Diagnostic yield of adding solid food swallows during high-resolution manometry in esophageal motility disorders

A practical approach to ineffective esophageal motility

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is the most frequently diagnosed esophageal motility abnormality and characterized by diminished esophageal peristaltic vigor and frequent weak, absent, and/or fragmented peristalsis on high-resolution esophageal manometry. Despite its commonplace occurrence, this condition can often provoke uncertainty for both patients and clinicians. Although the diagnostic criteria used to define this condition has generally become more stringent over time, it is unclear whether the updated criteria result in a more precise clinical diagnosis. While IEM is often implicated with symptoms of dysphagia and gastroesophageal reflux disease, the strength of these associations remains unclear. In this review, we share a practical approach to IEM highlighting its definition and evolution over time, commonly associated clinical symptoms, and important management and treatment considerations. We also share the significance of this condition in patients undergoing evaluation for anti-reflux surgery and consideration for lung transplantation.

The yield of solid swallows in high resolution esophageal manometry among patients with dysphagia and gastro-esophageal reflux symptoms

BACKGROUND

Swallowing disorders are frequently reported esophageal symptoms and represent a common cause for referrals to gastroenterology consultations. Esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) is considered the gold standard modality for the evaluation of esophageal peristalsis and esophageal sphincter. The standard protocol of HRM includes water swallows only, that may not assess appropriately esophageal function and symptoms. Hence, we investigated the diagnostic yield of combining solid food swallows (SFS) to standard HRM.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study at the Unit of Gastroenterology of EMMS Nazareth Hospital, Israel. Patients who underwent manometry mainly due to dysphagia or reflux symptoms between November 2019 and November 2020 were enrolled. All patients underwent routine HRM and completed ten 5 mL water swallows and 5 bread swallows. Analysis and reports were done by an expert gastroenterologist, based on the Chicago Classification version 3.

RESULTS

Overall, 99 patients (45.5% men, mean age 52.1±16 years) who underwent HRM were included. The addition of solid swallows to the test changed manometry results in 43 patients (43.4%) (P<0.005). Furthermore, SFS improved the contractility in 26/42 cases of ineffective and/or absent motility (61%) (P<0.005). Finally, SFS aggravated symptoms in 44 patients (44.6% more aggravation than in liquid only) (P<0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Combining SFS to HRM can improve the diagnostic yield of the study. Adding solid swallows is of special value in cases of ineffective esophageal motility but induces a high rate of symptoms aggravation.

Assessing the diagnostic yield of achalasia using provocative testing in high-resolution esophageal manometry: Serial diagnostic study

BACKGROUND

Chicago Classification v4.0 recommends that if achalasia is demonstrated with single water swallows (SWS); provocative testing is not required. We determine whether provocative testing in patients with suspected achalasia can change manometric findings and reproduce symptoms.

METHODS

Between 2016 and 2022, 127 consecutive manometry studies of patients with achalasia were retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent SWS, a solid meal (SM) and/or a rapid drink challenge (RDC). Demographic data, fluoroscopy, gastroscopy, and pre-and post-treatment Eckardt scores were collated.

KEY RESULTS

Of 127 achalasia patients (50.6 ± 16.6 years and 54.6% male), all completed a SM and 116 (91.3%) completed RDC; overall 83 were naïve (65.4%) to previous therapy. 15.4% patients with normal integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) on SWS demonstrated obstruction with RDC. SM gave a different achalasia phenotype in 44.9% of patients (p ⟨ 0.001). Twelve patients with normal IRP during SWS had persistent/recurrent obstruction during provocative testing; 83.3% had previous achalasia therapy. None of 13 patients with Type III (TIII) achalasia with SWS exhibited a change in manometric findings with provocative testing. Impedance bolus heights were lower in patients with TIII achalasia and those with normal IRP with SWS. During the SM, symptoms were reproduced in 56.7% of patients. Forty-six of 103 patients (44.7%) underwent therapy based upon the final achalasia subtype which was defined by the provocative test result of the high-resolution manometry (HRM) study. All treatments were effective, regardless of the achalasia subtype.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Manometric findings remain unchanged when TIII achalasia is diagnosed with SWS. In patients with normal IRP, Type I, or Type II achalasia during SWS, provocative testing can alter achalasia phenotype or uncover achalasia where diagnosis is unclear. Further, it can reproduce symptoms. Such findings can personalize and guide effective therapeutic decisions.

Clinical utility of the solid meal test during high-resolution esophageal manometry. A study in a Latin American population

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

The solid test meal (STM) is a challenge test that is done during esophageal manometry and appears to increase the diagnostic yield of the study. The aim of our analysis was to establish the normal values for STM and evaluate its clinical utility in a group of Latin American patients with esophageal disorders versus healthy controls.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted on a group of healthy controls and consecutive patients that underwent high-resolution esophageal manometry, in which STM was done at the final part of the study and consisted of asking the subjects to eat 200 g of precooked rice. The results were compared during the conventional protocol and the STM.

RESULTS

Twenty-five controls and 93 patients were evaluated. The majority of the controls (92%) completed the test in under 8 min. The STM changed the manometric diagnosis in 38% of the cases. The STM diagnosed 21% more major motor disorders than the conventional protocol; it doubled the cases of esophageal spasm and quadrupled the cases of jackhammer esophagus, whereas it demonstrated normal esophageal peristalsis in 43% of the cases with a previous diagnosis of ineffective esophageal motility.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms the fact that complementary STM during esophageal manometry adds information and enables a more physiologic assessment of esophageal motor function to be made, compared with liquid swallows, in patients with esophageal motor disorders.

A Comparative Assessment of the Diagnosis of Swallowing Impairment and Gastroesophageal Reflux in Canines and Humans

Swallowing impairment is a highly prevalent and clinically significant problem affecting people and dogs. There are myriad causes of swallowing impairment of which gastroesophageal reflux is the most common in both species. Similarities in anatomy and physiology between humans and canines results in analogous swallowing disorders including cricopharyngeus muscle achalasia, esophageal achalasia, hiatal herniation, and gastroesophageal reflux with secondary esophagitis and esophageal dysmotility. Accordingly, the diagnostic approach to human and canine patients with swallowing impairment is similar. Diagnostic procedures such as swallowing fluoroscopy, high-resolution manometry, pH/impedance monitoring, and endolumenal functional luminal imaging probe can be performed in both species; however, nasofacial conformation, increased esophageal length, and the difficulty of completing several of these procedures in awake dogs are inherent challenges that need to be considered. Human patients can convey their symptoms and respond to verbal cues, whereas veterinarians must rely on clinical histories narrated by pet owners followed by comprehensive physical examination and observation of the animal eating different food consistencies and drinking water. Dogs may also be unwilling to drink or eat in the hospital setting and may be resistant to physical restraint during diagnostic procedures. Despite the species differences and diagnostic challenges, dogs are a natural animal model for many oropharyngeal and esophageal disorders affecting people, which presents a tremendous opportunity for shared learnings. This manuscript reviews the comparative aspects of esophageal anatomy and physiology between humans and canines, summarizes the diagnostic assessment of swallowing impairment in both species, and discusses future considerations for collaborative medicine and translational research.

Diagnosis and Management of Achalasia: Updates of the Last Two Years

Achalasia is a rare neurodegenerative disorder causing dysphagia and is characterized by abnormal esophageal motor function as well as the loss of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxation. The assessment and management of achalasia has significantly progressed in recent years due to the advances in high-resolution manometry (HRM) technology along with the improvements and innovations of therapeutic endoscopy procedures. The recent evolution of HRM technology with the inclusion of an adjunctive test, fluoroscopy, and EndoFLIP has enabled more precise diagnoses of achalasia to be made and the subgrouping into therapeutically meaningful subtypes. Current management possibilities include endoscopic treatments such as Botulinum toxin injected to the LES and pneumatic balloon dilation. Surgical treatment includes laparoscopic Heller myotomy and esophagectomy. Furthermore, in recent years, per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has established itself as a principal endoscopic therapeutic alternative to the traditional laparoscopic Heller myotomy. The latest randomized trials report that POEM, pneumatic balloon dilatation, and laparoscopic Heller's myotomy have comparable effectiveness and complications rates. The aim of the current review is to provide a practical clinical approach to dysphagia and to shed light on the most recent improvements in diagnostics and treatment of achalasia over the last two years.

Chicago classification version 4.0© technical review: Update on standard high-resolution manometry protocol for the assessment of esophageal motility

The Chicago Classification v4.0 (CCv4.0) is the updated classification scheme for esophageal motility disorders using metrics from high-resolution manometry (HRM). A key feature of CCv.4.0 is the more rigorous and expansive protocol that incorporates single wet swallows acquired in different positions (supine, upright) and provocative testing, including multiple rapid swallows and rapid drink challenge. Additionally, solid bolus swallows, solid test meal, and/or pharmacologic provocation can be used to identify clinically relevant motility disorders and other conditions (eg, rumination) that occur during and after meals. The acquisition and analysis for performing these tests and the evidence supporting their inclusion in the Chicago Classification protocol is detailed in this technical review. Provocative tests are designed to increase the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of HRM studies for disorders of esophageal motility. These changes attempt to minimize ambiguity in prior iterations of Chicago Classification, decrease the proportion of HRM studies that deliver inconclusive diagnoses and increase the number of patients with a clinically relevant diagnosis that can direct effective therapy. Another aim in establishing a standard manometry protocol for motility laboratories around the world is to facilitate procedural consistency, improve diagnostic reliability, and promote collaborative research.

[Diagnosis of Dysphagia: High Resolution Manometry & EndoFLIP]

Esophageal motility disorders were re-defined when high-resolution manometry was employed to better understand their pathogenesis. Newly developed parameters including integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), distal contractile integral, and distal latency showed better diagnostic yield compared with previously used conventional parameters. Therefore, Chicago classification was formulated, and its diagnostic cascade begins by assessing the IRP value. However, IRP showed limitation due to its inconsistency, and other studies have tried to overcome this. Recent studies showed that provocative tests, supplementing the conventional esophageal manometry protocol, have improved the diagnostic yield of the esophageal motility disorders. Therefore, position change from supine to upright, solid or semi-solid swallowing, multiple rapid swallows, and the rapid drink challenge were newly added to the manometry protocol in the revised Chicago classification version 4.0. Impedance planimetry enables measurement of bag cross-sectional area at various locations. The functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) has been applied to assess luminal distensibility. This probe can also measure pressure, serial cross-sectional areas, and tension-strain relationship. The esophagogastric junction's distensibility is decreased in achalasia. Therefore, EndoFLIP can be used to assess contractility and distensibility of the esophagus in the patients with achalasia, including repetitive antegrade or retrograde contractions. EndoFLIP can detect achalasia patients with relatively low IRP, which was difficult to diagnose using the current high-resolution manometry. EndoFLIP also provides information on the contractile activity and distensibility of the esophageal body in patients with achalasia. The use of provocative tests, newly added in Chicago classification 4.0 version, and EndoFLIP can expand understanding of esophageal motility disorders.