-pH monitoring) and high-resolution manometry between January 2012 and February 2017 were retrospectively studied. The patients were divided into two groups (acid reflux and nonacid reflux) based on their MII-pH monitoring data. Reflux episodes, endoscopic findings, and esophageal dynamic parameters were assessed and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 142 patients were included (acid reflux [n = 58], nonacid reflux [n = 60], control group [n = 24]). There were more patients with esophagitis and more severe esophageal mucosal injury in the acid reflux group than in the nonacid reflux group. The acid reflux group had reduced lower esophageal sphincter (LES) basal pressure, shorter LES length, lower esophageal pressure and distal contractile integral index than the nonacid reflux group. Patients in the acid reflux group had more large breaks and a higher incidence of type II and III esophagogastric junction morphology than those in the nonacid reflux group. Acid exposure time, the incidence of long-term acid reflux, recumbent acid reflux, and the incidence of acid and nonacid reflux had a significant negative correlation with esophageal body motility or LES function.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that an increase in esophageal acid exposure is correlated with an increase in esophageal dysmotility in patients with GERD.

Chicago Classification normative metrics in a healthy Indian cohort for a 16-channel water-perfused high-resolution esophageal manometry system

BACKGROUND

High-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) interpretation by the Chicago Classification (CC) derives its normal values from western volunteers using solid-state catheters. There is no normative data for the 16-channel water-perfused HREM system commonly used in India.

AIMS

To determine normal values for a 16-channel water-perfused HREM catheter in supine posture using healthy volunteers and substitute these normal values (if different from CC values) in the CC v3.0 algorithm.

METHODS

After ethics approval and informed consent, 53 volunteers (31 men) with no gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms or medications affecting GI motility underwent HREM by standard protocol. Age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and manometry parameters analyzed using Trace 1.3.3 software were collected. The median, range, and 5, 10, 75, and 95 percentiles (where applicable) were obtained for all HREM metrics. Normal value percentiles were defined as 95th (integrated relaxation pressure [IRP]), 10th-100th (distal contractile integral [DCI]), and minimum (distal latency [DL]).

RESULTS

The mean age was 30 years and the BMI was 24.2 kg m^-2 . Compared to CC, our normal metrics were lower for IRP (13 mm Hg) and DCI (350-4500 mm Hg s cm). DCI >4500 and <70 (<5th percentile) were defined as hypercontractile and failed contraction, respectively. Abnormal DL (<4.5 s) and peristaltic break size (>5 cm) were similar to CC metrics. Applying these metrics, CC diagnoses changed in 15% (8/53) with downgrading of ineffective motility to fragmented peristalsis or normal, due to lower DCI cutoff used.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first report of normative data for the 16-channel water-perfused system in supine posture. It revealed lower IRP and DCI, necessitating modification of CC cutoffs for this system.

Oesophageal dysphagia: a stepwise approach to diagnosis and management

Dysphagia is a common symptom in the general population. Incidence varies depending on the specific definition used. A good medical history is vital for distinguishing true oesophageal dysphagia from oropharyngeal dysphagia or other causes. Oesophageal dysphagia is a so-called red flag alarm symptom requiring oesophagogastroduodenoscopy. However, even after investigations including oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (with biopsy), barium swallow, and oesophageal manometry, no obstructive cause may be found. This Review suggests an algorithm of history-taking and investigation to allow the causes of non-obstructive dysphagia to be identified, including functional dysphagia. The Review then discusses management strategies and outcomes for functional dysphagia.

Modern diagnosis of GERD: the Lyon Consensus

Clinical history, questionnaire data and response to antisecretory therapy are insufficient to make a conclusive diagnosis of GERD in isolation, but are of value in determining need for further investigation. Conclusive evidence for reflux on oesophageal testing include advanced grade erosive oesophagitis (LA grades C and D), long-segment Barrett's mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal oesophageal acid exposure time (AET) >6% on ambulatory pH or pH-impedance monitoring. A normal endoscopy does not exclude GERD, but provides supportive evidence refuting GERD in conjunction with distal AET <4% and <40 reflux episodes on pH-impedance monitoring off proton pump inhibitors. Reflux-symptom association on ambulatory reflux monitoring provides supportive evidence for reflux triggered symptoms, and may predict a better treatment outcome when present. When endoscopy and pH or pH-impedance monitoring are inconclusive, adjunctive evidence from biopsy findings (histopathology scores, dilated intercellular spaces), motor evaluation (hypotensive lower oesophageal sphincter, hiatus hernia and oesophageal body hypomotility on high-resolution manometry) and novel impedance metrics (baseline impedance, postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index) can add confidence for a GERD diagnosis; however, diagnosis cannot be based on these findings alone. An assessment of anatomy, motor function, reflux burden and symptomatic phenotype will therefore help direct management. Future GERD management strategies should focus on defining individual patient phenotypes based on the level of refluxate exposure, mechanism of reflux, efficacy of clearance, underlying anatomy of the oesophagogastric junction and psychometrics defining symptomatic presentations.

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.

Oesophageal motor function in chronic intestinal idiopathic pseudo-obstruction: A study with high-resolution manometry

BACKGROUND

Chronic intestinal idiopathic pseudo-obstruction (idiopathic CIPO) is a rare heterogeneous condition for which the different phenotypes are difficult to be established. Oesophageal motility has shown to be impaired in patients with idiopathic CIPO at traditional manometry, whereas no studies have assessed it by high resolution manometry (HRM).

AIMS

To evaluate oesophageal motility by HRM in patients with idiopathic CIPO.

METHODS

14 patients with idiopathic CIPO underwent oesophageal HRM. Multiple rapid swallows (MRS) were performed in order to evaluate contraction reserve. The Chicago Classification 3.0 was used to classify the oesophageal motility disorders.

RESULTS

One idiopathic CIPO patient had type-II achalasia, one aperistalsis and 12 had minor disorder of peristalsis (11 ineffective oesophageal motility and one fragmented peristalsis). These minor disorders were not significantly different from those of 50 other consecutive patients who underwent HRM for dysphagia or GERD and received the diagnosis of ineffective oesophageal motility. Three of the 12 idiopathic CIPO patients with minor disorder of peristalsis had no contraction reserve after MRS.

CONCLUSIONS

HRM is able to identify different grades of oesophageal motor impairment in patients with idiopathic CIPO. Presence of major oesophageal dismotility or absent contraction reserve suggest a more severe and widespread motor disorder.

Normal Values of High-Resolution Manometry in Supine and Upright Positions in a Thai Population

BACKGROUND

Although cut-off values used in high-resolution manometry (HRM) to diagnose esophageal motility disorders are based on representative samples of the US population and assume a supine position, differences in population and body positioning can reportedly affect results.

AIMS

To establish normal HRM values for Thai people in both supine and upright positions.

METHODS

Forty-one healthy subjects were recruited, each of whom underwent solid-state HRM with ten 5-mL swallows of water in both the supine and upright positions. Measuring parameters according to the Chicago classification criteria (CC v3.0) were included, for which the mean, median and 5th and 95th percentiles (PCTLs) were calculated.

RESULTS

The results corresponded with the CC v3.0 criteria, except for the mean, and 5th PCTL of the distal contractile integral (DCI), which were lower for this population. In the upright position, the mean and median values for DCI, intrabolus pressure and integrated relaxation pressure were significantly decreased, whereas the length of the transitional zone was significantly increased. The limitations of this study include: (1) the relatively low number of participants, (2) the limited recruitment of participants only at Ramathibodi Hospital and (3) the limited recruitment of only young and middle-aged participants.

CONCLUSIONS

We established normal values for the HRM parameters in a representative sample of the Thai population. Our supine results still prove that the use of the CC v3.0 is preferable. HRM testing in patients measured in the upright position should be analyzed based on the normative values obtained from upright swallow studies.

Classification of esophageal motor findings in gastro-esophageal reflux disease: Conclusions from an international consensus group

BACKGROUND

High-resolution manometry (HRM) has resulted in new revelations regarding the pathophysiology of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). The impact of new HRM motor paradigms on reflux burden needs further definition, leading to a modern approach to motor testing in GERD.

METHODS

Focused literature searches were conducted, evaluating pathophysiology of GERD with emphasis on HRM. The results were discussed with an international group of experts to develop a consensus on the role of HRM in GERD. A proposed classification system for esophageal motor abnormalities associated with GERD was generated.

KEY RESULTS

Physiologic gastro-esophageal reflux is inherent in all humans, resulting from transient lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxations that allow venting of gastric air in the form of a belch. In pathological gastro-esophageal reflux, transient LES relaxations are accompanied by reflux of gastric contents. Structural disruption of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier, and incomplete clearance of the refluxate can contribute to abnormally high esophageal reflux burden that defines GERD. Esophageal HRM localizes the LES for pH and pH-impedance probe placement, and assesses esophageal body peristaltic performance prior to invasive antireflux therapies and antireflux surgery. Furthermore, HRM can assess EGJ and esophageal body mechanisms contributing to reflux, and exclude conditions that mimic GERD.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Structural and motor EGJ and esophageal processes contribute to the pathophysiology of GERD. A classification scheme is proposed incorporating EGJ and esophageal motor findings, and contraction reserve on provocative tests during HRM.

Manometric Subtypes of Ineffective Esophageal Motility

Objectives:

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is characterized by well-defined manometric criteria. However, much variation exists within the diagnosis: Some patients exhibit exactly the required five weak swallows to make the diagnosis. Others show consistently ineffective swallows with total absence of any normal swallow. “We hypothesize” there are two different manometric subtypes of IEM; IEM Alternans (IEM-A) and IEM Persistens (IEM-P).

Methods:

A total of 231 IEM patients were identified by high-resolution manometry (HRM). IEM defined by distal contractile integral (DCI) <450 mm Hg/s/cm in ≥50% of test swallows. Abnormal reflux study was defined by excess total number of reflux episodes, abnormal esophageal acid exposure, or positive symptom association.

Results:

A total of 195 (84%) patients had IEM-A and 36 (16%) had IEM-P. A striking gender difference with 34% of IEM-A being males compared to 53% of IEM-P. (P=0.03). Mean age of IEM-P (59.6 years+/−13.1) was greater than IEM-A (55.5 years+/−13.6) (P=0.04). Mean lower esophageal sphincter (LES) resting pressure was significantly lower in IEM-P (20.8 mm Hg+/−1.4) than IEM-A (29 mm Hg+/−1.2) (P=0.002). There was no difference in LES-integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), bolus transit, or manometric presence of hiatal hernia between the two groups. Out of 146, 89 (61%) patients had abnormal reflux study. Esophageal acid exposure in upright position was significantly higher in IEM-P than IEM-A (3.5 vs. 1.7%, P=0.04). Poor gastric acid control on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) was more prevalent among IEM-P patients (58%) than IEM-A (27%) (P=0.007). In subgroup analysis of 41 IEM patients with dysphagia, DCI for liquid swallows was significantly lower in IEM-P (111+/−142 mm Hg/s/cm) compared to IEM-A (421+/−502 mm Hg/s/cm) (P=0.04), lower mean LES resting pressure in IEM-P (16.6+/−9 mm Hg) than IEM-A (31.7+/−18 mm Hg) (P=0.01).

Conclusions:

There are two distinct manometric IEM subtypes; IEM-P with an older male predominance, more advanced reflux disease, weaker LES, and worse response to PPI; likely a more advanced manifestation than IEM-A. However, the question if there are different etiologies underlying the two subtypes remains to be answered.

Esophageal Body Motility for Clinical Assessment in Patients with Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Symptoms

Background/Aims

Little data exists about esophageal body dysmotility and reflux patterns in refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (RGERD) patients off therapy. We aimed to evaluate effects of esophageal body dysmotility on reflux parameters in RGERD patients by combining impedance-pH monitoring and high-resolution manometry (HRM).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the impedance-pH data and HRM metrics in patients with refractory gastroesophageal reflux symptoms. Impedance-pH monitoring and manometric data were compared between 2 groups: ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) and normal motility.

Results

Forty-eight patients (30 males, mean age 54.5 years) were included (16 erosive esophagitis, 24 non-erosive reflux disease, and 8 functional heartburn), amongst which 24 subjects showed IEM, and others had normal motility. Number of patients who had a large break in the IEM group was significantly higher than that of normal motility patients. IEM group had more patients with weakly acid reflux and long term acid reflux than the normal group (P = 0.008, P = 0.004, respectively). There was no statistical difference in baseine impedance levels from z4 to z6 between the 2 groups (2911 ± 1160 Ω vs 3604 ± 1232 Ω, 2766 ± 1254 Ω vs 3752 ± 1439 Ω, 2349 ± 1131 Ω vs 3038 ± 1254 Ω, all P > 0.05). Acid exposure time, numbers of long term acid reflux and weakly acid reflux showed strong negative correlation with esophageal body motility and/or lower esophageal sphincter function.

Conclusions

IEM was associated more with acid exposure, abnormal weakly acid reflux, and long term acid reflux in RGERD patients. These data suggested the role of esophageal body dysmotility in the pathophysiological mechanisms of RGERD patients.

Ineffective Esophageal Motility Progressing into Distal Esophageal Spasm and Then Type III Achalasia

The clinical significance of minor esophageal motility disorders is unclear, though they typically carry a benign course. Distal esophageal spasm progressing to achalasia has been reported, although it appears to be rare. We report a case of a patient with dysphagia and chest pain who was found to have ineffective esophageal motility on high-resolution manometry, which developed into distal esophageal spasm and then progressed to type III achalasia.

Ineffective esophageal motility and the vagus: current challenges and future prospects

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is characterized by low to very low amplitude propulsive contractions in the distal esophagus, hence primarily affecting the smooth muscle part of the esophagus. IEM is often found in patients with dysphagia or heartburn and is commonly associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease. IEM is assumed to be associated with ineffective bolus transport; however, this can be verified using impedance measurements or evaluation of a barium coated marshmallow swallow. Furthermore, water swallows may not assess accurately the motor capabilities of the esophagus, since contraction amplitude is strongly determined by the size and consistency of the bolus. The “peristaltic reserve” of the esophagus can be evaluated by multiple rapid swallows that, after a period of diglutative inhibition, normally give a powerful peristaltic contraction suggestive of the integrity of neural orchestration and smooth muscle action. The amplitude of contraction is determined by a balance between intrinsic excitatory cholinergic, inhibitory nitrergic, as well as postinhibition rebound excitatory output to the musculature. This is strongly influenced by vagal efferent motor neurons and this in turn is influenced by vagal afferent neurons that send bolus information to the solitary nucleus where programmed activation of the vagal motor neurons to the smooth muscle esophagus is initiated. Solitary nucleus activity is influenced by sensory activity from a large number of organs and various areas of the brain, including the hypothalamus and the cerebral cortex. This allows interaction between swallowing activities and respiratory and cardiac activities and allows the influence of acute and chronic emotional states on swallowing behavior. Interstitial cells of Cajal are part of the sensory units of vagal afferents, the intramuscular arrays, and they provide pacemaker activity to the musculature that can generate peristalsis in the absence of innervation. This indicates that a low-amplitude esophageal contraction, observed as IEM, can be caused by a multitude of factors, and therefore many pathways can be potentially explored to restore normal esophageal peristalsis.

Ineffective Esophageal Motility (IEM): the Old-New Frontier in Esophagology

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is characterized by distal esophageal contraction amplitude of <30 mmHg on conventional manometry (Blonski et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 103(3):699-704, 2008), or a distal contractile integral (DCI) < 450 mmHg*s*cm on high-resolution manometry (HRM) (Kahrilas et al. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 27(2):160-74, 2015) in≥50 % of test swallows. IEM is the most common abnormality on esophageal manometry, with an estimated prevalence of 20-30 % (Tutuian and Castell Am J Gastroenterol. 99(6):1011-9, 2004; Conchillo et al. Am J Gastroenterol. 100(12):2624-32, 2005). Non-obstructive dysphagia has been considered to be frequently associated with severe esophageal peristaltic dysfunction. Defective bolus transit (DBT) on multichannel intraluminal impedance testing was found in more than half of IEM patients who presented with dysphagia (Tutuian and Castell Am J Gastroenterol. 99(6):1011-9, 2004), highlighting the functional defect of this manometric finding. Treatment of IEM has been challenging because of lack of promotility agents that have a definite effect on esophageal function.

Characteristics of Consecutive Esophageal Motility Diagnoses After a Decade of Change

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and esophageal manometry (MII-EM) measures concomitantly bolus transit and pressure changes allowing determination of the functional impact of esophageal motility abnormalities. Ten years ago our laboratory reported MII-EM results in 350 consecutive patients. Since then high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) became available and the definitions of ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) and nutcracker esophagus were revised. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of these developments on esophageal function testing.

METHODS

From August 2012 through May 2013, HRIM was performed in 350 patients referred for esophageal function testing. Each patient received 10 liquid and 10 viscous swallows. While taking advantage of the new technology and revised criteria, HRIM findings were classified according to the conventional criteria to allow more appropriate comparison with our earlier analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with the study performed 10 years ago, the prevalence of normal manometry (36% vs. 35%), achalasia (7% vs. 8%), scleroderma (1% vs. 1%), hypertensive lower esophageal sphincter (LES) (7% vs. 7%), and hypotensive LES (1% vs. 2%) remained the same, whereas the prevalence of distal esophageal spasm (9% vs. 3%), nutcracker esophagus (9% vs. 3%), and poorly relaxing LES (10% vs. 3%) decreased and the prevalence of IEM increased (20% vs. 31%) significantly. Compared with the early study, normal liquid bolus transit was significantly different in patients with hypertensive LES (96% vs. 57%) and poorly relaxing LES (55% vs. 100%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study brings to light the increase in prevalence of IEM. In addition, it suggests that the hypertensive LES and poorly relaxing LES may each affect bolus transit in about half of these patients.

Ineffective esophageal motility phenotypes following fundoplication in gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is associated with reflux disease, but its natural history is unclear. We evaluated patients undergoing repeat esophageal high resolution manometry (HRM) for symptomatic presentations after antireflux surgery (ARS) to understand the progression of IEM.

METHODS

Patients with repeat HRM after ARS were included. Ineffective esophageal motility was diagnosed if ≥5 sequences had distal contractile integral (DCI) <450 mmHg cm s. Augmentation of DCI following multiple rapid swallows (MRS) was assessed. The esophagogastric junction (EGJ) was interrogated using the EGJ contractile integral (EGJ-CI). Esophageal motor function was compared between patients with and without IEM.

KEY RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients (53.9 ± 1.8 years, 66.2% female) had pre- and post-ARS HRM studies 2.1 ± 0.19 years apart. Esophagogastric junction-CI augmented by a mean of 26.3% following ARS. Four IEM phenotypes were identified: 14.7% had persistent IEM, 8.8% resolved IEM after ARS, 19.1% developed new IEM, and 57.4% had no IEM at any point. Patients with IEM had a lower DCI pre- and post-ARS, lower pre-ARS EGJ CI, and lower pre-ARS-integrated relaxation pressure (p ≤ 0.02 for all comparisons); presenting symptoms and other EGJ metrics were similar (p ≥ 0.08 for all comparisons). The IEM phenotypes could be predicted by MRS DCI response patterns (p = 0.008 across groups); patients with persistent IEM had the least DCI augmentation (p = 0.007 compared to no IEM), while those who resolved IEM had DCI augmentation comparable to no IEM (p = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Distinct phenotypes of IEM exist among symptomatic reflux patients following ARS. Provocative testing with MRS may help identify these phenotypes pre-ARS.

Multiple Rapid Swallow Maneuver Enhances the Clinical Utility of High-Resolution Manometry in Patients Showing Ineffective Esophageal Motility

The clinical significance of ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) together with multiple rapid swallow (MRS) has not been yet evaluated in the Chicago Classification v3.0. This study evaluated the adjunctive role of MRS in IEM and determined the criteria of abnormal MRS to maximize the utility of IEM. We analyzed 186 patients showing IEM or normal esophageal motility (NEM), who underwent esophageal high-resolution impedance-manometry for esophageal symptoms. Two different criteria for abnormal MRS were applied to IEM subjects, resulting in 2 corresponding subgroups: IEM-A when distal contractile integral (DCI) ratio between an average wet swallows and MRS contraction was < 1 and IEM-B when MRS contraction DCI was <450 mm Hg-s-cm. One IEM subject inadequately performed MRS. Among the remaining 52 IEM subjects, 18 (34.6%) were classified into IEM-A and 23 (44.2%) into IEM-B. IEM subjects showed less complete bolus transit (median 0.0%, interquartile range 0.0-20.0% vs 60.0%, 30.0-80.0; P < 0.001) resulting in higher impaired bolus transit than NEM subjects (98.1% vs 66.9%, P = 0.001). IEM-B subjects showed additionally higher pathologic bolus exposure than NEM subjects (55.6% vs 29.3%, P = 0.001), whereas IEM-A subjects could not. Although IEM-B subjects had the highest prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease among the subjects groups, it did not reach statistical significance. In conclusion, IEM patients with abnormal MRS contraction have an increased risk of prolonged bolus clearance, poor bolus transit, and pathologic bolus exposure. IEM patients need to be assessed concerning whether MRS contraction DCI is < 450 mm Hg-s-cm to segregate clinically relevant patients.

Diagnosis of Esophageal Motility Disorders: Esophageal Pressure Topography vs. Conventional Line Tracing

OBJECTIVES

Enhanced characterization of esophageal peristaltic and sphincter function provided by esophageal pressure topography (EPT) offers a potential diagnostic advantage over conventional line tracings (CLT). However, high-resolution manometry (HRM) and EPT require increased equipment costs over conventional systems and evidence demonstrating a significant diagnostic advantage of EPT over CLT is limited. Our aim was to investigate whether the inter-rater agreement and/or accuracy of esophageal motility diagnosis differed between EPT and CLT.

METHODS

Forty previously completed patient HRM studies were selected for analysis using a customized software program developed to perform blinded independent interpretation in either EPT or CLT (six pressure sensors) format. Six experienced gastroenterologists with a clinical focus in esophageal disease (attendings) and six gastroenterology trainees with minimal manometry experience (fellows) from three academic centers interpreted each of the 40 studies using both EPT and CLT formats. Rater diagnoses were assessed for inter-rater agreement and diagnostic accuracy, both for exact diagnosis and for correct identification of a major esophageal motility disorder.

RESULTS

The total group agreement was moderate (κ=0.57; 95% CI: 0.56-0.59) for EPT and fair (κ=0.32; 0.30-0.33) for CLT. Inter-rater agreement between attendings was good (κ=0.68; 0.65-0.71) for EPT and moderate (κ=0.46; 0.43-0.50) for CLT. Inter-rater agreement between fellows was moderate (κ=0.48; 0.45-0.50) for EPT and poor to fair (κ=0.20; 0.17-0.24) for CLT. Among all raters, the odds of an incorrect exact esophageal motility diagnosis were 3.3 times higher with CLT assessment than with EPT (OR: 3.3; 95% CI: 2.4-4.5; P<0.0001), and the odds of incorrect identification of a major motility disorder were 3.4 times higher with CLT than with EPT (OR: 3.4; 2.4-5.0; P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Superior inter-rater agreement and diagnostic accuracy of esophageal motility diagnoses were demonstrated with analysis using EPT over CLT among our selected raters. On the basis of these findings, EPT may be the preferred assessment modality of esophageal motility.

Esophageal hypomotility and spastic motor disorders: current diagnosis and treatment

Esophageal hypomotility (EH) is characterized by abnormal esophageal peristalsis, either from a reduction or absence of contractions, whereas spastic motor disorders (SMD) are characterized by an increase in the vigor and/or propagation velocity of esophageal body contractions. Their pathophysiology is not clearly known. The reduced excitation of the smooth muscle contraction mediated by cholinergic neurons and the impairment of inhibitory ganglion neuronal function mediated by nitric oxide are likely mechanisms of the peristaltic abnormalities seen in EH and SMD, respectively. Dysphagia and chest pain are the most frequent clinical manifestations for both of these dysfunctions, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is commonly associated with these motor disorders. The introduction of high-resolution manometry (HRM) and esophageal pressure topography (EPT) has significantly enhanced the ability to diagnose EH and SMD. Novel EPT metrics in particular the development of the Chicago Classification of esophageal motor disorders has enabled improved characterization of these abnormalities. The first step in the management of EH and SMD is to treat GERD, especially when esophageal testing shows pathologic reflux. Smooth muscle relaxants (nitrates, calcium channel blockers, 5-phosphodiesterase inhibitors) and pain modulators may be useful in the management of dysphagia or pain in SMD. Endoscopic Botox injection and pneumatic dilation are the second-line therapies. Extended myotomy of the esophageal body or peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) may be considered in highly selected cases but lack evidence.

The Chicago Classification of esophageal motility disorders, v3.0

BACKGROUND

The Chicago Classification (CC) of esophageal motility disorders, utilizing an algorithmic scheme to analyze clinical high-resolution manometry (HRM) studies, has gained acceptance worldwide.

METHODS

This 2014 update, CC v3.0, developed by the International HRM Working Group, incorporated the extensive clinical experience and interval publications since the prior (2011) version.

KEY RESULTS

Chicago Classification v3.0 utilizes a hierarchical approach, sequentially prioritizing: (i) disorders of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow (achalasia subtypes I-III and EGJ outflow obstruction), (ii) major disorders of peristalsis (absent contractility, distal esophageal spasm, hypercontractile esophagus), and (iii) minor disorders of peristalsis characterized by impaired bolus transit. EGJ morphology, characterized by the degree of overlap between the lower esophageal sphincter and the crural diaphragm and baseline EGJ contractility are also part of CC v3.0. Compared to the previous CC version, the key metrics of interpretation, the integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), the distal contractile integral (DCI), and the distal latency (DL) remain unchanged, albeit with much more emphasis on DCI for defining both hypo- and hypercontractility. New in CC v3.0 are: (i) the evaluation of the EGJ at rest defined in terms of morphology and contractility, (ii) 'fragmented' contractions (large breaks in the 20-mmHg isobaric contour), (iii) ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), and (iv) several minor adjustments in nomenclature and defining criteria. Absent in CC v3.0 are contractile front velocity and small breaks in the 20-mmHg isobaric contour as defining characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Chicago Classification v3.0 is an updated analysis scheme for clinical esophageal HRM recordings developed by the International HRM Working Group.

Impedance as an adjunct to manometric testing to investigate symptoms of dysphagia: What it has failed to do and what it may tell us in the future

Dysphagia is a common reason for referral for investigations of oesophageal motility. Impedance measurement has now been incorporated into commercially available diagnostic manometry systems for more than a decade. This innovation, which offered the ability to record patterns of bolus transport without the need for simultaneous radiology, has for the most part failed to live up to expectations, offering few additional diagnostic insights. This review examines the potential pitfalls related to how impedance patterns are currently analysed and introduces and discusses the new concept of pressure-flow analysis integrating pressure and impedance measurements to derive new metrics linked to the pressures occurring within and around the bolus as it is being transported.

The Chicago classification of motility disorders: an update

The Chicago Classification defines esophageal motility disorders in high resolution manometry. This is based on individual scoring of 10 swallows performed in supine position. Disorders of esophago-gastric junction (EGJ) outflow obstruction are defined by a median integrated relaxation pressure above the limit of normal and divided into 3 achalasia subtypes and EGJ outflow obstruction. Major motility disorders (aperistalsis, distal esophageal spasm, and hypercontractile esophagus) are patterns not encountered in controls in the context of normal EGJ relaxation. Finally with the latest version of the Chicago Classification, only two minor motor disorders are considered: ineffective esophageal motility and fragmented peristalsis.

Esophageal chemical clearance is impaired in gastro-esophageal reflux disease--a 24-h impedance-pH monitoring assessment

BACKGROUND

Impedance-pH monitoring allows assessment of retrograde and antegrade intra-esophageal movement of fluids and gas. Reflux is followed by volume clearance and chemical clearance, elicited by secondary and swallow-induced peristalsis, respectively. We aimed to assess whether chemical clearance is impaired in gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

Blinded retrospective review of impedance-pH tracings from patients with erosive reflux disease (ERD) and non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), and from proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-refractory patients before and after laparoscopic fundoplication. The number of refluxes followed within 30 s by swallow-induced peristaltic waves was divided by the number of total refluxes to obtain a parameter representing chemical clearance namely the postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave (PSPW) index.

KEY RESULTS

The PSPW index was significantly lower in 31 ERD (15%) and in 44 NERD (33%) off-PPI patients than in 30 controls (75%), as well as in 18 ERD (16%) and in 48 NERD (31%) on-PPI patients than in 26 on-PPI functional heartburn (FH) cases (67%) (P < 0.05 for all comparisons). In 29 PPI-refractory patients, the median PSPW index was unaltered by otherwise effective antireflux surgery (20% postoperatively, 21% preoperatively). The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values of the PSPW index in identifying GERD patients were 97%, 89%, 96%, and 93%.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Impairment of chemical clearance is a primary pathophysiological mechanism specific to GERD: it is unaffected by medical/surgical therapy, is not found in FH, and is more pronounced in ERD than in NERD. Using the PSPW index could improve the diagnostic efficacy of impedance-pH monitoring.

High-resolution manometry and esophageal pressure topography: filling the gaps of convention manometry

Although conventional manometry set the basis for the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders, the large axial spacing between recording sites leaves large portions of the esophagus unevaluated and vulnerable to movement artifact. However, continuous spatiotemporal representations of pressure through the esophagus recorded with high-resolution manometry offers greater detail and improved accuracy for many of the most important measurements of esophageal motor function. This review describes how the new classification schemes for esophageal pressure topography have evolved from conventional criteria and focuses on how esophageal pressure topography has improved the ability to subcategorize conventional manometric diagnoses into new functional phenotypes.

High-resolution manometry correlates of ineffective esophageal motility

OBJECTIVES

There are currently no criteria for ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) and ineffective swallow (IES) in esophageal pressure topography (EPT). Our aims were to use high-resolution manometry metrics to define IEM within the Chicago Classification and to determine the distal contractile integral (DCI) threshold for IES.

METHODS

The EPT of 150 patients with either dysphagia or reflux symptoms were reviewed. Peristaltic function in EPT was defined by the Chicago Classification; the corresponding conventional line tracing (CLT) were reviewed separately. Generalized linear mixed models were used to find thresholds for DCI corresponding to traditionally determined IES and failed swallows. An external validation sample was used to confirm these thresholds.

RESULTS

In terms of swallow subtypes, IES in CLT were a mixture of normal, weak, and failed peristalsis in EPT. A DCI of 450 mm Hg-s-cm was determined to be optimal in predicting IES. In the validation sample, the threshold of 450 mm Hg-s-cm showed strong agreement with CLT determination of IES (positive percent agreement 83%, negative percent agreement 90%). The patient diagnostic level agreement between CLT and EPT was good (78.6% positive percent agreement and 63.9% negative percent agreement), with negative agreement increasing to 92.0% if proximal breaks were excluded.

CONCLUSIONS

The manometric correlate of IEM in EPT is a mixture of failed swallows and weak swallows with breaks in the middle/distal troughs. A DCI value <450 mm Hg-s-cm can be used to predict IES previously defined in CLT. IEM can be defined by >5 swallows with weak/failed peristalsis or with a DCI <450 mm Hg-s-cm.

The relationship between dysphagia, pump function, and lower esophageal sphincter pressures on high-resolution manometry

INTRODUCTION

Study objective was to compare high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) findings between patients with and without dysphagia.

METHODS

After Institutional Review Board approval, a prospectively maintained database was reviewed to identify patients who underwent HRIM. Patients without upper endoscopy within 7 days of manometry, patients with achalasia, history of previous foregut surgery, esophageal strictures, or a large hiatus hernia were excluded. A new parameter called lower esophageal sphincter pressure integral (LESPI) was compared between patients with and without dysphagia. For subanalysis, subjects were categorized: (a) group A: no dysphagia and <60% hypocontractile or absent waves, (b) group B: dysphagia and <60% hypocontractile or absent waves, and (c) group C: ≥ 60% hypocontractile or absent waves.

RESULTS

One hundred thirteen patients satisfied study criteria. Patients with dysphagia had a significantly higher LESPI and distal contractile integral (DCI). On multivariate regression analysis, the following were associated with dysphagia: (a) ≥ 60% hypocontractile or absent waves, (b) LESPI >400 mmHg s cm, and (c) DCI >3,000 mmHg s cm. However, 32% of patients with <60% hypocontractile or absent waves (group B) had dysphagia. These patients had a significantly higher DCI and LESPI than group A. Group C had a significantly lower DCI than all other patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Dysphagia in patients with ≥ 60% hypocontractile or absent waves is indicative of an intrinsic pump failure as they have low DCI, while dysphagia in patients with <60% hypocontractile or absent waves is more indicative of significant outflow obstruction as they have high LESPI and integrated relaxation pressure.

Impact of ineffective oesophageal motility and wrap type on dysphagia after laparoscopic fundoplication

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic 360° fundoplication is the most common operation for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, but is associated with postoperative dysphagia in some patients. Patients with ineffective oesophageal motility may have a higher risk of developing postoperative dysphagia, but this remains unclear.

METHODS

From 1991 to 2010, 2040 patients underwent primary laparoscopic fundoplication for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and met the study inclusion criteria; 343 had a 90°, 498 a 180° and 1199 a 360° fundoplication. Primary peristalsis and distal contraction amplitude during oesophageal manometry were determined for 1354 patients. Postoperative dysphagia scores (range 0-45) were recorded at 3 and 12 months, then annually. Oesophageal dilatations and/or reoperations for dysphagia were recorded.

RESULTS

Preoperative oesophageal motility did not influence postoperative dysphagia scores, the need for dilatation and/or reoperation up to 6 years. Three-month dysphagia scores were lower after 90° and 180° compared with 360° fundoplication (mean(s.e.m.) 8·0(0·6) and 9·8(0·5) respectively versus 11·9(0·4); P < 0·001 and P = 0·003), but these differences diminished after 6 years of follow-up. The incidence of dilatation and reoperation for dysphagia was lower after 90° (2·6 and 0·6 per cent respectively) and 180° (4·4 and 1·0 per cent) fundoplications than with a 360° wrap (9·8 and 6·8 per cent; both P < 0·001 versus 90° and 180° groups).

CONCLUSION

Tailoring the degree of fundoplication according to preoperative oesophageal motility by standard manometric parameters has no long-term impact on postoperative dysphagia. There is, however, a proportionate increase in short-term dysphagia scores with increasing degree of wrap, and a corresponding proportionate increase in dilatations and reoperations for dysphagia. These differences in dysphagia scores diminish with time.

Gastroesophageal reflux and altered motility in lung transplant rejection

BACKGROUND

Lung transplantation has become an effective therapeutic option for selected patients with end stage lung disease. Long-term survival is limited by chronic rejection manifest as bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS). The aspiration of gastric contents has been implicated as a causative or additive factor leading to BOS. Gastroesophageal reflux (GER) and altered foregut motility are common both before and after lung transplantation. Further, the normal defense mechanisms against reflux are impaired in the allograft. Recent studies using biomarkers of aspiration have added to previous association studies to provide a growing body of evidence supporting the link between rejection and GER. Further, the addition of high-resolution manometry (HRM) and impedance technology to characterize bolus transit and the presence and extent of reflux regardless of pH might better identify at-risk patients. Although additional prospective studies are needed, fundoplication appears useful in the prevention or treatment of post-transplant BOS.

PURPOSE

This review will highlight the existing literature on the relationship of gastroesophageal reflux and altered motility to lung transplant rejection, particularly BOS. The article will conclude with a discussion of the evaluation and management of patients undergoing lung transplantation at our center.