Does Chicago Classification address Symptom Correlation with High-resolution Esophageal Manometry?

Diagnostic Yield of High-resolution Esophageal Manometry With Chicago Classification Version 3.0 in Thai Patients

Background/Aims

High-resolution manometry with the Chicago classification scheme has been introduced in clinical practice as a gold standard for esophageal motility test. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic yield of high-resolution manometry in Thai patients.

Methods

All available high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) studies performed during the study period were retrospectively reviewed and interpreted according to the Chicago classification version 3.0. The main esophageal symptoms and coexisting factors were correlated with the HREM findings.

Results

Of the 201 patients, nearly half (49.8%) were documented to have dysphagia. The second most common condition was refractory reflux symptoms (17.4%). More than 70.0% of dysphagia patients showed abnormal esophageal motility, contrary to globus patients who mostly had normal test findings (65.4%). Dysphagia still was the most often correlated condition with major esophageal motility disorders (88.7%), particularly the elderly patients who have coexisting weight loss. Endoscopic and/or surgical procedures were revealed for the highest rate among patients with dysphagia but no one in the globus group needed this intervention. The sensitivity and specificity of dysphagia for major esophageal motility disorders were 70.0% and 67.0%. A much lower sensitivity and higher specificity were found in other non-dysphagia symptoms, especially nausea/vomiting or belching (3.0% or 89.0%). The highest positive likelihood ratio (2.10) to detect major abnormalities was also observed in dysphagia.

Conclusion

Esophageal manometry provided the highest yield in dysphagia; it was not a strongly beneficial test in patients presenting with nondysphagia to identify clinically relevant esophageal motor disorders.

Normal study or minor motor disorders detected on high-resolution oesophageal manometry - are they relevant?

Introduction

The clinical significance of normal motility or minor peristaltic disorders, noted on esophageal manometry, in symptomatic patients is unclear.

Aim

To determine the clinical presentation, response to treatment, and outcomes at 2-year follow-up in symptomatic patients with normal manometry and minor peristaltic disorders.

Material and methods

This prospective cohort study included patients between 18 and 80 years old. Patients with previous upper gastrointestinal surgery, prior dilation or myotomy, and major motility disorders or EGJ outflow obstruction as per CC v 3.0 were excluded. The cohort was divided into two groups: normal manometry (Gp1) and minor peristaltic defects (Gp2). Study subjects were contacted for follow-up at 6, 12, and 24 months from the date of initial high-resolution oesophageal manometry study. Details of drug use, symptom control, and requirement of anti-reflux procedures in both groups were obtained.

Results

Fifty-six patients (median age: 42.3 years, males 72%) formed the study cohort: Gp1 - 35 (62.5%) and Gp2 - 21 (37.5%). The patients in the two groups were comparable in terms of symptoms (p = 0.94) and treatment (p = 0.15) at presentation. On follow-up, the majority of the cases (76.8%) reported improvement in symptoms at 2 years. None required anti-reflux procedures. There were no significant differences in the symptom profile and drug use in patients in the two groups at various time periods.

Conclusions

Patients with normal and minor oesophageal motor function abnormalities do not worsen over time.

Detection of hiatal hernias: comparison of high-resolution manometry and physician reported in an obese-predominant population

Background

The diagnosis of a hiatal hernia (HH) can be made by barium oesophagram or upper endoscopy. Data regarding the ability of high-resolution manometry (HRM) with oesophageal pressure topography (OPT) to identify HH remains limited. We aim to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the automated localisation on high-resolution manometry compared with physician visual interpretation on the detection of HH.

Methods

Patients (n=181) from West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia and Ohio, undergoing HRM with OPT from 1 January 2015 to 1 December 2017 were reviewed. The BMIs of this patient population are of the highest in the USA. Demographics, presenting symptoms, laboratory data, endoscopic findings, radiographic findings, and HRM findings were collected. Diagnosis of HH through HRM automated identification of oesophageal landmarks were compared with diagnosis by physician visual interpretation of OPT.

Results

Automated identification of HH using HRM had high specificity (99.1%), but low sensitivity (11.4%). Physician visual interpretation of OPT similarly had high specificity (82.9%, 83.8%), but low sensitivity (30.0%, 28.6%). Automated identification of HH had a greater positive predictive value (88.9%) compared with physician visual interpretation (52.5%, 52.6%) but was found to have a similar negative predictive value (63.9%) as physician visual interpretation (65.3%, 65.0%).

Conclusion

Compared with physician visual interpretation of OPT, automated identification of HH was more specific, but less sensitive in the diagnosis of HH. Use of automated identification of HH using HRM alone may lead to an increased number of false negatives, and subsequent underdiagnosis of this condition.

Correlation Between Clinical Signs and High-resolution Manometry Data in Children

OBJECTIVES

High-resolution manometry (HRM) is the gold standard for diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders. However, clinical signs associated with these disorders are nonspecific, and it is difficult to correlate clinical signs with HRM data. The main objective of our study was to assess the positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of each clinical sign, as well as their sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders.

METHODS

This is a bicentric retrospective cohort study based on HRM data collected between May 2012 and May 2016. The studied symptoms were weight loss, feeding difficulties, swallowing disorders, dysphagia, food blockages, vomiting, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), belching, and respiratory symptoms. HRM data were analyzed according to the Chicago Classification (3.0).

RESULTS

In total, 271 HRM data were analyzed, of which 90.4% showed abnormal results. HRM was well tolerated in 91% of the cases. The most common esophageal motility disorder was ineffective esophageal motility (38%). Weight loss was significantly associated (P = 0.003) with an abnormal HRM with a 96% PPV.

CONCLUSIONS

With nonspecific clinical signs suggesting an esophageal motility disorder, weight loss was a predictive sign of abnormal HRM results. HRM was well tolerated in pediatric patients, and ineffective esophageal motility appears to be the most frequent motility disorder in our cohort, as already observed in adult patient studies.