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…     

Multichannel intraluminal impedance monitoring in the evaluation of patients with non-obstructive Dysphagia

BACKGROUND: Non-obstructive dysphagia (NOD) often poses diagnostic problems. The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of the addition of multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII) recording to esophageal manometry in the work-up of patients with NOD. METHODS: A total of 40 consecutive patients with NOD underwent combined esophageal MII recording and perfusion manometry. Ten liquid and 10 viscous boluses were tested in each patient. Values for bolus presence time (BPT) at each of the four recording sites and total bolus transit time (TBTT) were calculated. Bolus transit (BT) was considered to be normal when BPT at all sites and TBTT were within the normal limits defined in 42 healthy subjects. Patients were judged to have normal transit if >or=80% of liquid and >or=70% of viscous swallows showed normal transit. RESULTS: The following manometric diagnoses were made: normal motility (20), ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) (13), diffuse esophageal spasm (DES) (4), and achalasia (3). Abnormal transit for liquid and/or viscous boluses was found in 35.3% of patients with normal motility, in 66.7% of DES patients, and in 100% of achalasia patients. In patients with achalasia quantification of BT was often made impossible by low initial impedance baseline. Two IEM patients (15.4%) showed normal liquid and viscous transit. Swallows showing normal transit had significantly longer duration of LES relaxation in patients with normal manometry and IEM (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: MII recording identifies esophageal function abnormalities in NOD patients with normal manometry, IEM, and DES. The MII technique seems to be less suitable for the most severe end of the dysphagia spectrum like achalasia.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Normal values for manometry performed with swallows of viscous test material

OBJECTIVE: Esophageal function testing with combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry (MII-EM) is performed using ten 5-ml liquid and viscous swallows. Diagnosis of bolus transit abnormalities identified by impedance is based on both liquid and viscous swallows. Manometric diagnosis is based solely on liquid swallows. The aim of this study was to establish the normal values for manometry performed with a viscous bolus. MATERIAL AND METHODS: MII-EM studies performed in 80 healthy volunteers were analyzed. The analyzed manometric parameters included contraction amplitude and duration, distal onset velocity and lower esophageal sphincter (LES) residual pressure. RESULTS: Mean distal esophageal amplitude (DEA) (mmHg) for liquid swallows was 104 (+/-44) and for viscous swallows 102 (+/-51). Viscous versus liquid swallows were characterized by higher contraction amplitudes at 10 cm above the LES, slower distal onset velocities and higher LES residual pressures. Duration of contractions was similar between liquid and viscous swallows. Upper normal limits for viscous swallows were: 204 mmHg for DEA (mean+/-2 SDs); 6 ineffective and 1 simultaneous swallows and 11.7 mmHg for LES residual pressure (95th percentile). CONCLUSIONS: Based on our results, the following values should be considered normal for manometry performed with viscous swallows: 相似文献   

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.     

Impedance manometry with viscous test solution increases detection of esophageal function defects compared to liquid swallows

OBJECTIVE: Multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry (MII-EM) is performed using ten 5-ml swallows each of a liquid and a viscous solution. However, the manometric diagnosis is based solely on results from the 10 liquid swallows. The aim of this study was to compare esophageal function evaluated with 10 liquid versus 10 viscous swallows using combined MII-EM in patients with various symptoms. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Consecutive studies performed in 300 patients (211F, mean age 54.5 years) were analyzed. The manometric diagnoses were separated into normal and abnormal manometry. MII findings included the number of complete and incomplete transits and total bolus transit time. RESULTS: Manometric diagnosis for liquid and viscous solutions was consistent in 231 (77%) and inconsistent in 69 (23%) patients (p<0.0001). Overall, the number of manometric abnormalities detected with the viscous solution (n=91, 30.3%) was significantly higher (p=0.03) than that detected with the liquid solution (n=60, 20%). Impedance diagnosis for the viscous and liquid solutions was consistent in 238 (79.3%) patients and inconsistent in 62 (20.7%) patients (p<0.0001). Among those 62 patients, 36 (58.1%) had complete bolus transit with the liquid solution and incomplete bolus transit with the viscous solution, and 26 (41.9%) had incomplete bolus transit with the liquid solution and complete transit with the viscous solution (p=0.46). Overall, there was no significant difference between the number of bolus transit abnormalities for the liquid (n=75, 25%) and viscous solutions (n=85, 28.3%, p=0.47). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that a viscous solution detects significantly more manometric abnormalities than a liquid solution. Impedance diagnosis has greater similarity for both the liquid and viscous solutions.     

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.     

Prevalence of increased esophageal muscle thickness in patients with esophageal symptoms

BACKGROUND: Patients with achalasia, diffuse esophageal spasm (DES), and nutcracker esophagus have a thicker muscularis propria than normal subjects. The goal of our study was to determine the prevalence of increased muscle thickness in a group of unselected patients referred to the esophageal function laboratory for evaluation of the symptoms. METHODS: We studied 40 normal subjects and 94 consecutive patients. Manometry and ultrasound images were recorded concurrently, using a special custom-built catheter. Esophageal muscle thickness and muscle cross-sectional area were measured at 2 and 10 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). Patients were assigned manometric diagnosis and determination was made if they had increased muscle thickness and muscle cross-sectional area. RESULTS: Nearly all patients with well-defined spastic motor disorders, i.e., achalasia, DES, and nutcracker esophagus, revealed (a) an increase in the muscle thickness/cross-sectional area, (b) increase in esophageal muscle thickness/cross-sectional area was also seen, albeit at a lower prevalence rate, in patients with less well-characterized manometric abnormalities, i.e., hypertensive LES, impaired LES relaxation, and ineffective esophageal motility, and (c) 24% of patients with esophageal symptoms but normal manometry were also found to have an increase in muscle thickness/cross-sectional area. Dysphagia was more likely, and heartburn less likely in patients with increased muscle thickness, but there were no differences in chest pain and regurgitation symptoms between the groups. CONCLUSION: We describe, for the first time, increased muscle thickness in patients with esophageal symptoms and normal manometry. We suggest that increased esophageal muscle thickness is likely to be an important marker of esophageal motor dysfunction.     

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.     

Assessment of esophageal motor function using combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry in healthy volunteers: a single-center study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND: Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry (MII-EM) allow simultaneous measurement of both pressure and bolus transit. The aim of this study was to establish normative data in Chinese subjects for combined MII-EM and to correlate liquid and viscous bolus transit by impedance with esophageal contractions by manometry. METHODS: Eighteen normal volunteers (six women and 12 men; mean age 24 years, range 19-36 years) underwent combined MII-EM with a catheter containing four impedance-measuring segments and five solid-state pressure transducers. Each subject received 10 liquid and 10 viscous material swallows of 5 mL each. Tracings were analyzed for bolus presence time, total bolus transit time, contraction amplitude, duration, and onset velocity. RESULTS: A total of 180 liquid and viscous swallow responses were analyzed. In all, 98.4% percent of manometrically normal liquid and 97.7% of manometrically normal viscous swallows had complete bolus transit by impedance. More than half (56.3%) of manometrically ineffective liquid and 50% of ineffective viscous swallows had complete bolus transit. Nearly 90% of normal individuals had at least 70% complete liquid bolus transit while more than 90% of normal individuals had at least 70% complete viscous bolus transit. CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes normative data for combined MII-EM in a healthy Chinese population. These data will help provide impedance application in esophageal function testing with a reference range that could be utilized by future studies or clinical practices involving Chinese subjects.     

Inconsistent association of esophageal symptoms, psychometric abnormalities and dysmotility

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to characterize the psychometric profiles of symptomatic patients with abnormal esophageal motility and symptomatic patients with normal manometric findings compared to asymptomatic controls. METHODS: A total of 113 patients with abnormal esophageal motility (7 achalasia, 8 diffuse esophageal spasm, 27 nutcracker esophagus, 37 hypertensive lower esophageal sphincter, 21 hypotensive peristalsis, 13 failed peristalsis), 23 symptomatic controls with similar esophageal symptoms but normal manometry, and 27 asymptomatic controls were enrolled. Validated questionnaires assessing depression (Beck Depression Inventory), anxiety (Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory or Trait Anxiety Inventory), and somatization (Psychosomatic Symptom Checklist) were administered to all subjects. RESULTS: Patients with both esophageal symptoms and either hypertensive lower esophageal sphincter, nutcracker esophagus, or hypotensive contractions exhibited increased somatization, acute anxiety, or depression compared to asymptomatic controls but not compared to symptomatic controls. On the other hand, the psychometric profiles of patients with achalasia and diffuse esophageal spasm were strikingly normal. Among esophageal symptoms, chest pain was closely correlated with psychometric abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS: The esophageal symptoms of patients with abnormal esophageal motility may relate to the underlying psychological abnormalities, independent of manometric abnormalities.     

Hypertrophy of the muscularis propria of the lower esophageal sphincter and the body of the esophagus in patients with primary motility disorders of the esophagus

OBJECTIVES: Patients with diffuse esophageal spasm (DES) and nutcracker esophagus/high amplitude esophageal contraction (HAEC) have a thicker esophageal muscularis propria than do healthy subjects. The goals of this study were to determine the esophageal muscle cross-sectional area (MCSA), a measure of muscle mass, in patients with achalasia of the esophagus; and to compare it with that in patients with DES, patients with HAEC, and normal subjects. METHODS: Using a high-frequency ultrasound probe catheter, concurrent manometry and ultrasound images of the esophagus were recorded in four subject groups: normal volunteers, patients with HAEC, patients with DES, and patients with achalasia of the esophagus. Recordings were obtained from the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and multiple sites in the esophagus 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 cm above the LES. RESULTS: The LES and esophageal muscle thickness as well as esophageal MCSA were greater in all three patient groups than in the normal subject group. Muscle thickness and MCSA were observed to be greatest in patients with achalasia, which were greater than in patients with DES, which were greater than in those with HAEC, which in turn were greater than in normal subjects. CONCLUSIONS: We propose that an increase in the MCSA is an important feature of patients with primary motility disorders of the esophagus. The degree of increase in muscle mass may be an important determinant of the type and the severity of esophageal motor dysfunction.     

The effect of mosapride on esophageal motility and bolus transit in asymptomatic volunteers

GOALS: To evaluate the effect of mosapride, a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine-4 agonist, on esophageal motility and bolus transit in asymptomatic volunteers. STUDY: Twenty healthy subjects participated in two experiments, 7 days apart, and we utilized a randomized, double-blind cross-over design with 3-day pretreatments of placebo or mosapride. All subjects underwent combined intraluminal impedance manometry. RESULTS: There was no difference in the amplitude, the duration, and the esophageal peristaltic patterns between the two pretreatments. The lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure and the number of transient LES relaxations did not change after mosapride vs. placebo. However, the rate of complete bolus transit in liquid swallows was higher with mosapride pretreatment (92.2%) than with placebo (84.6%; P < 0.01). The total bolus transit time in all liquid swallows showed a tendency to shorten after mosapride treatment (P = 0.06). The liquid bolus transit became faster after mosapride, especially in manometrically ineffective liquid swallows (P < 0.01). The total bolus transit time for manometrically normal viscous swallows decreased after pretreatment with mosapride (7.7 seconds; range, 6.8-9.2) in comparison with placebo (8.1 seconds; range, 7.1-11.1; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Mosapride increases the rate of complete bolus transit in the esophagus, and enhances esophageal bolus transit in asymptomatic volunteers.     

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.     

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.