Characteristics of achalasia subtypes in untreated Chinese patients: a high-resolution manometry study

Differences in upper esophageal sphincter function and clinical characteristics among the three subtypes of Japanese patients with esophageal achalasia

BACKGROUND

The rarity of esophageal achalasia has resulted in little being known about the characteristics of its three subtypes. The upper esophageal sphincter is considered one key factor to prevent aspiration pneumonia, a serious complication of esophageal achalasia. This study aimed to reveal the subtype characteristics of esophageal achalasia and how the upper esophageal sphincter functions and relates to other clinical parameters of the disease.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated the clinical records of patients diagnosed with esophageal achalasia. All participants underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and then, within 2 weeks, high-resolution manometry. Gastrointestinal symptoms were assessed using a previously validated self-reported questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 110 patients with esophageal achalasia were enrolled: 50 with type I, 40 with type II, and 20 with type III. Mean age at diagnosis was 54.5, 50.4, and 66.1 years for types I, II, and III, respectively. Mean resting upper esophageal sphincter pressure was 28.0, 51.8, and 43.6 mmHg for patients with types I, II, and III, respectively (p < 0.01). Patients with type III esophageal achalasia more frequently reported stomachache than those with type I (p = 0.03). A negative correlation between resting upper esophageal sphincter pressure and age was observed in all subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

A negative correlation was confirmed between resting upper esophageal sphincter pressure and age in all subtypes of esophageal achalasia. Type III patients were older at diagnosis, type II patients showed higher upper esophageal sphincter pressure, and type I patients showed a lower upper esophageal sphincter pressure at the early life stage.

Graded pneumatic dilation in subtype I and II achalasia: long-term experience in a single center

Background

The efficacy of pneumatic dilation (PD) in the management of achalasia has yielded variable results. The availability of high-resolution manometry led to the identification of 3 clinically relevant subtypes of achalasia, revealing the poor efficacy of PD in subtype III. Furthermore, PD showed a lower response rate in patients with subtype III compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy and peroral endoscopic myotomy. This study aimed to investigate the short- and long-term efficacy, safety profile and side effects of PD with a "graded approach" in subtypes I and II achalasia.

Methods

We enrolled 141 patients (male 67, mean age=66±16.26 years) with achalasia (n=27 subtype I, n=74 subtype II and n=40 subtype III) between January 2010 and July 2020 at St. Orsola University Hospital, Bologna, Italy. We analyzed the data of patients with subtypes I and II, who underwent a graded-protocol PD. Short- and long-term clinical efficacy, complications and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were recorded.

Results

One month after graded protocol PD, 100% subtype I and 96.2% subtype II achalasia patients showed clinical remission. The PD procedure was completed without major complications in all patients. In the long-term follow up (median time: 56 months), 95.5% subtype I and 90% subtype II achalasia patients had an Eckardt score ≤3. GERD occurred in 27.7% of all patients.

Conclusion

A graded-protocol PD applied in the appropriate achalasia subtypes was shown to be a safe and highly effective approach, in both the short- and long-term.

The Reflux Symptoms Before and After Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy of Chinese Patients With Achalasia

Background/Aims

Achalasia is a rare disease, but the incidence is increasing recently. Peroral esophageal myotomy (POEM) is an effective treatment. Regurgitation is a common symptom before and after POEM. Our aim is to investigate the factors related to preoperative and postoperative reflux symptoms.

Methods

Our study was retrospective. The achalasia patients diagnosed by high-resolution manometry and gastroscopy were divided into reflux group and non-reflux group before and after POEM, respectively. General information, symptoms, POEM information, and manometric results were compared.

Results

(1) Ninety-six of 130 patients had reflux symptoms before POEM. The lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP) in the reflux group was significantly higher than the non-reflux group (P = 0.023), while integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) was similar. The reflux group had longer esophagus than the non-reflux group (P = 0.006). Reflux symptoms were not related to subtypes of achalasia. (2) Twenty-five of 84 patients had reflux symptoms after POEM. Postoperative Eckardt scores, LESP, and 4-second IRP (4sIRP) were significantly lower than the preoperative values (P < 0.001). The preoperative values and POEM information were similar between the postoperative 2 groups and there was no significant difference in the presence of preoperative reflux symptoms between 2 groups. The postoperative LESP and 4sIRP were similar between the 2 groups, however, the postoperative UESP was significantly higher in the reflux group than the non-reflux group (P = 0.042). The non-reflux group had more declines in Eckardt scores and LESP than the reflux group.

Conclusions

The reflux symptoms of achalasia patients without treatment were mainly due to food retention. The postoperative reflux symptoms were not the sign of the excessive relaxation of lower esophageal sphincter.

Chicago Classification update (version 4.0): Technical review on diagnostic criteria for achalasia

The recommended diagnostic criteria for achalasia have been recently updated by Chicago Classification version 4.0 (CCv4.0), the widely accepted classification scheme for esophageal motility disorders using metrics from high-resolution manometry (HRM). CCv4.0 continued upon prior versions by subtyping achalasia into type I, type II, and type III on HRM. The achalasia subgroup of the CCv4.0 Working Group developed both conclusive and inconclusive statements for the HRM diagnoses of achalasia subtypes. Conclusive achalasia on HRM is defined as an abnormal median integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) in the primary position of wet swallows along with 100% failed peristalsis, with type I achalasia having 100% failed peristalsis without panesophageal pressurization (PEP), type II achalasia with PEP in at least 20% of swallows, and type III achalasia having at least 20% of swallows premature with no appreciable peristalsis. An inconclusive HRM diagnosis of achalasia can arise when there is an integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) that is borderline or at the upper limit of normal in at least one position, there is an abnormal IRP in both positions but evidence of peristalsis with PEP or premature swallows, or there is peristalsis in the secondary position after apparent achalasia in the primary position. In patients with dysphagia and an inconclusive HRM diagnosis of achalasia, supportive testing beyond HRM such as a timed barium esophagram (TBE) for functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) is recommended. The review recommends a diagnostic algorithm for achalasia, discusses therapeutic options for the disease, and outlines future needs on this topic.

Advances in The Diagnosis and Treatment of Achalasia of The Cardia: a Review

Idiopathic achalasia is an esophageal motor disorder characterized by the loss of the lower esophageal sphincter ganglion, resulting in impaired lower esophageal relaxation and absence of esophageal peristalsis. Patients commonly present with progressive dysphagia accompanied by reflux, heartburn, retrosternal pain, and severe weight loss. Diagnosis is primarily based on the patient's chief complaints, barium esophagography, and the most recent high-resolution manometry. Endoscopic assessment and endoscopic ultrasonography also have significant value with regard to the exclusion of esophageal anatomical lesions, neoplastic diseases, and pseudoachalasia. However, as most patients with achalasia demonstrate a gradual onset, early diagnosis is difficult. Currently, treatment of idiopathic achalasia, including pneumatic dilation, stent placement, and surgical myotomy, is aimed at reducing lower esophageal sphincter pressure and relieving the symptoms of dysphagia. Peroral endoscopic myotomy has gradually become the mainstream treatment because it causes less trauma and has a rapid recovery rate. This article reviews the main methods of diagnosis and treatment of achalasia, with an emphasis on the potential of peroral endoscopic myotomy and the advancements of immunotherapy for achalasia.

Upper Esophageal Sphincter Motility and Thoracic Pressure are Determinants of Pressurized Waves in Achalasia Subtypes According to the Chicago Classification

BACKGROUND

Phenotypes of achalasia are based on esophageal body pressurization during swallow. The reasons that lead to pressurized waves are still unclear. This study aims to evaluate manometric parameters that may determine pressurized waves in patients with achalasia.

METHODS

A total of 100 achalasia high-resolution manometry tests were reviewed. We measured before each swallow: upper esophageal sphincter (UES) basal pressure, esophageal length, lower esophageal sphincter (LES) basal pressure, LES length, gastric and thoracic pressure, transdiaphragmatic pressure gradient and the LES retention pressure (LES basal pressure-TPG); during swallow: UES pressure, UES residual pressure, UES recovery time, LES relaxation pressure, gastric and thoracic pressure, transdiaphragmatic pressure gradient and after swallow: esophageal length, LES length, wave pressure, gastric and thoracic pressure and transdiaphragmatic gradient pressure.

RESULTS

Univariate analysis showed in pressurized waves before swallow: higher thoracic, UES and LES basal pressure, longer LES length and decrease in LES retention pressure; during swallow: higher thoracic, gastric and UES pressure, higher UES and LES relaxation pressure and after swallow: higher thoracic and gastric pressure. Multivariate analysis in pressurized waves showed as significant before swallow: thoracic and UES basal pressure; during swallow: thoracic, gastric and UES pressure, UES residual pressure and UES recovery time and after swallow: thoracic pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

Basal esophageal pressurization and the UES are independent variables that may be associated with pressurized waves.

Esophageal motility disorders on high-resolution manometry: Chicago classification version 4.0©

Chicago Classification v4.0 (CCv4.0) is the updated classification scheme for esophageal motility disorders using metrics from high-resolution manometry (HRM). Fifty-two diverse international experts separated into seven working subgroups utilized formal validated methodologies over two-years to develop CCv4.0. Key updates in CCv.4.0 consist of a more rigorous and expansive HRM protocol that incorporates supine and upright test positions as well as provocative testing, a refined definition of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow obstruction (EGJOO), more stringent diagnostic criteria for ineffective esophageal motility and description of baseline EGJ metrics. Further, the CCv4.0 sought to define motility disorder diagnoses as conclusive and inconclusive based on associated symptoms, and findings on provocative testing as well as supportive testing with barium esophagram with tablet and/or functional lumen imaging probe. These changes attempt to minimize ambiguity in prior iterations of Chicago Classification and provide more standardized and rigorous criteria for patterns of disorders of peristalsis and obstruction at the EGJ.

ACG Clinical Guidelines: Diagnosis and Management of Achalasia

Achalasia is an esophageal motility disorder characterized by aberrant peristalsis and insufficient relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter. Patients most commonly present with dysphagia to solids and liquids, regurgitation, and occasional chest pain with or without weight loss. High-resolution manometry has identified 3 subtypes of achalasia distinguished by pressurization and contraction patterns. Endoscopic findings of retained saliva with puckering of the gastroesophageal junction or esophagram findings of a dilated esophagus with bird beaking are important diagnostic clues. In this American College of Gastroenterology guideline, we used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation process to provide clinical guidance on how best to diagnose and treat patients with achalasia.

Meta-analysis of clinical outcome after treatment for achalasia based on manometric subtypes

BACKGROUND

The introduction of high-resolution manometry and the Chicago classification has made it possible to diagnose achalasia and predict treatment response accurately. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of the different treatments available on symptomatic outcomes across all achalasia subtypes.

METHODS

The study was conducted according to PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. A literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE databases was undertaken to identify all relevant articles reporting clinical outcomes of patients with achalasia after botulinum toxin injection, pneumatic dilatation, laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) based on manometric subtypes. Patients were grouped according to the Chicago classification and the success rate in treating symptoms was measured as the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

Twenty studies (1575 patients) were selected, and data on botulinum toxin, pneumatic dilatation, LHM and POEM were extracted. Success rates for LHM in type I, II and III achalasia were 81, 92 and 71 per cent respectively. Those for POEM were 95, 97 and 93 per cent respectively. POEM was more likely to be successful than LHM for both type I (odds ratio (OR) 2·97, 95 per cent c.i. 1·09 to 8·03; P = 0·032) and type III (OR 3·50, 1·39 to 8·77; P = 0·007) achalasia. The likelihood of success of POEM and LHM for type II achalasia was similar.

CONCLUSION

Pneumatic dilatation had a lower but still acceptable success rate compared with POEM or LHM in patients with type II achalasia. POEM is an excellent treatment modality for type I and type III achalasia, although it did not show any superiority over LHM for type II achalasia.

Value of Multidetector Computed Tomography in the Assessment of Achalasia Subtypes and Detection of Pulmonary and Thoracic Complications

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) findings in patients with achalasia, to assess its role in differentiating subtypes in detecting lung involvement and extra-esophageal thoracic complications.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This clinical retrospective study included 51 patients with manometrically confirmed achalasia who underwent chest X-ray and MDCT in diagnostic work-up. Esophageal wall thickness and morphology, luminal dilatation, lung changes, and extra-esophageal manifestations were analyzed on MDCT by 2 readers. Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney test were used for assessing the differences among the achalasia subtypes, and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) assessing the inter-observer agreement between the measurements of 2 readers.

RESULTS

Fourteen (27.5%) patients had achalasia subtype I, 21 (60.8%) had subtype II while 6 (11.8%) had subtype III. Esophageal wall thickness of the esophageal body (EB) and distal esophageal segment (DES) as well as nodular/lobulated appearance of DES were found significantly more often in subtype III (p = 0.024, p < 0.001, p = 0.009, respectively). Esophageal dilatation gradually decreased from subtype I to III (p = 0.006). Chest X-ray revealed lung changes in 9 (17%) and MDCT in 21 (41%) patients (p = 0.001), most frequently in subtype I, with predominance of ground-glass opacities. Tracheal/carinal compression was detected in 27 (52.9%) and left atrial compression in 17 (33.3%) patients. Excellent inter-observer agreement was observed in measuring the EB and DES wall thickness, and diameter of EB (ICC 0.829, 0.901, and 0.922).

CONCLUSION

MDCT is a useful tool for detecting lung and extra-esophageal thoracic complications in patients with achalasia, and could be a valuable additional imaging modality in the differentiation of achalasia subtypes.

Management of achalasia cardia: Expert consensus statements

Achalasia cardia (AC) is a frequently encountered motility disorder of the esophagus resulting from an irreversible degeneration of neurons. Treatment modalities are palliative in nature, and there is no curative treatment available for AC as of now. Significant advancements have been made in the management of AC over last decade. The introduction of high resolution manometry and per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has strengthened the diagnostic and therapeutic armamentarium of AC. High resolution manometry allows for the characterization of the type of achalasia, which in turn has important therapeutic implications. The endoscopic management of AC has been reinforced with the introduction of POEM that has been found to be highly effective and safe in palliating the symptoms in short-term to mid-term follow-up studies. POEM is less invasive than Heller's myotomy and provides the endoscopist with the opportunity of adjusting the length and orientation of esophageal myotomy according to the type of AC. The management of achalasia needs to be tailored for each patient, and the role of pneumatic balloon dilatation, POEM, or Heller's myotomy needs to be revisited. In this review, we discuss the important aspects of diagnosis as well as management of AC. The statements presented in the manuscript reflect the cumulative efforts of an expert consensus group.

Comparison of the Outcomes of Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy for Achalasia According to Manometric Subtype

Background/Aims

We evaluated whether manometric subtype is associated with treatment outcome in patients with achalasia treated by peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM).

Methods

High-resolution manometry data and Eckardt scores were collected from 83 cases at two tertiary referral centers where POEM is performed. Manometric tracings were classified according to the three Chicago subtypes.

Results

Among the 83 cases, 48 type I, 24 type II, and 11 type III achalasia cases were identified. No difference was found in pre-POEM Eckardt score, basal lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, or integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) among the type I, type II, and type III groups. All three patient groups showed a significant improvement in post-POEM Eckardt score (6.1±2.1 to 1.5±1.5, p=0.001; 6.8±2.2 to 1.2±0.9, p=0.001; 6.6±2.0 to 1.6±1.4, p=0.011), LES pressure (26.1±13.8 to 15.4±6.8, p=0.018; 32.3±19.0 to 19.2±10.4, p=0.003; 36.8±19.2 to 17.5±9.7, p=0.041), and 4s IRP (21.5±11.7 to 12.0±8.7, p=0.007; 24.5±14.8 to 12.0±7.6, p=0.002; 24.0±15.7 to 11.8±7.1, p=0.019) at a median follow-up of 16 months.

Conclusions

POEM resulted in a good clinical outcome for all manometric subtypes.

Clinical Outcomes and Safety of Partial Full-Thickness Myotomy versus Circular Muscle Myotomy in Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy for Achalasia Patients

Background. Here we aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety between partial full-thickness myotomy and circular muscle myotomy during POEM procedure in achalasia patients. Methods. Clinical data of achalasia of cardia (AC) patients who underwent POEM in our center during January 2014 to January 2015 was collected (34 cases). 19 patients who received partial full-thickness myotomy were assigned to group A and 14 patients who received circular muscle myotomy were assigned to group B. The procedure-related parameters between the two groups were compared. Symptom relief rate and postprocedure manometry outcomes were compared to evaluate the efficacy. Procedure-related adverse events and complications were compared to evaluate the safety. Results. (1) Mean operation times were significantly shorter in group A than group B (62.42 ± 23.17 vs 87.86 ± 26.44 min, p < 0.01). (2) Symptom relief rate and postprocedure manometry outcomes had no statistical differences when compared between the two groups (all p > 0.05). (3) Comparison of procedure-related adverse events and complications had no statistical differences (all p > 0.05). Conclusion. Partial full-thickness myotomy had no significant differences in efficacy or safety with circular myotomy, but partial full-thickness myotomy significantly reduced the procedure time.

High-resolution manometric subtypes as a predictive factor for the treatment of achalasia: A meta-analysis and systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess manometric subtypes as predictive factors for the treatment efficacies of pneumatic balloon dilatation (PBD) and laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) in patients with achalasia.

METHODS

A systematic search of the Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library database was conducted to identify relevant publications on high-resolution manometric subtypes and different therapies for achalasia with predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data on the success rates after PBD or LHM for different manometric subtypes were extracted. The pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for different manometric subtypes were estimated using STATA 13.0.

RESULTS

In all, nine studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 298 patients having achalasia receiving PBD and 429 undergoing LHM were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled OR between the subtypes of achalasia after PBD or LHM showed that the best and worse treatment outcomes were found in patients with type II and III achalasia, respectively (type I vs type II after PBD: OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.08-0.36, P = 0.000; type I vs type III after PBD: OR 3.64, 95% CI 1.55-8.53, P = 0.003; type II vs type III after PBD: OR 27.18, 95% CI 9.08-81.35, P = 0.000; type I vs type II after LHM: OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.12-0.56, P = 0.001; type I vs type III after LHM: OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.80-4.50, P = 0.148; type II vs type III after LHM: OR 6.86, 95% CI 2.72-17.28, P = 0.000).

CONCLUSION

Type II achalasia shows the best prognosis after PBD and LHM, while type III achalasia has the worst prognosis.

Clinical, endoscopic, and radiologic features of three subtypes of achalasia, classified using high-resolution manometry

BACKGROUND/AIMS

High-resolution manometry (HRM) has improved the accuracy of manometry in detecting achalasia and determining its subtypes. However, the correlation of achalasia subtypes with clinical, endoscopic, and radiologic findings has not been assessed. We aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical, endoscopic, and fluoroscopy findings associated with three subtypes of achalasia using HRM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The retrospective clinical data, HRM, endoscopy, and radiologic findings were obtained from the medical records of untreated achalasia patients.

RESULTS

From 2011 to 2013, 374 patients underwent HRM. Fifty-two patients (14%) were diagnosed with achalasia, but only 32 (8.5%) of these patients had not received treatment and were therefore included in this study. The endoscopy results were normal in 28% of the patients, and a barium swallow was inconclusive in 31% of the achalasia patients. Ten patients (31%) were classified as having type I achalasia, 17 (53%) were classified as type II, and 5 (16%) were classified as type III. Among the three subtypes, type I patients were on average the youngest and had the longest history of dysphagia, mildest chest pain, most significant weight loss, and most dilated esophagus with residual food. Chest pain was most common in type III patients, and frequently had normal fluoroscopic and endoscopic results.

CONCLUSION

The clinical, radiologic, and endoscopic findings were not significantly different between patients with type I and type II untreated achalasia. Type III patients had the most severe symptoms and were the most difficult to diagnose based on varied clinical, radiologic, and endoscopic findings.

Upper esophageal sphincter abnormalities are strongly predictive of treatment response in patients with achalasia

AIM: To investigate the relationship between upper esophageal sphincter abnormalities achalasia treatment

METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 41 consecutive patients referred for high resolution esophageal manometry with a final manometric diagnosis of achalasia. Patients were sub-divided by presence or absence of Upper esophageal sphincter (UES) abnormality, and clinical and manometric profiles were compared. Correlation between UES abnormality and sub-type (i.e., hypertensive, hypotensive or impaired relaxation) and a number of variables, including qualitative treatment response, achalasia sub-type, co-morbid medical illness, psychiatric illness, surgical history, dominant presenting symptom, treatment type, age and gender were also evaluated.

RESULTS: Among all 41 patients, 24 (58.54%) had a UES abnormality present. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of age, gender or any other clinical or demographic profiles. Among those with UES abnormalities, the majority were either hypertensive (41.67%) or had impaired relaxation (37.5%) as compared to hypotensive (20.83%), although this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.42). There was no specific association between treatment response and treatment type received; however, there was a significant association between UES abnormalities and treatment response. In patients with achalasia and concomitant UES abnormalities, 87.5% had poor treatment response, while only 12.5% had favorable response. In contrast, in patients with achalasia and no UES abnormalities, the majority (78.57%) had good treatment response, as compared to 21.43% with poor treatment response (P = 0.0001). After controlling for achalasia sub-type, those with UES abnormality had 26 times greater odds of poor treatment response than those with no UES abnormality (P = 0.009). Similarly, after controlling for treatment type, those with UES abnormality had 13.9 times greater odds of poor treatment response compared to those with no UES abnormality (P = 0.017).

CONCLUSION: The presence of UES abnormalities in patients with achalasia significantly predicted poorer treatment response as compared to those with normal UES function.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy for treatment of esophageal achalasia: Analysis of 12 cases

AIM: To investigate the diagnostic criteria for esophageal achalasia and evaluate the clinical effects of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) in the treatment of esophageal achalasia.

METHODS: The clinical date of 12 patients who were diagnosed with esophageal achalasia and recived POEM in the Ningbo Medical Center, Lihuili Hostpial between November 2012 and January 2014 were reviewed retrospectively. The surgical results, parameters measured by esophageal manometry before and after POEM, and complications after POEM and during follow-up were analyzed.

RESULTS: POEM were successful in 10 of the 12 patients. There were 1 case of subcutaneous emphysema, 1 case of pneumomediastinum, subcutaneous emphysema and pleural effusion, and 1 case of hemorrhage of the digestive tract. Symptoms were significantly improved in 10 patients who had successful POEM; parameters measured by esophageal manometry were also improved obviously.

CONCLUSION: Esophageal manometry is the gold standard for the diagnosis of achalasia. POEM has appreciable short-term effects in the treatment of achalasia, but the long-term efficacy and complications need further follow-up observations.

Clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of 3 subtypes of achalasia according to the chicago classification in a tertiary institute in Korea

Background/Aims

Achalasia is classified into 3 types according to the Chicago classification. The aim of this study was to investigate characteristics and treatment outcomes of 3 achalasia subtypes in Korean patients.

Methods

Fifty-five patients diagnosed with achalasia based on conventional or high-resolution esophageal manometry were consecutively enrolled. Their clinical characteristics, manometric, endoscopic and esophagographic findings and treatment responses were analyzed among the 3 subtypes of achalasia.

Results

Of 55 patients, 21 (38.2%) patients had type I, 28 (50.9%) patients had type II and 6 (10.9%) patients had type III. The median follow-up period was 22.4 (interquartile range, 3.6-67.4) months. Type III patients were older than type I and II patients (70.0 vs. 46.2 and 47.6 years, P = 0.023). The width of the esophagus in type I patients was wider with more frequent bird's beak appearance on esophagogram than the other 2 types (P = 0.010 and 0.006, respectively). Of the 50 patients who received the evaluation for treatment response at 3 months, 7 patients (36.8% vs. 26.9%) were treated with pneumatic dilatation and 4 patients (21.1% vs. 15.4%) with laparoscopic Heller's myotomy in type I and II groups, respectively. The treatment responses of pneumatic dilatation and Heller's myotomy in type I group were 71.4 and 50.0% and in type II were 85.7 and 75.0%, respectively, and all 5 patients in type III group showed good response to medical therapy.

Conclusions

Clinical characteristics of 3 achalasia subtypes in Korean patients are consistent with other studies. Treatment outcomes are variable among 3 subtypes.

Comparison of idiopathic achalasia and Chagas' disease esophagopathy at the light of high-resolution manometry

The comparison between idiopathic achalasia (IA) and Chagas' disease esophagopathy (CDE) may evaluate if treatment options and their outcomes can be accepted universally. This study aims to compare IA and CDE at the light of high-resolution manometry. We studied 86 patients with achalasia: 45 patients with CDE (54% females, mean age 55 years) and 41 patients with IA (58% females, mean age 49 years). All patients underwent high-resolution manometry. Upper esophageal sphincter parameters were similar (basal pressure CDE = 72 ± 45 mmHg, IA = 82 ± 57 mmHg; residual pressure CDE = 9.9 ± 9.9 mmHg, IA = 9.8 ± 7.5 mmHg). In the body of the esophagus, the amplitude was higher in the IA group than the CDE group at 3 cm (CDE = 15 ± 14 mm Hg, IA = 42 ± 52 mmHg, P = 0.003) and 7 cm (CDE = 16 ± 15 mmHg, IA = 36 ± 57 mmHg, P = 0.04) above the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). The LES basal pressure (CDE = 17 ± 16 mmHg, IA = 40 ± 22 mmHg, P < 0.001) and residual pressure (CDE = 12 ± 11 mmHg, IA = 27 ± 13 mmHg, P < 0.001) were also higher in the IA group. Our results show that: (i) there is no difference in regards to the upper esophageal sphincter; (ii) higher pressures of the esophageal body are noticed in patients with IA; and (iii) basal and residual pressures of the LES are lower in patients with CDE. Our results did not show expressive manometric differences between IA and CDE. Some differences may be attributed to a more pronounced esophageal dilatation in patients with CDE.