New parameter for quantifying bolus transit with high-resolution impedance manometry: A comparison with simultaneous esophagogram

High-resolution impedance manometry for comparing bolus transit between patients with non-obstructive dysphagia and asymptomatic controls

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are no high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM)-based diagnostic criteria for non-obstructive dysphagia (NOD). New impedance parameters, such as the esophageal impedance integral (EII) and volume of inverted impedance (VII) ratios, have shown strong correlations with bolus transit. This study compared the EII and VII ratios as diagnostic tools for NOD.

METHODS

We analyzed 36 participants (12 patients with achalasia, 12 patients with NOD [7 with normal motility and 5 with ineffective esophageal motility], and 12 asymptomatic controls) who underwent HRIM with a maximum of 5 swallows per participant. The EII and VII ratios were calculated as Z2 (post-swallow)/Z1 (pre-swallow). Bolus transit was retrospectively evaluated using transluminal impedance analysis.

KEY RESULTS

Both EII and VII ratios could effectively distinguish the achalasia group from the non-achalasia groups (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC]: 0.83 for VII vs. 0.80 for EII; p = 0.73). However, the VII ratio was significantly better in discriminating asymptomatic controls from patients with dysphagia (NOD + achalasia) (AUROC: 0.81 vs. 0.68; p = 0.01). Moreover, the VII ratio was better in discriminating asymptomatic controls from patients with NOD (AUROC: 0.68 vs. 0.51; p = 0.06). In repeated swallows, the VII ratio was consistently the lowest in controls and the highest in patients with achalasia, whereas the EII ratio did not show a consistent pattern.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

The VII ratio was more reliable than the EII ratio for describing bolus transit and distinguishing patients with NOD from asymptomatic controls, even during repeated measures of subsequent swallows.

[Diagnosis of Dysphagia: High Resolution Manometry & EndoFLIP]

Esophageal motility disorders were re-defined when high-resolution manometry was employed to better understand their pathogenesis. Newly developed parameters including integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), distal contractile integral, and distal latency showed better diagnostic yield compared with previously used conventional parameters. Therefore, Chicago classification was formulated, and its diagnostic cascade begins by assessing the IRP value. However, IRP showed limitation due to its inconsistency, and other studies have tried to overcome this. Recent studies showed that provocative tests, supplementing the conventional esophageal manometry protocol, have improved the diagnostic yield of the esophageal motility disorders. Therefore, position change from supine to upright, solid or semi-solid swallowing, multiple rapid swallows, and the rapid drink challenge were newly added to the manometry protocol in the revised Chicago classification version 4.0. Impedance planimetry enables measurement of bag cross-sectional area at various locations. The functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) has been applied to assess luminal distensibility. This probe can also measure pressure, serial cross-sectional areas, and tension-strain relationship. The esophagogastric junction's distensibility is decreased in achalasia. Therefore, EndoFLIP can be used to assess contractility and distensibility of the esophagus in the patients with achalasia, including repetitive antegrade or retrograde contractions. EndoFLIP can detect achalasia patients with relatively low IRP, which was difficult to diagnose using the current high-resolution manometry. EndoFLIP also provides information on the contractile activity and distensibility of the esophageal body in patients with achalasia. The use of provocative tests, newly added in Chicago classification 4.0 version, and EndoFLIP can expand understanding of esophageal motility disorders.