Chicago Classification update (V4.0): Technical review on diagnostic criteria for ineffective esophageal motility and absent contractility

Identification of Achalasia Within Absent Contractility Phenotypes on High-Resolution Manometry: Prevalence, Predictive Factors, and Treatment Outcome

INTRODUCTION

Absent contractility on high-resolution manometry (HRM) defines severe hypomotility but needs distinction from achalasia. We retrospectively identified achalasia within absent contractility using HRM provocative maneuvers, barium esophagography, and functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP).

METHODS

Adult patients with absent contractility on HRM during the 4-year study period were eligible for inclusion. Inadequate studies, achalasia after therapy, or prior foregut surgery were exclusions. Upright integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) >12 mm Hg, panesophageal pressurization, and/or elevated IRP on multiple rapid swallows and rapid drink challenge (RDC) were considered abnormal. Esophageal barium retention and abnormal esophagogastric junction distensibility index (<2.0 mm 2 /mm Hg) on FLIP defined achalasia. Clinical, endoscopic, and motor characteristics of patients with achalasia were compared with absent contractility without obstruction.

RESULTS

Of 164 patients, 20 (12.2%) had achalasia (17.9% of 112 patients with adjunctive testing), while 92 did not, and 52 did not undergo adjunctive tests. Achalasia was diagnosed regardless of IRP value, but the median supine IRP was higher (odds ratio 1.196, 95% confidence interval 1.041-1.375, P = 0.012). Patients with achalasia were more likely to present with dysphagia (80.0% vs 35.9%, P < 0.001), with obstructive features on HRM maneuvers (83.3% vs 48.9%, P = 0.039), but lower likelihood of GERD evidence (20.0% vs 47.3%, P = 0.027) or large hiatus hernia (15.0% vs 43.8%, P = 0.002). On multivariable analysis, dysphagia presentation ( P = 0.006) and pressurization on RDC ( P = 0.027) predicted achalasia, while reflux and presurgical evaluations and lack of RDC obstruction predicted absent contractility without obstruction.

DISCUSSION

Despite HRM diagnosis of absent contractility, achalasia is identified in more than 1 in 10 patients regardless of IRP value.

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.

Ineffective esophageal motility: Characterization and outcomes across pediatric neurogastroenterology and motility centers in the United States

OBJECTIVES

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) on high-resolution manometry (HRM) is not consistently associated with specific clinical syndromes or outcomes. We evaluated the prevalence, clinical features, management, and outcomes of pediatric IEM patients across the United States.

METHODS

Clinical and manometric characteristics of children undergoing esophageal HRM during 2021-2022 were collected from 12 pediatric motility centers. Clinical presentation, test results, management strategies, and outcomes were compared between children with IEM and normal HRM.

RESULTS

Of 236 children (median age 15 years, 63.6% female, 79.2% Caucasian), 62 (23.6%) patients had IEM, and 174 (73.7%) patients had normal HRM, with similar demographics, medical history, clinical presentation, and median symptom duration. Reflux monitoring was performed more often for IEM patients (25.8% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.002), but other adjunctive testing was similar. Among 101 patients with follow-up, symptomatic cohorts declined in both groups in relation to the initial presentation (p > 0.107 for each comparison) with management targeting symptoms, particularly acid suppression. Though prokinetics were used more often and behavioral therapy less often in IEM (p ≤ 0.015 for each comparison), symptom outcomes were similar between IEM and normal HRM. Despite a higher proportion with residual dysphagia on follow-up in IEM (64.0% vs. 39.1%, p = 0.043), an alternate mechanism for dysphagia was identified more often in IEM (68.8%) compared to normal HRM (27.8%, p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

IEM is a descriptive manometric pattern rather than a clinical diagnosis requiring specific intervention in children. Management based on clinical presentation provides consistent symptom outcomes.

Discriminating "impaired" from "disordered" contractile response on FLIP panometry by utilizing pressure measurement

BACKGROUND

Functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) panometry evaluates esophageal motility, including the contractile response to distension, that is, secondary peristalsis. Impaired/disordered contractile response (IDCR) is an abnormal, but nonspecific contractile response that can represent either hypomotility or spastic motor disorders on high-resolution manometry (HRM). We hypothesized that FLIP pressure could be incorporated to clarify IDCR and aimed to determine its utility in a cohort of symptomatic esophageal motility patients.

METHODS

173 adult patients that had IDCR on FLIP panometry and HRM with a conclusive Chicago Classification v4.0 (CCv4.0) diagnosis were included and analyzed as development (n = 118) and validation (n = 55) cohorts. FLIP pressure values were assessed for prediction of either hypomotility or spasm, defined on HRM/CCv4.0.

KEY RESULTS

HRM/CCv4.0 diagnoses were normal motility in 48 patients (28%), "hypomotility" (ineffective esophageal motility, absent contractility, or Type I or II achalasia) in 89 (51%), and "spasm" (Type III achalasia, distal esophageal spasm, or hypercontractile esophagus) in 36 (21%). The pressure at esophagogastric junction-distensibility index (DI) (60 mL) was lower in hypomotility (median [interquartile range] 34 [28-42] mmHg) than in spasm (49 [40-62] mmHg; p < 0.001) and had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.80 (95% CI 0.73-0.88) for hypomotility and 0.76 (0.69-0.83) for spasm. For "spasm" on HRM, a threshold FLIP pressure of >35 mmHg provided 90% sensitivity (47% specificity) while >55 mmHg provided 93% specificity (40% sensitivity).

CONCLUSION & INFERENCES

Pressure on FLIP panometry can help clarify the significance of IDCR, with low-pressure IDCR associated with hypomotility and high-pressure IDCR suggestive of spastic motor disorders.

The Milan score: A novel manometric tool for a more efficient diagnosis of gastro-esophageal reflux disease

OBJECTIVE

A definitive diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) depends on endoscopic and/or pH-study criteria. However, high resolution manometry (HRM) can identify factors predicting GERD, such as ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), esophago-gastric junction contractile integral (EGJ-CI), evaluating esophagogastric junction (EGJ) type and straight leg raise (SLR) maneuver response. We aimed to build and externally validate a manometric score (Milan Score) to stratify the risk and severity of the disease in patients undergoing HRM for suspected GERD.

METHODS

A population of 295 consecutive patients undergoing HRM and pH-study for persistent typical or atypical GERD symptoms was prospectively enrolled to build a model and a nomogram that provides a risk score for AET > 6%. Collected HRM data included IEM, EGJ-CI, EGJ type and SLR. A supplemental cohort of patients undergoing HRM and pH-study was also prospectively enrolled in 13 high-volume esophageal function laboratories across the world in order to validate the model. Discrimination and calibration were used to assess model's accuracy. Gastroesophageal reflux disease was defined as acid exposure time >6%.

RESULTS

Out of the analyzed variables, SLR response and EGJ subtype 3 had the highest impact on the score (odd ratio 18.20 and 3.87, respectively). The external validation cohort consisted of 233 patients. In the validation model, the corrected Harrel c-index was 0.90. The model-fitting optimism adjusted calibration slope was 0.93 and the integrated calibration index was 0.07, indicating good calibration.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel HRM score for GERD diagnosis has been created and validated. The MS might be a useful screening tool to stratify the risk and the severity of GERD, allowing a more comprehensive pathophysiologic assessment of the anti-reflux barrier.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT05851482).

Esophageal motor abnormalities in gastroesophageal reflux disorders

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), a prevalent condition with multifactorial pathogenesis, involves esophageal motor dysmotility as a key contributing factor to its development. When suspected GERD patients have an inadequate response to proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and normal upper endoscopy results, high-resolution manometry (HRM) is utilized to rule out alternative diagnosis such as achalasia spectrum disorders, rumination, or supragastric belching. At present, HRM continues to provide supportive evidence for diagnosing GERD and determining the appropriate treatment. This review focuses on the existing understanding of the connection between esophageal motor findings and the pathogenesis of GERD, along with the significance of esophageal HRM in managing GERD patients. The International GERD Consensus Working Group introduced a three-step method, assessing the esophagogastric junction (EGJ), esophageal body motility, and contraction reserve with multiple rapid swallow (MRS) maneuvers. Crucial HRM abnormalities in GERD include frequent transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations, disrupted EGJ, and esophageal body hypomotility. Emerging HRM metrics like EGJ-contractile integral and innovative provocative maneuver like straight leg raise have the potential to enhance our understanding of factors contributing to GERD, thereby increasing the value of HRM performed in patients who experience symptoms suspected of GERD.

Fifteen-year symptomatic outcome of patients with nonactionable motor findings on high-resolution manometry

BACKGROUND

High-resolution manometry (HRM) is performed for evaluation of esophageal symptoms, but patient outcome is unclear when no actionable motor disorder is identified. We evaluated long-term symptomatic outcome of patients with nonactionable HRM findings.

METHODS

Patients who underwent (HRM) studies in 2006-2008 were tracked. Patients with achalasia spectrum disorders, foregut surgery before or after HRM, and incomplete symptom documentation were excluded. Symptom questionnaires assessing dominant symptom intensity (DSI, product of symptom severity and frequency recorded on 5-point Likert scales) and global symptom severity (GSS, from 10 cm visual analog scale) were repeated. Change in symptom burden was compared against HRM motor findings using Chicago Classification 4.0 (CCv4.0), applied retroactively to 2006-2008 data.

KEY RESULTS

Overall, 134 patients (median age 68 years, 64.5% female) could be contacted. The majority (73.1%) had normal motility; others had ineffective esophageal motility (8.2%), esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (13.4%), hypercontractile esophagus (3.0%), or absent contractility (2.2%), none managed invasively. Over 15 years of follow-up, DSI decreased from 8.0 (4.0-16.0) to 1.0 (0.0-6.0) (p < 0.001) and GSS improved from 5.5 (3.3-7.7) to 2.0 (0.0-4.0) (p < 0.001); improvement was consistent across CCv4.0 diagnoses and subgroups. The majority (82.8%) reported improvement over time, and antisecretory medication was the most effective intervention (83.0% improvement). There was no difference in medication efficacy (p = 0.75) or improvement in symptoms (p = 0.20) based on CCv4 diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Esophageal symptoms improve with conservative symptomatic management over long-term follow-up when no conclusive obstructive motor disorders or achalasia spectrum disorders are found on HRM.

A Comparison between Chicago Classification Versions 3.0 and 4.0 and Their Impact on Manometric Diagnoses in Esophageal High-Resolution Manometry Cases

High-resolution manometry (HRM) facilitates the detailed evaluation of esophageal motility. In December 2020, Chicago classification (CC) version 4.0 introduced modifications to improve consistency and accuracy. We conducted this study to compare the differences in the interpretations of HRM examinations between CC 3.0 and 4.0. Consecutive HRM records at a Taiwan tertiary medical center, including wet swallows and MRS performed in both supine and sitting positions from October 2019 to May 2021, were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed using both CC versions 3.0 and 4.0. A total of 105 patients were enrolled, and 102 patients completed the exam, while three could not tolerate HRM sitting up. Refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms (n = 65, 63.7%) and dysphagia (n = 37, 36.3%) were the main indications. A total of 18 patients (17.6%) were reclassified to new diagnoses using CC 4.0. Of the 11 patients initially diagnosed with absent contractility, 3 (27.3%) were reclassified as having Type 1 achalasia. Of the 18 patients initially diagnosed with IEM, 6 (33.3%) were reclassified as normal. The incidence of diagnosis changes was similar in both the dysphagia and refractory GERD symptoms groups (21.6% versus 15.3%, p = 0.43). The use of CC 4.0 led to changes in the diagnoses of esophageal motility disease, irrespective of examination indications. Early adoption improves the accuracy of diagnoses and affects patient management.

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.

Optimizing the Management Algorithm for Esophageal Dysphagia After Index Endoscopy: Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Minimization Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines advise esophageal motility testing for dysphagia when structural disorders are ruled out, but cost concerns impede adoption. We evaluated cost-effective positioning of esophageal motility testing in the algorithm to evaluate esophageal dysphagia.

METHODS

We developed a decision analytic model comparing 3 strategies: (i) esophageal manometry, (ii) screening impedance planimetry followed by esophageal manometry if needed, or (iii) nonalgorithmic usual care. Diagnostic test accuracy was adapted to expected rates of esophageal motility disorders in general gastroenterology populations. We modeled routine testing for all patients with nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia compared with selective testing with strong suspicion for achalasia. Cost outcomes were defined on national commercial and Medicare datasets stratified on age and sex. Health outcomes were modeled on populations with achalasia. The time horizon was 1 year.

RESULTS

Motility testing was preferred over nonalgorithmic usual care due to cost savings rather than health gains. To commercial insurers, routine esophageal manometry for nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia would be cost-saving below a reimbursed cost of $2,415. Screening impedance planimetry would be cost saving below a reimbursed cost of $1,130. The limit for reimbursed costs would be lower for patients older than 65 years to achieve cost savings mainly due to insurance. Sex did not significantly influence cost-effectiveness. Patients and insurers preferred routine screening impedance planimetry before manometry when the index of suspicion for achalasia was below 6%.

DISCUSSION

Aligning with practice guidelines, routine esophageal motility testing seems cost saving to patients and insurers compared with nonalgorithmic usual care to evaluate nonstructural/mechanical dysphagia. Choice of testing should be guided by index of suspicion.

Esophageal Motility Disorders: Diagnosis and Treatment Strategies

BACKGROUND

Esophageal motility disorders (EMDs) are caused by the impaired relaxation of the upper/lower esophageal sphincter and/or defective esophageal peristaltic contractions, resulting in dysphagia and noncardiac chest pain. High-resolution manometry (HRM) is essential for the diagnosis of primary EMD; however, the recognition of EMD and HRM by general practitioners in Japan is limited. This review summarizes the diagnosis of and treatment strategies for EMD.

SUMMARY

HRM is a specific test for the diagnosis of EMD, whereas endoscopy and barium swallow as screening tests provide characteristic findings (i.e., esophageal rosette and bird's beak sign) in some cases. It is important to note that manometric diagnoses apart from achalasia are often clinically irrelevant; therefore, the recently updated guidelines suggest additional manometric maneuvers, such as the rapid drink challenge, and further testing, including functional lumen imaging, for a more accurate diagnosis before invasive treatment. Endoscopic/surgical myotomy, pneumatic dilation, and botulinum toxin injections need to be considered for patients with achalasia and clinically relevant esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction.

KEY MESSAGE

Since the detailed pathophysiology of EMD remains unclear, their diagnosis needs to be cautiously established prior to the initiation of invasive treatment.

Interrater Reliability of Functional Lumen Imaging Probe Panometry and High-Resolution Manometry for the Assessment of Esophageal Motility Disorders

INTRODUCTION

High-resolution manometry (HRM) and functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) are primary and/or complementary diagnostic tools for the evaluation of esophageal motility. We aimed to assess the interrater agreement and accuracy of HRM and FLIP interpretations.

METHODS

Esophageal motility specialists from multiple institutions completed the interpretation of 40 consecutive HRM and 40 FLIP studies. Interrater agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for continuous variables and Fleiss' κ statistics for nominal variables. Accuracies of rater interpretation were assessed using the consensus of 3 experienced raters as the reference standard.

RESULTS

Fifteen raters completed the HRM and FLIP studies. An excellent interrater agreement was seen in supine median integral relaxation pressure (ICC 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.95-0.98), and a good agreement was seen with the assessment of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow, peristalsis, and assignment of a Chicago Classification version 4.0 diagnosis using HRM (κ = 0.71, 0.75, and 0.70, respectively). An excellent interrater agreement for EGJ distensibility index and maximum diameter (0.91 [0.90-0.94], 0.92 [0.89-0.95]) was seen, and a moderate-to-good agreement was seen in the assignment of EGJ opening classification, contractile response pattern, and motility classification (κ = 0.68, 0.56, and 0.59, respectively) on FLIP. Rater accuracy for Chicago Classification version 4.0 diagnosis on HRM was 82% (95% confidence interval 78%-84%) and for motility diagnosis on FLIP Panometry was 78% (95% confidence interval 72%-81%).

DISCUSSION

Our study demonstrates high levels of interrater agreement and accuracy in the interpretation of HRM and FLIP metrics and moderate-to-high levels for motility classification in FLIP, supporting the use of these approaches for primary or complementary evaluation of esophageal motility disorders.

Esophageal high-resolution manometry demands visual interpretation in addition to mathematical software-based analysis

PURPOSE

Esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) revolutionized esophageal function testing due to the intuitive colorful and agreeable-to-the-eyes plots (Clouse plots). HRM execution and interpretation is guided by the Chicago Classification. The well-established metrics for interpretation allows a reliable automatic software analysis. Analysis based on these mathematical parameters, however, ignores the valuable visual interpretation unique to human eyes and based on expertise.

METHODS

We compiled some situations where visual interpretation added useful information for HRM interpretation.

RESULTS

Visual interpretation may be useful in cases of hypomotility, premature waves, artifacts, segmental abnormalities of peristalsis, and extra-luminal non-contractile findings.

CONCLUSION

These extra findings can be reported apart from the conventional parameters.

Dietary factors involved in GERD management

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is extremely common, and even modest weight gain has been associated with higher symptom burden as well as objective evidence of reflux on endoscopy and physiological measurement. Certain trigger foods, especially citrus, coffee, chocolate, fried food, spicy food and red sauces are frequently reported to worsen reflux symptoms, although hard evidence linking these items to objective GERD is lacking. There is better evidence that large meal volume and high calorie content can increase esophageal reflux burden. Conversely, sleeping with the head end of the bed raised, avoiding lying down close to meals, sleeping on the left side and weight loss can improve reflux symptoms and objective reflux evidence, especially when the esophagogastric junction 'reflux barrier' is compromised (e.g., in the presence of a hiatus hernia). Consequently, attention to diet and weight loss are both important elements of management of GERD, and need to be incorporated into management plans.

Assessment of Esophageal Motility in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Scoping Review

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated condition causing esophageal symptoms, particularly dysphagia. Despite the important progress in the treatment of EoE, a significant proportion of patients continue to report symptoms that negatively impact quality of life. Esophageal manometry is used to assess motility and function, but is not routinely used in EoE. We aimed to systematically review and describe current literature evaluating esophageal manometry in EoE. Forty-eight studies meeting the criteria were identified, describing 802 patients. Using standard water swallow protocols, the proportion of abnormalities detected was not dissimilar to other populations, apart from disorders of esophago-gastric outflow, which were found in 5%. Twelve studies described pretreatment and posttreatment manometry, with motility normalization after pharmacological therapy reported in 20%. Early, brief panesophageal pressurization was described in a number of studies and was more prevalent in the few studies utilizing additional provocation testing. Reports in the literature regarding temporal relationships between manometric findings and symptoms are variable. Esophageal manometry may be capable of detecting clinically relevant changes to esophageal function in EoE. Possible mechanisms are altered neuromuscular function because of secretory products of EoE and/or fibroinflammatory processes, manifesting as pressurization because of altered esophageal compliance. Some changes may be reversible with therapy. Drawing strong conclusions from the literature is difficult, with bias toward case reports and retrospective observation. Adaptations to assessment protocols to include provocation testing may provide more robust evaluation and detect clinically relevant, subtle changes in esophageal function, earlier within the patient pathway.

High-resolution manometry with additional maneuvers using the Starlet system: normative thresholds and diagnostic yields for relevant esophagogastric junction outflow disorders

BACKGROUND

Chicago classification version 4.0 suggests additional maneuvers, such as upright testing, multiple rapid swallows (MRS), and the rapid drink challenge (RDC), for high-resolution manometry (HRM) to minimize ambiguity in the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders. The present study investigated normative thresholds for these new metrics using the Starlet system as well as their diagnostic yields for relevant esophagogastric outflow disorders (EGJOD).

METHODS

In study 1, 30 asymptomatic volunteers prospectively performed HRM including MRS and RDC in the supine/upright positions. We calculated normative thresholds for the new metrics, such as upright integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), upright intrabolus pressure (IBP), and IRP during RDC (RDC-IRP). In study 2, we retrospectively analyzed the HRM tracings of 82 patients who underwent HRM in both positions at our hospital to assess the diagnostic yields of HRM metrics.

RESULTS

Based on the results of study 1, we adopted the following normative thresholds: upright IRP < 20 mmHg, upright IBP < 21 mmHg, and RDC-IRP < 16 mmHg. In study 2, 45 patients with dysphagia or chest pain were included in the analysis to identify predictive factors for clinically relevant esophagogastric outflow disorders (true EGJOD). Supine/upright IRP, RDC-IRP, and pan-esophageal pressurization > 20 mmHg during RDC (RDC-PEP) predicted true EGJOD with RDC-PEP with the highest sensitivity of 91.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

HRM with additional maneuvers may facilitate the diagnosis of clinically relevant EGJOD.

Underlying etiology associated with the diagnosis of absent contractility on high resolution esophageal manometry

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Absent contractility is considered a disorder of peristalsis. The literature about the etiology and clinical characteristics is scarce and the evidence on systemic diseases associated with this esophageal disorder is limited. Therefore, we aimed to determine the etiology of absent contractility in our population using the clinical algorithm recently described in the literature.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, descriptive study at a single tertiary hospital of all patients diagnosed of absent contractility between May 2018 and February 2020. Data on demographic characteristics, medication, comorbidities, and laboratory and paraclinical tests were recorded from clinical records.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients with absent contractility were included for analysis. There was a predominance of female sex (n=43, 59.7%), with a mean age of 55.4 (±15.0) years. We identified a systemic disorder associated with absent contractility in 64 (88.9%) patients. From these, 31 (43.1%) patients were diagnosed with a systemic autoimmune disease, 26 (36.1%) patients were considered to have absent contractility secondary to pathological exposure to acid-reflux and 15 (20.8%) patients were diagnosed with other non-autoimmune systemic disorders. In the remaining eight (11.1%) patients, there were no underlying systemic disorders that could justify the diagnosis of absent contractility.

CONCLUSIONS

A systematic approach to search for an underlying cause in patients diagnosed with absent contractility is warranted. Up to 90% of patients with absent contractility have a systemic disorder associated with this condition.

RNA-sequencing reveals molecular and regional differences in the esophageal mucosa of achalasia patients

Achalasia is an esophageal motility disorder characterized by the functional loss of myenteric plexus ganglion cells in the distal esophagus and lower esophageal sphincter. Histological changes have been reported in the esophageal mucosa of achalasia, suggesting its involvement in disease pathogenesis. Despite recent advances in diagnosis, our understanding of achalasia pathogenesis at the molecular level is very limited and gene expression profiling has not been performed. We performed bulk RNA-sequencing on esophageal mucosa from 14 achalasia and 8 healthy subjects. 65 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were found in the distal esophageal mucosa of achalasia subjects and 120 DEGs were identified in proximal esophagus. Gene expression analysis identified genes common or exclusive to proximal and distal esophagus, highlighting regional differences in the disease. Enrichment of signaling pathways related to cytokine response and viral defense were observed. Increased infiltration of CD45+ intraepithelial leukocytes were seen in the mucosa of 38 achalasia patients compared to 12 controls. Novel insights into the molecular changes occurring in achalasia were generated in this transcriptomic study. Some gene changes observed in the mucosa of achalasia may be associated with esophagitis. Differences in DEGs between distal and proximal esophagus highlight the importance of better understanding regional differences in achalasia.

Clinical symptoms, endoscopic findings, and lower esophageal sphincter characteristics in patients with absent contractility

Absent contractility is a rare esophageal motility disorder defined by high-resolution manometry which remains poorly understood in pathogenesis and management. We investigated the clinical symptoms, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy findings, and lower esophageal sphincter (LES) characteristics in adult patients diagnosed with absent contractility on high resolution manometry and factors associated with erosive esophagitis that were found on endoscopy in these patients. A cross-sectional study was conducted in patients with absent contractility who were examined at the Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Vietnam between March 2018 and December 2020. Clinical symptoms, endoscopic findings, and LES metrics were collected and compared between individuals with and without erosive esophagitis. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine a variety of factors associated with erosive esophagitis. Among 7519 patients who underwent high resolution manometry, 204 (2.7%) were diagnosed with absent contractility. The mean age of the study sample was 45.9 years, 65.7% were women, and none had systemic sclerosis. The most common symptoms were regurgitation, belching, epigastric pain, and bloating. On endoscopy, 50% had erosive esophagitis, mostly Los Angeles grade A (42.9%). On manometry, 44.6% of the patients had LES hypotension and 68.1% had low integrated relaxation pressure in 4 seconds (IRP4s). Male sex (adjusted odds ratio = 2.01, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-3.89) and an IRP4s < 5 mm Hg (adjusted odds ratio = 2.21, 95% confidence interval: 1.12-4.37) were significantly associated with erosive esophagitis. Absent contractility was present in many patients without known systemic diseases. Erosive esophagitis was common and associated with male sex and low IRP4s.

Dysphagia Worsens With Increasing Ineffective Swallows Among Patients With Ineffective Esophageal Motility

INTRODUCTION

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is the most common motility disorder identified on esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM), but patients with this finding may be asymptomatic. Therefore, we aimed to identify specific HRM findings predictive of symptoms in IEM.

METHODS

Adult patients (≥18 y) who underwent HRM between March 2016 and July 2019 were retrospectively evaluated and reclassified according to Chicago Classification 4.0 (CC4.0). Demographic information, HRM parameters, and gastroesophageal reflux disease Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire responses were captured among those with normal manometry or IEM. We evaluated the association between heartburn, regurgitation, and dysphagia, with respect to HRM findings including ineffective swallows.

RESULTS

Of 379 patients, 243 (64.1%) had a normal manometry, 136 (35.9%) were on IEM spectrum, and 73 (19.3%) had conclusive IEM by CC4.0. Mean dysphagia scores were significantly higher in those with conclusive IEM compared with those with normal HRM (2.00 vs. 1.36, P=0.002), as was the percentage of individuals reporting dysphagia affecting daily activities (21.9% vs. 11.4%, P=0.02). Heartburn and regurgitation symptoms did not differ between groups. In a multivariable model of IEM patients, the percentage of ineffective swallows independently predicted a higher dysphagia burden (β regression coefficient: 0.032, P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Applying the CC4.0 definition for conclusive IEM identifies a group of patients with worse dysphagia symptoms. Within this group, the percentage of ineffective swallows was an independent predictor of dysphagia severity. These findings may help practitioners and patients contextualize the heterogeneous diagnosis of IEM.

[Chicago Classification ver. 4.0: Diagnosis of Peristaltic Disorder]

The Chicago Classification is being revised continuously for the accurate diagnosis of esophageal peristaltic disorders in which the etiology is unclear, and the disease behavior is heterogeneous. The ver. 4.0 was recently updated. A representative change in the diagnosis of esophageal peristaltic disorders of the ver. 4.0 showed that the distinction between major and minor disorders was eliminated and was divided into the following four diagnoses: absent contractility, distal esophageal spasm (DES), hypercontractile esophagus (HE), and ineffective esophageal motility. Compared to the ver. 3.0, it recommended a more detailed protocol of high-resolution esophageal manometry and methods of interpreting manometric. In addition, it emphasized the clinically relevant symptoms in diagnosing DES and HE, and presented provocative tests (e.g., multiple rapid swallow and rapid drinking challenge), as well as additional testing, including impedance, timed barium esophagogram and functional lumen imaging probe, which may provide more standardized and rigorous criteria for peristaltic patterns and to minimize the ambiguity in diagnosis. Although it will take time and effort to apply this revised Chicago Classification in clinical practice, it may help diagnose and manage patients with esophageal peristalsis disorder in the future.

Making Sense of Nonachalasia Esophageal Motor Disorders

Achalasia is the prototypical obstructive motor disorder diagnosed using HRM, but non-achalasia motor disorders are often identified in symptomatic patients. The clinical relevance of these disorders are assessed using ancillary HRM maneuvers (multiple rapid swallows, rapid drink challenge, solid swallows) that augment the standard supine HRM evaluation by challenging peristaltic function. Finding obstructive motor physiology in non-achalasia motor disorders may raise the option of invasive management akin to achalasia. Certain non-achalasia disorders, particularly hypermotility disorders, may manifest as epiphenomena seen with esophageal hypersensitivity. Symptomatic management is offered for superimposed reflux disease, psychological disorders, functional esophageal disorders, and behavioral disorders.

How Updates in Chicago Classification Impact Clinical Practice

Chicago Classification version 4.0 (CC v4.0), published in 2021, presents several modifications largely aimed at minimizing over-diagnosis of inconclusive patterns on high-resolution manometry (HRM). These include: 1) introduction of a standardized HRM protocol for consistency among centers, 2) emphasis on the need for supportive data in instances of inconclusive manometric patterns, 3) required presence of relevant symptoms in certain instances to reduce over-diagnosis and inappropriate interventions, and 4) classification as disorders of EGJ outflow or disorders of peristalsis. These updates aim to improve the clinical application of HRM and patient outcomes.

Hard to Swallow Results

The American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society (ANMS) proposed quality measures (QMs) for performance and interpretation of esophageal manometry (EM). We implemented a quality improvement (QI) study at a large community hospital to assess and improve procedural adherence and interpretation of EM studies based on the ANMS QMs using the Chicago Classification 3.0 (CC) Guidelines. For pre-intervention, three motility independent reviewers reinterpreted 60 EM studies conducted by community gastroenterologists without Tier II-III motility training from October to December 2018 for compliance with pre-procedural, procedural, and data interpretation ANMS QMs. In December 2018, we developed a pre-procedural form, educated nurses on EM procedural compliance, and provided preliminary pre-intervention results to gastroenterologists along with literature utilizing the CC 3.0 Guidelines. For post-intervention, we reinterpreted 54 EM studies from January to August 2019 and investigated whether they met QMs for data interpretation with respect to the CC Guidelines and resulted in appropriate treatment. We found a statistically significant improvement in procedural compliance among nursing staff for 30 s of swallows (76% post-intervention versus 12% pre-intervention, p < 0.001) and 7 evaluable swallows (94% post-intervention versus 53% pre-intervention, p < 0.001). However, quality metrics within data interpretation by physicians post-intervention showed mixed results. An incorrect diagnosis was made in 50% (n = 27)) of studies with 72% (n = 39) having at least one missing item based on the CC. The most missed diagnosis was fragmented peristalsis (30%, n = 29). Among the 39% (n = 21) of surgery referrals, 24% (n = 5) were incorrectly referred. Our study shows poor data interpretation by community gastroenterologists without formal motility training despite adequate performance by nursing staff. This further supports the need for a national ANMS certification process for formal HRM education.