Concise Review: Applicability of High-resolution Manometry in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Exploring esophagogastric junction morphology and contractile integral: implications for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease pathophysiology

BACKGROUND

Evaluate the clinical significance of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) morphology and esophagogastric junction contractile integral (EGJ-CI) in refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (RGERD) patients.

METHODS

From June 2021 to June 2023, 144 RGERD patients underwent comprehensive evaluation, recording symptom scores, demographic data. GERD classification (NERD or RE, A-D) was based on endoscopic findings. Reflux was assessed through 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring, and high-resolution esophageal manometry(HREM) measured parameters including EGJ-CI.

RESULTS

HREM revealed EGJ morphologies (type I, II, III) in 80.6%, 13.9%, and 5.6% of subjects, respectively. As the separation between the lower esophageal sphincter(LES) and crural diaphragm(CD) increased, EGJ-CI decreased (p < 0.005). Subjects with EGJ morphology types II and III had significantly higher acid exposure times(AET), DeMeester scores, and impedance reflux times than type I (p < 0.05). There was no statistical difference between types II and III. Impedance reflux times in subjects with type III morphology were significantly higher than those with types I and II (p < 0.05). The optimal EGJ-CI cutoff for distinguishing pathological reflux was 24.8 mmHg·cm, with 68% sensitivity, 72.3% specificity, and an AUC of 0.693 (95% CI 0.609-0.768). Logistic regression analysis identified EGJ-CI <24.8 mmHg·cm (OR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.1-5.5, p = 0.022) and ineffective esophageal motility(IEM) (OR = 2.4, 95% CI 1.2-5.2, p = 0.027) as independent risk factors.

CONCLUSION

EGJ-CI is crucial for clinically assessing EGJ barrier function, predicting pathological reflux and selecting patients with persistent reflux symptoms for surgery.

Esophageal motor disorders across ages: A retrospective multicentric analysis

BACKGROUND

Age-related changes in the gastrointestinal system are common and may be influenced by physiological aging processes. To date, a comprehensive analysis of esophageal motor disorders in patients belonging to various age groups has not been adequately reported.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective assessment of high-resolution manometry (HRM) studies in a multicenter setting. HRM parameters were evaluated according to the Chicago Classification version 4.0. Epidemiological, demographic, clinical data, and main manometric parameters, were collected at the time of the examination. Age groups were categorized as early adulthood (<35 years), early middle-age (35-49 years), late middle-age (50-64 years), and late adulthood (≥65 years).

RESULTS

Overall, 1341 patients (632, 47.0% male) were included with a median age of 55 years. Late adulthood patients reported more frequently dysphagia (35.2%) than early adulthood patients (24.0%, p = 0.035), early middle-age patients (21.0%, p < 0.0001), and late middle-aged patients (22.7%, p < 0.0001). Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction was more prevalent in late adulthood (16.7%) than in early adulthood (6.1%, p = 0.003), and in early middle-age (8.1%, p = 0.001). Patients with normal esophageal motility were significantly younger (52.0 years) than patients with hypercontractile esophagus (61.5 years), type III achalasia (59.6 years), esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (59.4 years), absent contractility (57.2 years), and distal esophageal spasm (57.0 years), in multivariate model (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The rate of esophageal motor disorders is higher in older patients, in particular esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction and hypercontractile esophagus. Future prospective studies are necessary to confirm our results and to find tailored strategies to improve clinical outcomes.

Esophageal Mucosal Impedance Assessment for the Diagnosis of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Background/Aims

Diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is sometimes challenging because the performance of available tests is not entirely satisfactory. This study aims to directly measure the esophageal mucosal impedance during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for the diagnosis of GERD.

Methods

Sixty participants with typical symptoms of GERD underwent high-resolution esophageal manometry, 24-hour multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, and mucosal impedance measurement. Mucosal impedance measurement was performed at 2, 5, 10, and 18 cm above the esophagogastric junction during gastrointestinal endoscopy using a specific catheter developed based on devices described in the literature over the last decade. The patients were divided into groups A (acid exposure time < 4%) and B (acid exposure time ≥ 4%).

Results

The mucosal impedance was significantly lower in group B at 2 cm (2264.4 Ω ± 1099.0 vs 4575.0 Ω ± 1407.6 [group A]) and 5 cm above the esophagogastric junction (4221.2 Ω ± 2623.7 vs 5888.2 Ω ± 2529.4 [group A]). There was no significant difference in the mucosal impedance between the 2 groups at 10 cm and 18 cm above the esophagogastric junction. Mucosal impedance value at 2 cm > 2970 Ω resulted in a sensitivity of 96.4% and a specificity of 87.5% to exclude GERD.

Conclusions

Direct measurement of mucosal impedance during endoscopy is a simple and promising method for diagnosing GERD. Individuals with an abnormal acid exposure time have lower mucosal impedance measurements than those with a normal acid exposure time.

The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease and laryngopharyngeal reflux in patients with dysphagia after radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in post-irradiated patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, 31 NPC and 12 control patients completed questionnaires for GERD/LPR before esophageal manometry and 24-h pH monitoring. The DeMeester score and reflux finding score (RFS) were used to define GERD and LPR, respectively. Risk factors were identified.

RESULTS

51.6% of NPC and 8.3% of control patients, and 77.4% of NPC and 33% of control patients, were GERD-positive and LPR-positive, respectively. The GERD/LPR questionnaire failed to identify either condition in patients with NPC. No parameter differences in esophageal manometry or pneumonia incidence were noted between GERD/LPR-positive and GERD/LPR-negative patients. Post radiotherapy duration, high BMI, lack of chemotherapy, and dysphagia were positive risk factors for GERD/LPR.

CONCLUSIONS

A high prevalence of GERD/LPR in patients with post-irradiated NPC exists, but reflux symptoms are inadequate for diagnosis.

A New Method to Evaluate Lower Esophageal Distension Capacity in Eosinophilic Esophagitis by Using Functional Lumen Imaging Probe (EndoFLIP™)

Endoluminal functional lumen impedance planimetry (EndoFLIPTM) has become the gold standard to evaluate esophageal distensibility, although the study itself and its analysis present challenges. We propose here a new method to assess lower esophageal distension capacity that overcomes several limitations of prior approaches, including incomplete and corrupted EndoFLIPTM recordings. Esophageal distension capacity was evaluated with a 16-channel EndoFLIPTM in 10 controls and 14 patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Controls were evaluated once. EoE patients were evaluated at baseline and after at least six weeks of treatment with orodispersible budesonide tablets, 1 mg bd. Balloon volumes were increased by 5 mL stepwise, either reaching a maximum volume of 60 mL or a maximum balloon pressure of 60 mmHg. Recordings were analyzed with a homemade R script. The mean esophageal diameter at 60 mL, D (60 mL), was calculated or extrapolated depending on whether the 60 mL volume was reached. By fitting a Michaelis-Menten curve across all measured diameters throughout all constant volume steps, the mean D (60 mL) was estimated. For control subjects, the mean ± SD value of D (60 mL) was 17.08 ± 1.69 mm, and for EoE patients at baseline, D (60 mL) was 14.51 ± 2.68 mm. After six weeks of treatment of EoE patients, D (60 mL) significantly increased to 16.22 ± 1.86 mm (paired Wilcoxon signed test: p = 0.0052), although the values for control subjects were not reached. The estimated mean esophageal diameter at 60 mL is a good proxy for esophageal distension capacity, which correlates with clinical outcomes in EoE. The method presented in this study overcomes difficulties encountered during the standard measurement protocol, allowing the analysis of recordings from incomplete and corrupted registries.

Is there a direct relationship between hiatal hernia size, esophageal body hypomotility and symptomatic perception of gastroesophageal reflux episodes?

Background

The esophagogastric junction (EGJ) is classified into 3 anatomical subtypes according to lower esophageal sphincter-crural diaphragm (LES-CD) separation. We aimed to assess their relationship to esophageal motility, reflux characteristics, and symptom perception.

Methods

We analyzed data from 1740 consecutive patients with typical reflux symptoms, who underwent high resolution manometry and a 24-h pH-impedance study during a 13-year period. A diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was made if acid exposure time (AET) was >6%. EGJ types were classified as 1, 2, or 3, if LES-CD separation was up to 1 cm, 1-3 cm, or ≥3 cm, respectively.

Results

EGJ type distribution was 72.2%, 22.1% and 5.7%, for types 1, 2 and 3, respectively. GERD was diagnosed in 31.2% and was more common among patients with EGJ type 2/3 vs. 1 (P<0.001). Length of LES-CD separation significantly correlated with AET and number of reflux episodes. Patients with type 2 or 3 EGJ more often showed ineffective or absent peristalsis compared with type 1 (P=0.008 and P<0.001 respectively). In the multivariate analysis, EGJ type 2/3 correlated with AET (P=0.001) and reflux episodes (P=0.041) but not with positive symptomatic markers or with ineffective/absent peristalsis.

Conclusions

Our study confirms that EGJ anatomical morphology is a strong risk factor for GERD and correlates with both AET and the number of reflux events, though the length of separation is more important than the type. The multivariate analysis revealed that EGJ type 2 or 3 was not correlated with symptom perception or esophageal hypomotility.