Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry clarifies esophageal function abnormalities: study in 350 patients

BACKGROUND: Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and esophageal manometry (MII-EM) is a technique that uses an FDA-approved device allowing simultaneous evaluation of bolus transit (MII) in relation to pressure changes (EM). METHODS: During a 9-month period, beginning from July 2002 through March 2003, we prospectively performed combined MII-EM on all patients referred for esophageal function testing. Each patient received 10 liquid and 10 viscous swallows. Manometric findings were reported based on criteria described by Spechler and Castell for liquid swallows. MII findings were reported as having normal bolus transit if >/=80% (8/10) of liquid and >/=70% (7/10) of viscous swallows had complete bolus transit. RESULTS: Three-hundred fifty studies were evaluated from patients with a variety of symptoms having the following manometric diagnoses: normal manometry (125), achalasia (24), scleroderma (4), ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) (71), distal esophageal spasm (DES) (33), nutcracker esophagus (30), hypertensive lower esophageal sphincter (LES) (25), hypotensive LES (5), and poorly relaxing LES (33). None of the patients with achalasia and scleroderma had normal bolus transit. Fifty-one percent of patients with IEM and 55% of patients with DES had normal bolus transit while almost all (more than 95%) patients with normal esophageal manometry, nutcracker esophagus, poorly relaxing LES, hypertensive LES, and hypotensive LES had normal bolus transit. Dysphagia occurred most often in patients with incomplete bolus transit on MII testing. CONCLUSION: Esophageal body pressures primarily determine bolus transit with isolated LES abnormalities appearing to have little effect on esophageal function. MII clarifies functional abnormalities in patients with abnormal manometric studies.     

Clarification of the esophageal function defect in patients with manometric ineffective esophageal motility: studies using combined impedance-manometry.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII) and manometry (MII-EM) recently became available as an esophageal function test. Initial studies in healthy volunteers have shown that a proportion of ineffective contractions actually have complete bolus transit. The aim of our study is to evaluate esophageal bolus transit in patients with manometric patterns of ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). METHODS: All patients referred for esophageal function testing during a 9-month period underwent combined MII-EM studies, including 10 liquid and 10 viscous swallows. IEM is defined as >or=30% liquid swallows with contraction amplitude <30 mm Hg in the distal esophagus. Diagnosis of esophageal transit abnormalities is defined as abnormal bolus transit if >or=30% of liquid and >or=40% of viscous swallows had incomplete bolus transit. RESULTS: Seventy patients (35 women; mean age, 54 yr; range, 17-86 yr) with a manometric diagnosis of IEM were identified of a total of 350 combined MII-EM studies. In these patients, 68% of liquid and 59% of viscous swallows showed normal bolus transit, and almost one third of patients received an overall diagnosis of normal bolus transit for both liquid and viscous swallows. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience with combined MII-EM in patients with a manometric diagnosis of IEM confirms the suspicion that "effectiveness" should only be determined by using a test of esophageal function. Furthermore, we believe our results support a conclusion that a higher level of esophageal diagnostic information is best obtained by combined MII-EM. Future outcome studies should establish its value in patients with nonobstructive dysphagia and in prefundoplication assessment.     

Evaluation of esophageal function in patients with esophageal motor abnormalities using multichannel intraluminal impedance esophageal manometry

INTRODUCTION Esophageal manometry has been considered the “gold standard” test for the evaluation of esophageal motility. Esophageal manometry allows physicians to assess peri- stalsis by using informations about the shape, amplitude and duration of the…     

Comparison of bolus transit patterns identified by esophageal impedance to barium esophagram in patients with dysphagia

Bolus transit through the esophagus has not been validated by videoesophagram in patients with dysphagia and changes in impedance with abnormal barium transit have not been described in those patients. The aim of this study was to compare esophageal impedance findings with barium esophagram measurements in patients with dysphagia. The consecutive patients with dysphagia underwent conventional multichannel esophageal impedance manometry, after which a barium videoesophagram was performed simultaneously with multichannel esophageal impedance manometry using a mean of three swallows of barium. Esophageal emptying patterns shown in the esophagogram were classified by the degree of intraesophageal stasis and presence of intraesophageal reflux. Bolus transit patterns in impedance were classified as complete and incomplete transit. Sixteen patients (M : F = 8 : 8, mean age, 47 years) were enrolled. Their manometric diagnosis were normal (n= 6), ineffective esophageal motility (n= 1), diffuse esophageal spasm (DES; n= 2), and achalasia (n= 7). Sixty‐three swallows were analyzed. According to impedance analysis, 21/22 swallows with normal barium emptying showed complete transit (96%) and 31/32 swallows with severe stasis showed incomplete transit (97%). Nine swallows with mild stasis showed either complete or incomplete transit patterns in impedance. Swallows with mild barium stasis and complete transit in impedance were observed in patients who had received treatment (two patients with achalasia with history of esophageal balloonplasty and a patient with DES after nifedipine administration). Impedance reflected severe stasis with retrograde barium movement and described typical bolus transit patterns in patients with achalasia and DES. In conclusion, impedance‐barium esophagram concordance is high for swallows with normal esophageal emptying and for severe barium stasis in patients with dysphagia.     

Esophageal motility disorders—Symptomatic and manometric spectrum in Punjab,northern India

Background

Data on the spectrum of esophageal motility disorders in Indian population are scarce. We aimed to study the symptomatic and manometric profile of patients with suspected esophageal motility disorders.

Methods

Consecutive patients with esophageal symptoms who underwent esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) from January 2010 to December 2014 were included in this retrospective analysis of prospectively acquired data. HRM was performed with 22-channel water-perfusion system and patients classified using Chicago classification v3.0.

Results

Of the 401 patients studied [median age 43 (18–85) years; 61% males], 217 presented with dysphagia, 157 with predominant retrosternal discomfort and 27 with predominant regurgitation. Among patients with dysphagia, 43.8% had ineffective esophageal motility [IEM], 26.3% had achalasia cardia [AC], 6.9% had distal esophageal spasm [DES] and 19.4% had normal manometry [NM]. Among patients with retrosternal discomfort, 42.7% had IEM, 5.7% had AC, 4.5% had DES and 42% had NM. AC was significantly more common among patients presenting with dysphagia compared to those with retrosternal discomfort [p< 0.001] or regurgitation [p< 0.001]. NM was significantly more common among patients presenting with retrosternal symptoms compared to those with dysphagia [p< 0.001]. AC patients had longer duration of dysphagia, more frequent bolus obstruction and more weight loss compared to those with IEM or NM [p< 0.05].

Conclusion

Dysphagia was the commonest presenting symptom followed by retrosternal discomfort. Ineffective esophageal motility (not achalasia cardia) was the commonest manometric finding both among patients with dysphagia and retrosternal discomfort. This study highlights the high prevalence of IEM among patients with esophageal symptoms, which can present with dysphagia or retrosternal discomfort due to poor bolus transit.

     

Esophageal solid bolus transit: studies using combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry in healthy volunteers

The purpose of this study is to apply combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and esophageal manometry (MII‐EM) to test esophageal function during solid swallowing in a normal healthy population. We determined whether combined MII‐EM with solid bolus is more sensitive than that with viscous bolus in the detection of motility abnormality. Eighteen healthy volunteers (11 men and 7 women; mean age 22 years, range 20–26 years) underwent combined MII‐EM with a catheter containing four impedance‐measuring segments and five solid‐state pressure transducers. Each subject received 10 viscous and 10 solid materials. Tracings were analyzed manually for bolus presence time, total bolus transit time, contraction amplitude, duration, and onset velocity. Three hundred and sixty swallows including viscous and solid materials were analyzed. Contraction amplitude for the viscous swallows was higher at 20 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) (P= 0.049) but lower at 15 cm above the LES (P < 0.001). Duration of contractions for the solid swallows was longer at 15 cm (P= 0.002) and 10 cm above the LES (P= 0.011) compared with viscous swallows. The total bolus transit time for solid was significantly shorter than that for viscous boluses (6.8 vs. 7.7 seconds, P < 0.001). Bolus presence time appeared to be similar between viscous and solid boluses (except in the proximal esophagus). The percentage of swallows with ineffective peristalsis by manometry, as well as those with incomplete bolus transit by impedance, did not differ between viscous and solid swallows. The proportion of manometrically ineffective solid swallows with incomplete bolus transit was greater than that of viscous swallows (62.1% vs. 34.8%, P= 0.05). Application of solid boluses may potentially enhance diagnostic capability of esophageal function testing. Solid boluses can be regarded as a valuable complement to viscous boluses in the detection of esophageal motility abnormalities when applied with combined MII‐EM.     

Revised criterion for diagnosis of ineffective esophageal motility is associated with more frequent dysphagia and greater bolus transit abnormalities

BACKGROUND: Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) has been defined by the presence of > or = 30% liquid swallows with contraction amplitude < 30 mmHg (ineffective swallows) in the distal esophagus ("old" IEM). A recent study with combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry (MII-EM) raised the question whether the manometric diagnosis of IEM should be based on a new definition: > or = 50% ineffective liquid swallows ("new" IEM). The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the number of ineffective liquid swallows and symptoms and bolus transit in patients with "new" or "old" IEM who underwent MII-EM studies using 10 liquid and 10 viscous swallows. MATERIALS AND METHODS: There were 150 patients with "old" IEM included in the study. The patients diagnosed with "old" IEM (N = 150) (group A) were compared with those who retained a manometric diagnosis of IEM by the new definition (N = 101) (group B). The patients who did not retain their manometric diagnosis of IEM by the new definition (N = 49) (group C) were compared with group B. IEM was characterized as mild (normal bolus transit for both liquid and viscous swallows), moderate (abnormal bolus transit either for liquid or viscous swallows), or severe (abnormal bolus transit for both liquid and viscous swallows). RESULTS: There was no statistical difference in frequency of mild, moderate, or severe IEM and frequency of symptoms between group A and B. Group C had a significantly higher frequency of mild IEM and significantly lower frequency of severe IEM than group B. Heartburn (25.7%vs 10.2%, P= 0.03) and dysphagia (24.8%vs 12.3%, P= 0.08) showed a trend towards a greater frequency in group B than in group C. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that IEM with > or = 50% ineffective liquid swallows is frequently associated with bolus transit abnormalities and esophageal symptoms. Our results underscore the rationale for using the new definition of IEM.     

Utility of esophageal impedance in identifying dysmotility in patients with erosive esophagitis

SUMMARY. This study was intended to assess the utility of combined multiple intraluminal impedance and esophageal manometry (MII‐EM) in evaluating reflux patients and in identifying those with esophageal dysmotility. Thirteen controls and 20 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) underwent combined MII‐EM with a catheter containing four impedance‐measuring segments and four solid‐state pressure transducers. Each subject received 10 liquid and 10 viscous boluses to be swallowed. Distal esophageal contraction amplitude was significantly lower in GERD patients than in controls for viscous swallows (58.3 ± 7.3 mmHg versus 82.4 ± 4.1 mmHg, P = 0.005). Total bolus transit time was significantly slower in GERD patients than in controls for liquid swallows (P = 0.035). The percentages of complete bolus transit were significantly lower in GERD patients compared with controls (all P = 0.005). Half of GERD patients with normal EM still had abnormal bolus transit while three‐quarters of those with abnormal EM had abnormal bolus transit. MII helps identify bolus transit abnormalities not detected by conventional manometry. Combined MII‐EM is clinically useful for detecting esophageal dysmotility in patients with erosive esophagitis.     

Symptom and function heterogenicity among patients with distal esophageal spasm: studies using combined impedance-manometry

BACKGROUND: Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and esophageal manometry (MII-EM) is a clinically available tool that assesses the functional defect of various manometric abnormalities. The aim of our study was to evaluate esophageal bolus transit in patients with manometrically defined distal esophageal spasm (DES). METHODS: Patients referred for esophageal function testing underwent combined MII-EM studies including 10 liquid and 10 viscous swallows. Individual swallows were classified using previously published manometric and impedance criteria. DES is traditionally defined as > or =20% simultaneous contractions in the distal esophagus. Diagnosis of esophageal transit abnormalities was defined by the presence of > or =30% incomplete liquid or > or =40% incomplete viscous swallows. RESULTS: Data from 71 patients (43 female, mean age 57 yr, range 16-85) with a manometric diagnosis of DES were analyzed. During liquid swallows, patients with chest pain had higher (p < 0.05) distal esophageal amplitudes (202.3 +/- 34.5 mmHg) and a higher (p < 0.05) percentage of swallows with complete bolus transit (89%+/- 3%) compared to patients presenting with dysphagia (amplitude 117.8 +/- 8.7 mmHg; percentage of complete transit 69%+/- 5%) and patients with reflux symptoms (amplitude 116.4 +/- 12.7 mmHg; percentage of complete transit 74%+/- 5%). Fifty-one percent of the DES patients had a normal bolus transit for liquid and viscous, 24% abnormal bolus transit for one substance, and 25% abnormal bolus transit for liquid and viscous. CONCLUSION: Pressure and bolus transit information in patients with manometrically defined DES points toward heterogenicity of this group of patients. Outcomes data are warranted to evaluate whether stratifying DES patients based on pressure and bolus transit information may improve the clinical approach.     

Impedance detected abnormal bolus transit in patients with normal esophageal manometry. Sensitive indicator of esophageal functional abnormality?

SUMMARY. When used in combination with manometry, multichannel intraluminal impedance better characterizes the established manometric abnormalities into those with and without associated transit defects. However, the significance of the finding of normal manometry and abnormal impedance is not known. The objective of this study is to evaluate the clinical relevance of abnormal impedance associated with normal manometry during esophageal function testing in patients with a variety of esophageal symptoms. All patients referred for esophageal function testing during a 27‐month period underwent combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and esophageal manometry studies including 10 liquid and 10 viscous swallows in supine position. From 576 patients with normal esophageal body manometry we identified 158 patients (27%) with abnormal impedance. The primary symptom in these 158 patients was compared to that in 146 consecutive patients with normal manometry and normal impedance selected from the original 576 patients. Abnormal bolus transit was found with viscous, liquid and both type swallows in 60%, 19% and 21% of the patients respectively. Of patients with abnormal bolus transit, 23% presented with dysphagia compared to 10% of normal transit patients (p = 0.0035). In conclusion, abnormal impedance even in patients with normal manometry may be a sensitive indicator of esophageal functional abnormality as represented by the symptom of dysphagia in these patients. Abnormal transit was more frequently identified with viscous than liquid swallows. Prospective studies to further clarify impedance detected transit defects in patients with normal manometry and the role of viscous swallows in diagnostic testing are warranted.     

Optimal evaluation of patients with nonobstructive esophageal dysphagia

The aims of this study were to compare diagnostic accuracy, cost, and patient tolerance of videoesophagography and esophageal transit scintigraphy to esophageal manometry in the evaluation of nonobstructive esophageal dysphagia. Eighty-nine consecutive patients underwent videoesophagography, scintigraphy, and manometry. The sensitivities for diagnosing specific esophageal motility disorders, using esophageal manometry as the standard, were 75% and 68% for videoesophagography and scintigraphy, respectively, with positive predictive accuracies of 96% and 95% for achalasia, 100% and 67% for diffuse esophageal spasm, 100% and 75% for scleroderma, 50% and 67% for isolated LES dysfunction, 57% and 48% for nonspecific esophageal motility disorders, and 70% and 68% for normal esophageal motility. The cost for videoesophagography is less than that for either manometry or scintigraphy. Both videoesophagography and scintigraphy were better tolerated than manometry. It is concluded that videoesophagography and scintigraphy accurately diagnose primary esophageal motility disorders, achalasia, scleroderma, and diffuse esophageal spasm, but are less accurate in distinguishing nonspecific esophageal motility disorders from normal. When considering accuracy, cost, and patient acceptance, these findings suggest that videoesophagography is a useful initial diagnostic study for the evaluation of nonobstructive esophageal dysphagia.     

Regional Esophageal Dysfunction in Scleroderma and Achalasia using Multichannel Intraluminal Impedance and Manometry

Background Achalasia and scleroderma are esophageal motility abnormalities characterized by severely impaired bolus transit. Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry (MII-EM) enables the simultaneous measurement of intraesophageal pressures and bolus transit at various levels within the esophagus. Aim The aim of the study was to evaluate and characterize regional pressure and transit profile differences in scleroderma and achalasia patients. Methods A retrospective analysis was carried out of MII-EM studies of patients with scleroderma (15), achalasia (20), and poorly relaxing lower esophageal sphincter (LES) with normal esophageal body function (20) as a control group. Bolus presence and segmental transit were evaluated by MII. Results In patients with achalasia, bolus transit was impaired across all four sites compared with scleroderma (P < 0.0125) even though distal esophageal pressures were higher (P < 0.05) in patients with achalasia. Pressures in patients with achalasia were similar across all four sites (ANOVA; saline, P = 0.373; viscous, P = 0.615). Bolus clearance rates and contraction amplitudes in patients with scleroderma decreased from proximal to distal. In the control group, bolus clearance was complete during ≥83% of all swallows and esophageal pressure amplitudes increased distally. Conclusion While the overall bolus transit is impaired in both patients with achalasia and scleroderma regional pressure and bolus transit differences exist. Bolus transit abnormalities result from abnormal esophageal body contraction and not abnormal LES relaxation.     

Does combined multichannel intraluminal esophageal impedance and manometry predict postoperative dysphagia after laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication?

Laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) is an effective treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease; however, some patients develop dysphagia postoperatively. Manometry is used to evaluate disorders of peristalsis, but has not been proven useful to identify which patients may be at risk for postoperative dysphagia. Multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII) evaluates the effective clearance of a swallowed bolus through the esophagus. We hypothesized that MII combined with manometry may detect those patients most at risk of developing dysphagia after LNF. Between March 2003 and January 2007, 74 patients who agreed to participate in this study were prospectively enrolled. All patients completed a preoperative symptom questionnaire, MII/manometry, and 24‐h pH monitoring. All patients underwent LNF. Symptom questionnaires were administered postoperatively at a median of 18 months (range: 6–46 months), and we defined dysphagia (both preoperatively and postoperatively) as occurring more than once a month with a severity ≥4 (0–10 Symptom Severity Index). Thirty‐two patients (43%) reported preoperative dysphagia, but there was no significant difference in pH monitoring, lower esophageal sphincter pressure/relaxation, peristalsis, liquid or viscous bolus transit (MII), or bolus transit time (MII) between patients with and without preoperative dysphagia. In those patients reporting preoperative dysphagia, the severity of dysphagia improved significantly from 6.8 ± 2 to 2.6 ± 3.4 (P < 0.001) after LNF. Thirteen (17%) patients reported dysphagia postoperatively, 10 of whom (75%) reported some degree of preoperative dysphagia. The presence of postoperative dysphagia was significantly more common in patients with preoperative dysphagia (P= 0.01). Patients with postoperative dysphagia had similar lower esophageal sphincter pressure and relaxation, peristalsis, and esophageal clearance to those without dysphagia. Neither MII nor manometry predicts dysphagia in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease or its occurrence after LNF. The presence of dysphagia preoperatively is the only predictor of dysphagia after LNF.     

Does Diffuse Esophageal Spasm Progress to Achalasia? A Prospective Cohort Study

Diffuse esophageal spasm (DES) and achalasia share both clinical and manometric characteristics. Some reports support the notion of progression of DES to achalasia. However, there are currently no prospective data in support of this theory. To assess prospectively the rate of manometric progression of DES to achalasia. Manometry tracings of DES patients diagnosed between 1992 and 2003 were independently reviewed blindly and agreed on by two esophageal experts. Patients with DES who agreed to undergo repeat esophageal manometry constituted the study cohort. Follow-up manometry tracings were evaluated blindly and independently by the same two interpreters to determine the rate of manometric progression to achalasia. Predictors of manometric progression were assessed. A total of 32 patients were diagnosed with DES between 1992–2003. Twelve patients (9M/3F; median age 62 years) agreed to participate and underwent second manometry (mean ± SD follow-up of 4.8± 3.4 years). Achalasia was diagnosed on follow-up manometry in one patient (8%), seven (58%) patients continued to have DES, three (25%) had normal motility, and one (8%) had nutcracker esophagus. There were no predictors of progression to achalasia based on the initial manometry parameters. A subgroup of DES patients with initial low esophageal body amplitude developed increase in esophageal simultaneous contractions on follow-up similar to the patient who evolved to achalasia. Following were the results. 1) Progression from DES to achalasia is uncommon. 2) DES patients with low esophageal body amplitude may develop increased simultaneous contractions over time. 3) DES remains an elusive diagnosis clinically and manometrically.     

Relationship between pressure wave amplitude and esophageal bolus clearance assessed by combined manometry and multichannel intraluminal impedance measurement

OBJECTIVES: Esophageal wave amplitude is an important determinant of esophageal clearance. A threshold of 30 mmHg is widely accepted as the threshold for effective clearance in the distal esophagus. However, the precise relationship between wave amplitude and clearance has received relatively little attention. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of peristaltic wave amplitude on esophageal volume clearance using multiple intraluminal impedance (MII) measurement. METHODS: Concurrent manometry and MII were performed on 42 healthy asymptomatic volunteers and 13 patients with ineffective esophageal motility. Esophageal motility was measured at four sites 5-cm apart, starting 2 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter. MII was measured at corresponding sites with electrodes incorporated into the manometric assembly. Ten 5-mL liquid (saline) boluses and ten 5-mL low impedance viscous boluses were tested in each subject. Pressure wave amplitude was determined at each site as well as peristaltic success of the responses. Bolus clearance was measured from individual recording segment and from the esophagus as a whole. RESULTS: The proportion of liquid boluses cleared at each site was directly related to wave amplitude and did not increase significantly above a threshold of 25 mmHg in the proximal esophagus, 22 mmHg in the mid-esophagus, and 30 mmHg in the distal esophagus. Corresponding wave amplitudes for total esophageal clearance were 35-40 mmHg. There was a good correlation between the wave amplitude at one site of the esophagus and those of the rest of the esophagus. For both liquid and viscous boluses, the likelihood of impaired clearance was directly related to the number of segments with hypotensive pressure waves. CONCLUSION: The findings confirm the validity of the wave amplitude threshold required for effective liquid bolus clearance and have established the amplitude threshold for clearance of viscous boluses. However, the number of hypotensive pressure waves required for the definition of ineffective motility may be too low.     

Esophageal manometry: assessment of interpreter consistency.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Manometry is used widely in the evaluation of esophageal disorders. Our aim was to assess the intra- and interobserver reliability of esophageal manometry and identify potential causes for diagnostic variability. METHODS: Seventy-two esophageal manometry tracings were selected randomly from archives. Eight interpreters randomly and blindly evaluated tracings. Interpreters were divided into 3 groups: highly experienced (N = 3), moderately experienced (N = 3), and inexperienced (N = 2). Each tracing was examined for abnormalities involving the lower-esophageal sphincter (LES) and esophageal body. Interpreters rendered a single diagnosis from a list of 7 manometric diagnoses: normal, nutcracker, hypertensive LES, hypotensive LES, diffuse esophageal spasm (DES), nonspecific/ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), and achalasia. Intra- and interobserver agreements were determined and reasons for varied diagnoses were investigated. RESULTS: Overall intraobserver agreement was good (kappa = .63, P < .0001). There was no difference ( P = .9) between the highly and midexperienced interpreters (kappa = .61 and .65, respectively). Interobserver agreement for the diagnosis of achalasia and normal motility was good (kappa = .65 and .56, respectively). However, other manometric diagnoses yielded only fair interobserver agreement (kappa = .27). DES, nonspecific/ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), and hypo- and hypertensive LES diagnoses showed the least agreement. Poor adherence to established manometric criteria, misinterpretation of intrabolus pressure, and technical inadequacy were the most common sources of inconsistency in interpretations. CONCLUSIONS: Manometric diagnoses of conditions other than normal or achalasia are variable and have poor interobserver variability. Given their uncertain clinical implications, we must either redefine them or eliminate them from practice.     

Manometry and impedance characteristics of achalasia. Facts and myths

BACKGROUND: Achalasia is defined manometrically by an aperistaltic esophagus. Variations in the manometric findings occur in achalasia suggesting that all manometric features should not be required to diagnose achalasia. Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and esophageal manometry (MII-EM) allows both a functional and a manometric evaluation of esophageal motility and identifies chronic fluid retention. AIM: To compare manometric and MII characteristics in patients with achalasia. METHODS: Retrospective review of 73 MII-EM tracings from patients with achalasia done in our laboratory between October 2001 and December 2004 (38 females; mean age=53.5 y). Patients with previous esophageal interventions were excluded. Manometric and MII characteristics were identified and compared during 10 liquid and 10 viscous swallows. Patients were also divided into 2 groups: vigorous achalasia (VA) and achalasia. RESULTS: Twenty-two of the seventy-one (31%) achalasia patients had a hypertensive lower esophageal sphincter (LES). The mean lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP) for the 71 patients with achalasia was 37.9+/-21.2 mm Hg compared with 27.3+/-9.3 mm Hg (P<0.05) in the 73 patients with normal motility. The mean LESP in patients with achalasia was 36+/-20.3 mm Hg compared with 47+/-23.2 mm Hg (P<0.05) in patients with VA. Elevated intraesophageal pressure (IEP) was noted in 45/73 (61.6%). The mean LESP in this group was 41.1+/-22.9 mm Hg compared with 32.5+/-17 mm Hg (P<0.05) with normal IEP. The mean baseline impedance for achalasia was 801+/-732 compared with 1265.2+/-829.5 Omega (P<0.05) for the VA patients. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with achalasia have elevated IEP, elevated LES residual pressure, normal LES pressure, and low baseline impedance. All manometric features should not be required to diagnose achalasia. Patients with an elevated IEP are likely to have an elevated LES pressure and LES residual pressure. Low MII values identify chronic fluid retention and helps confirm the diagnosis.     

Different patterns of esophageal motility disorders among patients with dysphagia and normal endoscopy: A 2-center experience

Esophageal motility disorders (EMDs) are the main etiology of nonobstructive dysphagia (NOD), but they are underestimated in Egypt. High-resolution manometry (HRM) with Chicago Classification version 3.0 (CC v3.0) is the current gold standard diagnostic modality to assess EMD in patients with NOD. In this HRM-based study, we aimed to classify EMD among Egyptian patients and explore the relationship between the severity of symptoms and the various groups of EMD. From January 2020 to January 2021, patients with dysphagia were subjected to diagnostic workup, which included symptom questionnaire for Eckardt score, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, barium esophagogram, and HRM. All patients were categorized based on the HRM results using CC version 3.0 after exclusion of those with obstructive esophageal lesions. Of 252 patients with dysphagia, 55 patients with NOD were analyzed according to CC version 3.0. Achalasia was diagnosed in 31 patients (56.4%) (type I: 18 [58.06%]; type II: 9 [29.03%], and type III: 4 [12.9%]), 3 patients (5.5%) with esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction, 2 patients (3.6%) with absent contractility, 4 patients (7.3%) with distal esophageal spasm, 7 patients (12.7%) with ineffective esophageal motility, and 8 patients (14.5%) with normal manometry. Patients with achalasia experienced significantly high regurgitation (96.8% vs 70.8%; P = .016) compared with those without achalasia. Achalasia was the most common EMD in Egyptian patients with NOD. Eckardt score was higher in patients with outflow obstruction and major motor disorder, but it could not differentiate different categories of CC of EMD. HRM is effective in characterization of EMD.     

Multichannel intraluminal impedance for the assessment of post-fundoplication dysphagia

Dysphagia often occurs after fundoplication, although its pathophysiology is not clear. We sought to better understand postfundoplication dysphagia by measuring esophageal clearance with multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII) along with more traditional work-up (manometry, upper gastrointestinal imaging [UGI], endoscopy). We evaluated 80 consecutive patients after laparoscopic fundoplication between April 2002 and November 2004. Patients were evaluated clinically and underwent simultaneous manometry and MII, 24-hour pH monitoring, endoscopy, and UGI. For analysis, patients were divided into the following groups based on the presence of dysphagia and fundoplication anatomy (by UGI/endoscopy): (1) Dysphagia and normal anatomy; (2) Dysphagia and abnormal anatomy; (3) No dysphagia and abnormal anatomy; and (4) No dysphagia and normal anatomy. Patients with dysphagia (Groups 1 & 2) had similar peristalsis (manometry), but were more likely to have impaired clearance by MII (32 pts, 62%) than those without dysphagia (9 pts, 32%, P = 0.01). Patients with abnormal anatomy (Groups 2 & 3) were also more likely to have impaired esophageal clearance (66%vs. 38%, P = 0.01). Finally, of patients that had normal fundoplication anatomy, those with dysphagia were much more likely to have impaired clearance (12 pts, 52%) than those with dysphagia (4 pts, 21%, P = 0.03). MII after fundoplication provides objective evidence of esophageal clearance, and is commonly abnormal in patients with abnormal fundoplication anatomy and/or dysphagia. Esophageal clearance is impaired in the majority of patients with postoperative dysphagia, even with normal fundoplication anatomy and normal peristalsis. MII may detect disorders in esophageal motility not detected by manometry.     

Esophageal function testing with combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry: multicenter study in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry (MII-EM) assesses esophageal function by simultaneous measurement of both pressure and bolus transit. Normative data for this method have not been published. The aim of this study was to establish normative data for combined MII-EM and to correlate liquid and viscous bolus transit by impedance with esophageal contractions by manometry. METHODS: Forty-three normal volunteers recruited from 4 centers (15 women, 28 men; age range, 21-72 years) underwent combined MII-EM with a catheter containing 4 impedance-measuring segments and 4 solid-state pressure transducers. Each center recruited and analyzed subjects independently, according to pre-established criteria. Each subject received 20 x 5 mL swallows, 10 liquid and 10 viscous material. Tracings were analyzed manually for bolus presence time, bolus head advance time, segmental transit times, total bolus transit time, contraction amplitude, duration, and onset velocity. RESULTS: Ninety-seven and four-tenths percent of manometrically normal liquid and 96.1% of manometrically normal viscous swallows had complete bolus transit by impedance. Almost half (47.2%) of manometrically ineffective liquid and 34.7% of ineffective viscous swallows had complete bolus transit, whereas 91.7% of manometric simultaneous liquid swallows and 54.5% of simultaneous viscous swallows had complete bolus transit. More than 93% of normal individuals had at least 80% complete liquid or at least 70% complete viscous bolus transit. CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes normative data for combined MII-EM. Combined MII-EM may be a more sensitive tool in assessing esophageal function compared to standard manometry because impedance can distinguish different bolus transit patterns. Studies in patients with manometrically defined esophageal motility abnormalities should help clarify the functional importance of manometric ineffective and simultaneous swallows.