Slow esophageal propagation velocity: association with dysphagia for solids

Quantitative Risk Factor Analysis of Postoperative Dysphagia After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) Using the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10)

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective case series.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to utilize the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) to quantitatively analyze risk factors contributing to dysphagia after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ACDF is one of the most common procedures performed in the United States, with postoperative dysphagia rates ranging from 2% to 60%. The EAT-10 is a self-administered, symptom-specific 10-item clinical instrument to document dysphagia symptom severity and has demonstrated excellent internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and criterion-based validity.

METHODS

This study utilized a retrospective chart review of 163 patients from July 2013 to October 2017 who underwent ACDF at a single institution and prospectively completed EAT-10 surveys pre- and postoperatively. EAT-10 scores were collected preoperatively and at postoperative day 1, day 14, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. Preselected risk factors were abstracted from the patients' chart. Univariate analyses were performed to identify candidate variables that correlated with abnormal EAT-10 scores at each time point. Multivariate logistic regression was then utilized to identify risk factors that were independently correlated with abnormal EAT-10 scores at each time point.

RESULTS

Female gender, younger patients, and increased operating room (OR) time was associated with increased rates of dysphagia in the early postoperative period. History of obstructive sleep apnea, history of asthma, increased American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and a larger number of spinal levels included in the surgery were correlated with increased dysphagia in the later postoperative periods.

CONCLUSION

Dysphagia is common following ACDF. Factors associated with longer-term dysphagia seem to be more associated with pre-existing medical comorbidities. Understanding risk factors that correlate with increased rates of dysphagia has the potential to improve preoperative patient counseling and changes in operative management.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Bolus retention in hiatal hernia identified by high-resolution esophageal manometry with impedance

BACKGROUND

Esophageal acid retention in a hiatal hernia (HH) may play a role in gastro-esophageal reflux. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of bolus retention (BR) in HH and to compare pressure profiles in patients with HH with BR in the hernia to those with bolus clearance (BC) through the hernia using high-resolution esophageal manometry with impedance (HREMI).

METHODS

Clinical HREMI studies with HH ≥1.5 cm were analyzed for lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and crural diaphragm (CD) pressures and pressure profiles during 12 saline swallows. Impedance was analyzed for swallow retention in the HH.

KEY RESULTS

Bolus retention in a HH was present in 35 of 53 (66%) patients with a HH. Patients with BR had overall lower pressure profiles including a lower basal LES pressure (14.8 ± 10.6 vs 28.9 ± 16.8 mmHg; p = 0.0001), LES-CD gradient (6.8 ± 17.9 vs 20.6 ± 12.2 mmHg; p = 0.002), residual LES pressure (2.5 ± 4.6 vs 6.1 ± 12.2 mmHg; p = 0.017), amplitude of distal esophageal contractions (83.2 ± 38.8 vs 111.2 ± 42.8 mmHg; p = 0.020), and distal contractile integral (1487 ± 1016 vs 2608 ± 1221 mmHg-cm-sec; p = 0.001) compared to the BC group. Patients with BR were more likely to have a larger sized HH compared to the BC group (3.1 ± 1.6 vs 2.1 ± 0.6 cm; p = 0.016); similar pressure changes were found when the groups were divided up by HH sizes.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Bolus retention was seen in 66% of patients with HH. Bolus retention in the HH was associated with larger HH size, lower LES pressure, and lower esophageal contractile pressures compared to those with BC.