Modified acid reflux test

Although the standard acid reflux test is often used to diagnose gastroesophageal reflux (GER), the cost and benefit of this diagnostic test has never been evaluated. In this study, 184 consecutive referrals with esophageal symptoms were interviewed and had an esophagram, an esophageal manometry, and a modified acid reflux test (MART). The results were analyzed to determine how frequently MART altered the clinical diagnosis and to assess the cost of the new information. Patients with typical symptoms of GER (heartburn or regurgitation) were compared to those with atypical presentation (chest pain or dysphagia). Previously unsuspected GER was demonstrated in 63% of the atypical group, whereas no altered diagnosis was made in the typical group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups when mean lower esophageal sphincter pressures and mean pH scores were compared. MART was cost effective only in the atypical group, in which the cost of an altered diagnosis was $633.00.     

Role of stationary esophageal manometry in clinical practice. Manometric results in patients with gastroesophageal reflux, dysphagia or non-cardiac chest pain.

The present study was carried out to evaluate the diagnostic usefulness of stationary esophageal manometry in 263 patients divided into three groups: 150 patients with reflux symptoms, 68 with dysphagia, and 45 with non-cardiac chest pain. Patients with endoscopic abnormalities were excluded. Standard manometry was performed following the station pull-through technique. In the group of patients with reflux symptoms 40.7% had a normal manometry and 57.3% had abnormalities, being the most frequent (43%) hypotensive lower esophageal sphincter. In the dysphagia group, 20.6% of manometries were normal and 79.4% were abnormal, of which achalasia was the most frequent disorder (53.7%). In the case of non-cardiac chest pain, 42.2% of patients had a normal manometry and 57.8% an abnormal one, of which hypotensive lower esophageal sphincter was the most frequent abnormality. A significant higher proportion of manometric alterations were found in the dysphagia group compared to reflux symptoms and non-cardiac chest pain (p < 0.05). No statistical differences were found between the reflux and the non-cardiac chest pain groups. Manometry yields a higher diagnostic value in patients with dysphagia, and therefore manometry should be performed routinely after the exclusion of any organic esophageal disease. Manometry is not a first-choice functional diagnostic test in the study of patirnts with gastroesophageal reflux or non-cardiac chest pain.     

贲门失弛缓症

贲门失弛缓症是一种病因尚未明确、累及食管平滑肌和下食管括约肌（LES）的动力障碍性疾病。以吞咽时食管体部蠕动消失、LES松弛障碍为特征,临床表现为吞咽困难和胸痛等。本病可根据临床表现结合内镜、食管钡餐造影和食管动力学检查等确诊。本文就贲门失弛缓症的流行病学现状、发病机制、临床表现和诊断相关研究进展作一概述。     

Prospective evaluation of esophageal motor dysfunction in Down''s syndrome

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and way of presentation of esophageal motor dysfunction in a nonselected population of subjects with Down's syndrome. METHODS: The study was conducted in 58 Down's syndrome patients and 38 healthy controls. A global symptom score and individual scores for dysphagia for liquids and solids, heartburn, vomiting/regurgitation, and chest pain were obtained. Esophageal function was evaluated initially by scintigraphy using liquid and semisolid bolus. Time-activity curves based on the mean condensed images were used to calculate residual activity at 100 s after swallowing. According to both scintigraphy and clinical evaluation results, participants underwent a radiological and manometric study. RESULTS: The most frequent symptoms in Down's syndrome patients were: dysphagia for liquids (n = 9), dysphagia for solids (n = 10), vomiting/regurgitation (n = 8), and chest pain (n = 2). Liquid and semisolid retention of the tracer was significantly higher in Down's syndrome patients than in controls (p < 0.05). In 15 participants with Down's syndrome, tracer retention was higher than the 95 percentile of controls' retention. No correlation was found between the global or individual symptom score and esophageal retention quantified by scintigraphy. Hypothyroidism was unrelated to esophageal symptoms or retention. Five of the 15 esophagograms performed were abnormal, showing barium retention and/or esophageal dilation. Manometry showed achalasia in two subjects, total body aperistalsis in one, and nonspecific esophageal motor disorder in two. CONCLUSION: Esophageal motor disorders, particularly achalasia, are frequent in individuals with Down's syndrome. Awareness of esophageal dysmotility in this population is important, even though symptoms are not evident, to avoid potential complications.     

内镜下扩张结合肉毒杆菌毒素注射治疗贲门失弛缓症术后随访分析

目的 研究内镜下贲门扩张结合肉毒杆菌毒素注射术治疗贲门失弛缓的临床疗效、术后的食管动力学变化.方法 选择29例贲门失弛缓患者,经临床评估、内镜及食管动力学检测后,在内镜下对贲门进行水囊扩张,再于贲门四壁分4点注射A型肉毒杆菌毒素.分别于术后1周、1个月、6个月、12个月对患者密切随访,评估临床表现,检测相关的食管动力学指标,然后对结果 进行统计学处理,再比较分析.结果 患者在内镜术前出现不同程度的吞咽困难、胸痛和呕吐,内镜术后1周、6个月、12个月吞咽困难、胸痛及呕吐发生率较术前显著降低.术后12个月吞咽困难、胸痛发生率较术后1周、6个月组显著升高,呈现明显升高趋势.内镜术后下段食管的平均压力较术前显著降低,术后6个月较1个月显著升高.内镜术后1个月开始,与术前相比,下段食管的平均收缩间期显著缩短,下段食管的顺行性则显著改善.内镜治疗术后食管下括约肌静息压较术前显著降低,术后6个月食管下括约肌(LES)静息压较术后1个月则明显升高.内镜术后LES松弛率较术前显著升高,术后6个月食管下括约肌松弛率较术后1个月则明显降低.内镜术后1个月开始食管顺行性收缩比例较术前显著升高,而非协调性收缩的比例则显著降低.内镜治疗术后食管体部收缩幅度较术前显著降低.结论 内镜下贲门扩张及肉毒杆菌毒素注射术能显著改善贲门失弛缓症患者的临床表现及食管动力学状况,但术后1个月开始临床复发率逐步升高、食管动力学异常逐渐加重.     

非梗阻性食管源性吞咽困难患者食管测压结果分析

背景:食管源性吞咽困难的病因可分为机械性梗阻和动力障碍两类。目前关于致吞咽困难的食管动力障碍类型的研究相对较少。目的:分析非梗阻性食管源性吞咽困难患者的食管测压结果,探讨引起吞咽困难症状的常见食管动力障碍类型。方法:纳入2007年1月～2012年6月西安交通大学医学院第二附属医院50例以吞咽困难为主诉而行食管测压者,对其测压结果进行分析。入组患者通过病史询问、内镜或食管钡透检查等除外非食管源性和梗阻性吞咽困难。结果:36例(72.0%)患者的食管动力障碍类型为非特异性食管动力障碍(NEMD),13例(26.0%)为贲门失弛缓症,1例(2.0%)食管测压结果正常。9例(18.0%)合并胃食管反流病者均为NEMD。NEMD和贲门失弛缓症患者的食管动力障碍均以食管体部运动功能紊乱和下食管括约肌功能异常为主。结论:本组非梗阻性食管源性吞咽困难患者的食管动力障碍类型多为NEMD,其次为贲门失弛缓症。非梗阻性食管源性吞咽困难患者的食管测压结果可能正常。     

Is aperistalsis with complete lower esophageal sphincter relaxation an early stage of classic achalasia?

BACKGROUND: Aperistalsis with complete lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxation, characterized by the complete relaxation of the LES and aperistalsis of the esophageal body on manometry, has been considered by some authors to be an early manifestation of classic achalasia, which is defined as incomplete relaxation of the LES and aperistalsis of the esophageal body. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical features of patients with aperistalsis with complete LES relaxation, with those of patients with classic achalasia. METHODS: Eighteen patients with aperistalsis with complete LES relaxation and 53 patients with classic achalasia were analyzed with regard to clinical history, the maximal diameter of the esophageal body on barium esophagogram, LES resting pressure and the duration of LES relaxation on manometric recordings, and the selected treatment and its efficacy. RESULTS: The aperistalsis with complete LES relaxation group had distinctly different features compared to those of the classic achalasia group including older age, more frequent association with non-cardiac chest pain, less frequent association with dysphagia and weight loss, lower LES resting pressures, and longer duration of LES relaxation. However, the two groups were similar in terms of maximal diameter of the esophageal body, and efficacy associated with pneumatic dilation. CONCLUSIONS: Aperistalsis with complete LES relaxation on manometry is not necessarily an early manifestation of classic achalasia. However, this condition does not preclude a diagnosis of achalasia or a good response to achalasia therapy.     

经口内镜下肌切开术治疗贲门失弛缓症前后食管动力的变化

贲门失弛缓症的治疗目的为降低下食管括约肌压力(LESP),减轻梗阻,改善临床症状。经口内镜下肌切开术(POEM)近年来开始用于贲门失弛缓症的治疗。目的:通过分析手术前后食管动力的变化,评估POEM治疗贲门失弛缓症的近期疗效。方法:纳入2011年12月~2012年10月在南京鼓楼医院诊断为贲门失弛缓症并接受POEM治疗的39例患者,对其手术前后食管液态测压和近期随访结果进行回顾性分析。结果:38例患者完成POEM和术后3 d食管测压。术后3 d LESP较术前显著降低(P0.01),LES松弛率与术前相比无明显差异。术前和术后3 d食管体部均表现为蠕动性收缩消失,同步收缩比例增加。术后1个月随访,LESP仍显著低于术前(P0.05),37例患者吞咽困难明显好转,有效率为94.9%。结论:POEM治疗贲门失弛缓症近期内降低LESP和缓解临床症状效果明显,但对恢复食管蠕动功能作用有限。食管测压对贲门失弛缓症术后疗效评估有一定价值。     

Differential diagnosis of esophageal motor disorders based in characteristics of dysphagia

BACKGROUND: Dysphagia is one of principal symptoms of esophageal disorders and its characterization is important for diagnosis and management of patients. Anamnesis is useful for differentiating organic and functional dysphagia, but data are lacking about dysphagia characterization among different motor disorders. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate if it is possible the distinction among esophageal motor disorders according to their manometric diagnosis, based on dysphagia characteristics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Dysphagia characteristics (relation with bolus, frequency and localization) of 133 patients submitted to esophageal manometry were reviewed and analysed. All patients had barium swallow studies and/or endoscopy in order to exclude organic lesions. RESULTS: Esophageal manometry was abnormal in 85% of the patients. Characteristics of dysphagia were compared among groups of patients with achalasia, esophageal spastic disorders, non-specific esophageal motor disorders and with normal test. The precise distinction among groups based solely on characteristics of dysphagia was not possible, however some aspects could point to one or another group. In achalasia patients, dysphagia for both solid food and liquids, constant and felt in substernal area, was more frequent in relation to every other group. Intermittent dysphagia was more frequent in patients with spastic disorders. Characteristics of dysphagia in patients with non-specific esophageal motor disorders were similar to those observed in the group with normal test, frequently referred in the neck. CONCLUSION: Characteristics of dysphagia were ancillary to presume the diagnosis of these motor disturbances, however esophageal manometry is necessary for the correct diagnosis in patients with functional dysphagia.     

Esophageal manometry: a comparison of findings in younger and older patients

Objective: We sought to determine the utility of esophageal manometry in an older patient population.
Methods: Consecutively performed manometry studies (470) were reviewed and two groups were chosen for the study, those ≥ 75 yr of age (66 patients) and those ≤ 50 years (122 patients). Symptoms, manometric findings (lower esophageal sphincter [LES], esophageal body, upper esophageal sphincter [UES]) and diagnoses were compared between the groups.
Results: Dysphagia was more common (60.6% vs 25.4%), and chest pain was less common (17.9 vs 26.2%) in older patients. In the entire group, there were no differences in LES parameters. Older patients with achalasia had lower LES residual pressures after deglutition (2.7 vs 12.0 mm Hg), but had similar resting pressures (31.4 vs 35.2 mm Hg) compared with younger achalasia patients. Duration and amplitude of peristalsis were similar in both groups, whereas peristaltic sequences were more likely to be simultaneous in the older group (15% vs 4%). The UES had a lower resting pressure in the older patients (49.6 vs 77.6 mm Hg) and a higher residual pressure (2.0 vs −2.7 mm Hg). The older patients were less likely to have normal motility (30.3% vs 44.3%) and were more likely to have achalasia (15.2% vs 4.1%) or diffuse esophageal spasm (16.6% vs 5.0%). When only patients with dysphagia were analyzed, achalasia was still more likely in the older group (20.0% vs 12.9%).
Conclusions: When older patients present with dysphagia, esophageal manometry frequently yields a diagnosis to help explain their symptoms.     

Apple Sauce Improves Detection of Esophageal Motor Dysfunction During High-Resolution Manometry Evaluation of Dysphagia

Background  

Esophageal manometry utilizes water swallows to evaluate esophageal motor abnormalities in patients with dysphagia, chest pain, or reflux symptoms. Although manometry is the gold standard for evaluation of these symptoms, patients with dysphagia often have normal results in manometry studies.     

Predictive Value of Symptom Profiles in Patients with Suspected Oesophageal Dysmotility

Bak Y-T. Lorang M. Evans PR. Kellow JE, Jones MP, Smith RC. Predictive value of symptom profiles in patients with suspected oesophageal dysmotility. Scand J Gastroenterol 1994;29:392-397.

The main aim of the study was to determine prospectively, in patients referred for oesophageal manometry, whether certain combinations of oesophageal symptoms are more likely than others to predict the presence of oesophageal dysmotility or a positive response to acid perfusion testing. In 524 consecutive patients, presenting predominantly with (non-cardiac) chest pain (n = 277), dysphagia (n = 186), or heartburn (n = 61), a standardized symptom assessment was completed before oesophageal manometry and acid perfusion testing. Half the patients in each group reported additional (‘secondary’) oesophageal symptoms as well as the predominant symptom. Oesophageal dysmotility was categorized in accordance with standard manometric criteria for achalasia, diffuse oesophageal spasm, nutcracker oesophagus, hypertensive lower oesophageal sphincter, or non-specific oesophageal motility disorder. In the predominant chest pain group, the prevalence of abnormal manometry was 33%; in the presence of secondary symptoms, especially dysphagia rather than heartburn, however, the prevalence was significantly (p < 0.01) increased. Also in the predominant chest pain group the prevalence of positive acid perfusion testing (44%) was significantly greater (p<0.05) in those with than in those without secondary symptoms. In the predominant dysphagia group, the prevalence of abnormal manometry was higher than in the other two groups (56%; p < 0.001) but was not affected by the presence or absence of secondary symptoms; this latter finding was also true for the predominant heartburn group. The distribution of specific manometric disorders in any group was not related to the presence or type of secondary symptoms, although a combination of dysphagia and chest pain discriminated achalasia from other manometric disorders. Additional oesophageal symptoms can thus be useful in predicting the results of oesophageal function testing in patients presenting with non-cardiac chest pain but not in patients presenting with predominant non-obstructive dysphagia.     

Variations in clinical presentation of patients with esophageal contraction abnormalities

All patients referred over a one-year period for clinical esophageal manometry were asked to carefully characterize their esophageal symptoms on a self-report questionnaire. Seventy-five patients (48%) were found to have one or more of four contraction abnormalities in the distal esophagus which are thought to be associated with esophageal symptoms. Duration of any of the five symptoms sought (chest pain, dysphagia for solids, dysphagia for liquids, heartburn, regurgitation) varied from two weeks to 28 years (median two years). The prevalence of the individual esophageal symptoms was similar for each of the four contraction abnormalities. Chest pain was the most common symptom and did not vary in prevalence with the cumulative number of manometric abnormalities. In contrast, dysphagia for either liquids or solids tended to increase in prevalence with manometric severity. The variation in location of reported chest pain and dysphagia was remarkable. Although heartburn was reported as a presenting symptom by 48%, this symptom was reproduced by acid instillation in less than half of those so studied. We conclude that esophageal symptoms are generally poor predictors of manometric findings within this group and that variations in clinical presentation are common.     

Multimodality evaluation of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms who have failed empiric proton pump inhibitor therapy

Patients with symptoms suggestive of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), such as chest pain, heartburn, regurgitation, and dysphagia, are typically treated initially with a course of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The evaluation of patients who have either not responded at all or partially and inadequately responded to such therapy requires a more detailed history and may involve an endoscopy and esophageal biopsies, followed by esophageal manometry, ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring, and gastric emptying scanning. To assess the merits of a multimodality ‘structural’ and ‘functional’ assessment of the esophagus in patients who have inadequately controlled GERD symptoms despite using empiric PPI, a retrospective cohort study of patients without any response or with poor symptomatic control to empiric PPI (>2 months duration) who were referred to an Esophageal Studies Unit was conducted. Patients were studied using symptom questionnaires, endoscopy (+ or – for erosive disease, or Barrett's metaplasia) and multilevel esophageal biopsies (eosinophilia, metaplasia), esophageal motility (aperistalsis, dysmotility), 24‐hour ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring (+ if % total time pH < 4 > 5%), and gastric emptying scanning (+ if >10% retention at 4 hours and >70% at 2 hours). Over 3 years, 275 patients (147 men and 128 women) aged 16–89 years underwent complete multimodality testing. Forty percent (n= 109) had nonerosive reflux disease (esophagogastroduodenoscopy [EGD]–, biopsy–, pH+); 19.3% (n= 53) had erosive esophagitis (EGD+); 5.5% (n= 15) Barrett's esophagus (EGD+, metaplasia+); 5.5% (n= 15) eosinophilic esophagitis (biopsy+); 2.5% (n= 7) had achalasia and 5.8% (n= 16) other dysmotility (motility+, pH–); 16% (n= 44) had functional heartburn (EGD–, pH–), and 5.8% (n= 16) had gastroparesis (gastric scan+). Cumulative symptom scores for chest pain, heartburn, regurgitation, and dysphagia were similar among the groups (mean range 1.1–1.35 on a 0–3 scale). Multimodality evaluation changed the diagnosis of GERD in 34.5% of cases and led to or guided alternative therapies in 42%. Overlap diagnoses were frequent: 10/15 (67%) of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis, 12/16 (75%) of patients with gastroparesis, and 11/23 (48%) of patients with achalasia or dysmotility had concomitant pathologic acid reflux by pH studies. Patients with persistent GERD symptoms despite empiric PPI therapy benefit from multimodality evaluation that may change the diagnosis and guide therapy in more than one third of such cases. Because symptoms are not specific and overlap diagnoses are frequent and multifaceted, objective evidence‐driven therapies should be considered in such patients.     

Successful treatment of vigorous achalasia associated with gastric lymphoma

Summary A 61-year-old male was evaluated for dysphagia. Esophageal manometry revealed vigorous achalasia. Upper-gastrointestinal endoscopy revealed a probable gastric neoplasm which was confirmed at laparotomy. Histologically the tumor was a lymphoma. Antineoplastic therapy resulted in rapid and complete improvement in the patient's dysphagia. Repeat esophageal manometry was normal. It is concluded that: (1) patients presenting with achalasia or vigorous achalasia should be carefully evaluated for the presence of a gastric malignancy involving the gastric fundus and lower esophagus; (2) chemotherapy may produce a resolution of esophageal symptoms.     

Dysphagia following fundoplication: "slipped" fundoplication versus achalasia complicated by fundoplication

Failure to obtain preoperative esophageal manometry in patients being considered for antireflux surgery can result in immediate persistent postoperative dysphagia due to a missed diagnosis of achalasia. We describe the clinical assessment and management of a case of delayed postoperative dysphagia due to a "slipped" fundoplication, which is contrasted with three patients with immediate postoperative dysphagia due to a missed diagnosis of achalasia. Surgical revision was required to correct the "slipped" fundoplication, and pneumatic dilatation was successfully used in two of three cases of achalasia complicated by fundoplication. Careful preoperative esophageal evaluation with manometry is essential to rule out the presence of a primary esophageal motor disorder.     

Clinical Utility of Selective Esophageal Manometry in a Tertiary Care Setting

Purpose To evaluate the utility of selective esophageal manometry in clinical practice. Results Retrospective data from 200 subjects was reviewed. Manometry was considered to be (1) high clinical utility when specific abnormality was identified resulting in therapeutic intervention, (2) low clinical utility when specific abnormality was identified without alteration of therapy, (3) limited clinical utility when manometry was normal. High, low, and limited clinical utility was noted in 47, 40, and 13% of instances. Manometry was of high utility in patients with dysphagia or non-cardiac chest pain (P < 0.05), and low utility in gastroesophageal reflux (P < 0.05). Conclusions (1) Esophageal manometry has high clinical utility in dysphagia after exclusion of structural disorders; and non-cardiac chest pain after careful exclusion of reflux. (2) Ineffective motility disorder has high association with gastroesophageal reflux disease but low clinical utility except in preoperative assessment for fundoplication. (3) Esophageal manometry is of high utility in clinical practice when used in conjunction with other diagnostic exclusions.     

Classic and vigorous achalasia: a comparison of manometric, radiographic, and clinical findings

Compared with classic achalasia, vigorous achalasia has been defined as achalasia with relatively high esophageal contraction amplitudes, often with minimal esophageal dilation and prominent tertiary contractions on radiographs, and with the presence of chest pain. However, no study using current manometric techniques has compared manometric, radiographic, and clinical findings in vigorous and classic achalasia or questioned the usefulness of making this distinction. Fifty-four cases involving patients with achalasia whose radiographic and manometric studies were performed within 6 months of each other were available for review. Patients with vigorous achalasia (n = 17), defined by amplitude greater than or equal to 37 mm Hg, and patients with classic achalasia (n = 37), defined as amplitude less than 37 mm Hg, had substantial overlap in radiographic parameters of esophageal dilation, tortuosity, and tertiary contractions. Manometric properties of repetitive waves and lower esophageal sphincter pressure and clinical aspects of chest pain, dysphagia, heartburn, and satisfactory responses to pneumatic dilation were similar in both forms of achalasia. A separate analysis of patients with mean contraction amplitude greater than 60 mm Hg revealed similar findings. It is concluded that use of amplitude as a criterion for classifying achalasia is arbitrary and of dubious value.     

Five-Year Audit of Ambulatory 24-Hour Esophageal pH-Manometry in Clinical Practice

Background: Esophageal function testing was developed to aid diagnosis in patients with negative endoscopy. Although combined 24-h esophageal pH-manometry is now commercially available, its routine clinical effectiveness has not yet been studied. Methods: From 1992 to 1996 we evaluated 303 consecutive patients who were first-time referrals to our unit for 24-h esophageal pH-manometry. The referral indications were gastroesophageal reflux disease, 47.2%; dysphagia, 18.5%; non-cardiac chest pain, 14.9%; connective tissue disease, 13.2%; and symptomatic patients after antireflux surgery, 6.3%. Results: Overall, esophageal function testing altered the diagnosis of 44% of the patients, confirmed it in 38%, and specifically changed the management of 66%. The final clinical `diagnosis' was reflux disease, 54% (32% with non-specific esophageal motility disorder); connective tissue disease, 9.9%; achalasia, 9.6%; other specific esophageal motility disorders, 3.3%; non-specific esophageal motility disorders, 6.9%; and normal, 16.2%. The cost per testing was estimated to be US$305 and per change in management US$465. Conclusion: Combined 24-h pH-manometry has been shown to be a useful and cost-effective test for the management of selected patients in whom the primary investigation was insufficient.