Habitual rapid food intake and ineffective esophageal motility

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.

Dronabinol increases pain threshold in patients with functional chest pain: a pilot double-blind placebo-controlled trial

Noncardiac chest pain is associated with poor quality of life and high care expenditure. The majority of noncardiac chest pain is either gastresophageal reflux disease related or due to esophageal motility disorders, and the rest are considered functional chest pain (FCP) due to central and peripheral hypersensitivity. Current treatment of FCP improves 40-50% of patients. Cannabinoid receptors 1 (CB1) and 2 (CB2) modulate release of neurotransmitters; CB1 is located in the esophageal epithelium and reduces excitatory enteric transmission and potentially could reduce esophageal hypersensitivity. We performed a prospective study to evaluate its effects on pain threshold, frequency, and intensity in FCP. Subjects with FCP received dronabinol (5 mg, twice daily; n = 7; average age, 44 years; mean body mass index, 26.7) or placebo (n = 6; average age, 42 years; mean body mass index, 25.9) for 28 days (4 weeks). Chest pain, general health, and anxiety/depression questionnaires were assessed at baseline and at 4 weeks. Subjects underwent an esophageal balloon distention test prior to treatment and on last day of the study. Dronabinol increased pain thresholds significantly (3.0 vs. 1.0; P = 0.03) and reduced pain intensity and odynophagia compared to placebo (0.18 vs. 0.01 and 0.12 vs. 0.01, respectively, P = 0.04). Depression and anxiety scores did not differ between the groups at baseline or after treatment. No significant adverse effects were observed. In this novel study, dronabinol increased pain threshold and reduced frequency and intensity of pain in FCP. Further, large scale studies are needed to substantiate these findings.

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.