Normative Values for Esophageal Motility Assessed in the Physiological Seated Position for 16-Channel Water Perfused High-resolution Esophageal Manometry System and Postural Variations in Healthy Volunteers

Diagnostic Utility of High-resolution Esophageal Manometry and Its Correlation with Symptoms

BACKGROUND

Primary esophageal motility disorders present with a spectrum of symptoms where manometry plays an important role. We designed this study to evaluate the utility of esophageal manometry among various symptoms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a single-center observational study conducted over 5 years in a tertiary referral center. A total of 564 patients who underwent high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) using a 16-channel water perfusion system were included in the study. Their clinical profile and manometric findings, as per the Chicago classification version 4.0, were recorded, and the diagnostic utility of HREM with respect to symptoms was studied.

RESULTS

Motility disorders were identified in 48.8% of patients, the most common being Achalasia cardia (32.4%). Dysphagia (55.5%) was the most common indication of manometry, followed by gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (34.9%), chest pain (6.2%), and symptoms such as belching, globus, and hiccoughs (3.4%). Among those who were re-classified from Chicago classification v3.0 to v4.0, 21.2% had a newer diagnosis. Among the patients with dysphagia, HREM revealed the highest yield of detecting an abnormal esophageal motility test (70.6%); meanwhile, this yield was much lower in those with GERD (21.8%), chest pain (22.8%), and other symptoms (15.7%). The most common finding among those with dysphagia was Achalasia cardia (55.9%), while the study was normal among those with GERD (78.1%), chest pain (77.1%), and other symptoms (84.2%). The sensitivity and specificity of dysphagia for major motility disorders were 65% and 91%, respectively, with a positive predictive value of 90%.

CONCLUSION

HREM has high accuracy and a good diagnostic yield among patients with dysphagia, with the most common finding being Achalasia cardia.

A Systematic Review on Spinal Asymmetries in Case Studies of Unilateral Nephroptosis from a Viscerosomatic Point of View

The assessment of posture and asymmetries is common in musculoskeletal clinical practice, and correction is a frequent goal. In this setting, posture and asymmetries are usually interpreted in terms of musculoskeletal issues. This study aimed to evaluate spinal asymmetries in case studies of unilateral nephroptosis. A systematic review was performed using PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science. We included case reports and case series of nephroptotic patients which showed diagnostic imaging that allowed us to assess the presence of spinal asymmetries in the frontal plane. The methodological quality of the selected studies was assessed by using Case Report (CARE) checklist. Nineteen studies were included, with a total number of 78 reported patients (69 women) ranging 22 to 44 years old (mean: 29). Only one patient presented with medial nephroptosis, while the rest presented with caudal migration. Ninety-one percent of the cases affected to the right kidney. All cases but two showed homolateral flank closure (lower rib descent, iliac crest raise and/or homolateral side-bending). The correction of nephroptosis, either by supine position or surgical treatment, removed asymmetries in some cases while other cases improved only partly. Manual therapists must consider visceral implications while assessing body posture. Further, since the most common symptom of nephroptosis is loin pain, and it has been claimed that loin pain is underdiagnosed, manual therapists should consider its potential presence during clinical practice. Finally, being that nephroptosis shares several features with idiopathic lumbar scoliosis (type of patient, postural adaptation), more research is needed regarding any possible relation between them.

Variations in Clinical Practice of Esophageal High-resolution Manometry: A Nationwide Survey

Background/Aims

Esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) enables the comprehensive evaluation of the esophageal motor function. However, protocols are not uniform and clinical practices vary widely among institutions. This study aims to understand the current HRM practice in Korea.

Methods

The survey was sent via email through the Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility. The questions covered descriptive information, preparation, techniques, analysis, and reporting of esophageal HRM.

Results

The survey was completed in 32 (74.4%) out of 43 centers, including 24 tertiary and 8 secondary referral centers. Of the 32 centers, 25 (78.1%) performed HRM in a sitting position, while 7 centers (21.9%) reported performing HRM in a supine position. All the centers utilized single wet swallows as a standard, but the volume, frequency, and interval between swallows varied widely. Sixteen centers (50.0%) applied adjunctive tests, including multiple rapid swallows (n = 16) and rapid drink challenges (n = 9). Parameters assessed and documented in the report were similar. In addition to the assessment of the esophagogastric junction and esophageal body, 27 centers (84.8%) and 18 centers (56.3%) included measurements for the upper esophageal sphincter and the pharynx, respectively, in the HRM protocol.

Conclusions

We found a variation in the available HRM practice among centers, even though they broadly agreed in the data analysis. Efforts are needed to develop a standardized protocol for HRM measurement.

The Clinical Utility of Provocative Maneuvers at Esophageal High-resolution Manometry (HRM)

Esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) assesses esophageal motor function and is indicated both for evaluation of esophageal symptoms and before antireflux interventions. HRM studies are interpreted and esophageal motor diagnoses made according to the Chicago Classification, version 3.0 algorithm, which is based on ten 5 mL supine water swallows. However, this practice of single liquid swallows performed in the supine position does not reflect typical "real-life" swallowing, and may not reproduce the patient's presenting symptoms. Therefore, provocative maneuvers at HRM-beyond these 10 standard swallows-can afford additional insights into esophageal motor function with clinically significant implications, and represent areas of exciting investigation and innovation. Accordingly, the 2020 American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines on Esophageal Physiologic Testing conditionally recommend their inclusion in the HRM protocol. In this clinical review, we discuss the supporting data for and clinical utility of provocative maneuvers at HRM that include changes in body position or accessories (upright swallows, "bridge" position, straight leg raise, abdominal compression), bolus consistency (solid swallows, test meals, postprandial high-resolution impedance manometry), bolus frequency (multiple rapid swallows), the volume of bolus (rapid drink challenge/multiple water swallows), and the use of pharmacological agents.

Normative reference values for esophageal high-resolution manometry in healthy adults: A systematic review

Establishing normative values of high-resolution esophageal manometry is necessary for accurate interpretation and comparison of measurements. In this systematic review, we aimed to summarize normal values for different esophageal high-resolution manometry systems. Moreover, we assessed the effect of body position, bolus consistency, and provocative maneuvers on these normative thresholds. We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from January 1st, 2006, to January 20th, 2020, for studies that reported normative data of high-resolution manometry in healthy volunteers. We assessed methodological quality of the included studies and planned a descriptive analysis. We analyzed data from 54 articles describing normative thresholds in high-resolution manometry using solid-state or water-perfused systems. Forty-six studies performed the manometry study in the supine position with liquid swallows, whereas sixteen studies described normative values in the upright position. Twelve studies assessed normative values for different bolus consistencies, and nine studies evaluated different provocative maneuvers. There is a considerable variety of normative values for esophageal high-resolution manometry depending on the equipment used and the protocols performed to obtain measurements. This should be taken into account when evaluating measurements in clinical practice and when comparing results of published research studies.