Canakis A, Lee DU, Grossman JL, Hwang DG, Wellington J, Yang AH, Fan GH, Kim GE, Kim RE. Anesthesia choice and its potential impact on endoluminal functional lumen imaging probe measurements in esophageal motility disorders.
Gastrointest Endosc 2024;
99:702-711.e6. [PMID:
38052328 DOI:
10.1016/j.gie.2023.11.052]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2023] [Revised: 11/20/2023] [Accepted: 10/10/2023] [Indexed: 12/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
The widespread use of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has revolutionized the management of esophageal motility disorders (EMDs). The introduction of an endoluminal functional lumen imaging probe (EndoFLIP, Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) can serve as a complementary diagnostic tool to assess the mechanical properties (ie, pressure, diameter, distensibility, topography) of the esophagus. During EndoFLIP measurements, different anesthesia techniques may induce variable degrees of neuromuscular blockade, potentially affecting esophageal motility and altering the results of EndoFLIP metrics. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of using total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) versus general anesthesia with inhalational anesthetics (GAIA) on diagnostic EndoFLIP measurements.
METHODS
This retrospective study included all adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing EndoFlip during the POEM procedure at our institution between February 2017 and February 2022. Differences in pressure, diameter, and distensibility index were obtained by using propofol-based TIVA versus sevoflurane-based GAIA with a 30 mL and a 60 mL balloon. The differences were divided into terciles and compared between diagnoses by using univariate comparisons and logistic regression models.
RESULTS
A total of 49 patients were included (39% type I achalasia, 43% type II or III achalasia, and 18% jackhammer esophagus [JE]). Compared with spastic disorders (types II and III achalasia and JE), type I had lower values of pressure differences at 60 mL in univariate (3.75 vs 15.20, P = .001) and multivariate (adjusted odds ratio, .89; 95% confidence interval, .82-.978) analyses. Compared with type I, types II and III achalasia had higher rates of pressure differences at 60 mL in the univariate (9.85 vs 3.75, P = .04) analysis and nearly reached significance in the multivariate analysis (1.09; 95% confidence interval, 1-1.20). Compared with type I achalasia, JE exhibited higher values in pressure differences at 60 mL (27.7 vs 3.75, P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS
Esophageal pressure, as measured by EndoFLIP, was significantly reduced when patients were sedated with sevoflurane-based GAIA. The use of sevoflurane-based GAIA for diagnostic EndoFLIP may potentially lead to the misclassification of spastic disorders as type I achalasia. Propofol-based TIVA should therefore be considered over sevoflurane-based GAIA for sedation during the diagnostic test.
Collapse