TY - JOUR
T1 - Improved Assessment of Bolus Clearance in Patients With Achalasia Using High-Resolution Impedance Manometry
AU - Carlson, Dustin A.
AU - Beveridge, Claire A.
AU - Lin, Zhiyue
AU - Balla, Michelle
AU - Gregory, Dyanna
AU - Tye, Michael
AU - Ritter, Katherine
AU - Kahrilas, Peter J.
AU - Pandolfino, John E.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 AGA Institute
PY - 2018/5
Y1 - 2018/5
N2 - Background & Aims: Esophageal retention is typically evaluated by timed-barium esophagram in patients treated for achalasia. Esophageal bolus clearance can also be evaluated using high-resolution impedance manometry. We evaluated the associations of conventional and novel high-resolution impedance manometry metrics, esophagram, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in achalasia. Methods: We performed a prospective study of 70 patients with achalasia (age, 20–81 y; 30 women) treated by pneumatic dilation or myotomy who underwent follow-up evaluations from April 2013 through December 2015 (median, 12 mo after treatment; range, 3–183 mo). Patients were assessed using timed-barium esophagrams, high-resolution impedance manometry, and PROs, determined from Eckardt scores (the primary outcome) and the brief esophageal dysphagia questionnaire. Barium column height was measured from esophagrams taken 5 minutes after ingestion of barium (200 mL). Impedance-manometry was analyzed for bolus transit (dichotomized) and with a customized MATLAB program (The MathWorks, Inc, Natick, MA) to calculate the esophageal impedance integral (EII) ratio. Results: Optimal cut points to identify a good PRO (defined as Eckardt score of ≤3) were esophagram barium column height of 3 cm (identified patients with a good PRO with 63% sensitivity and 75% specificity) and an EII ratio of 0.41 (identified patients with a good PRO with 83% sensitivity and 75% specificity). Complete bolus transit identified patients with a good PRO with 28% sensitivity and 75% specificity. Of the 25 patients who met these cut points for both esophagram barium column height and EII ratio, 23 (92%) had a good PRO. Of the 17 patients who met neither cut point, 14 (82%) had a poor PRO (Eckardt score above 3). Conclusions: In a prospective study of 70 patients with achalasia, we found EII ratio identified patients with good PROs with higher levels of sensitivity (same specificity) than timed-barium esophagram or impedance-manometry bolus transit assessments. The EII ratio should be added to achalasia outcome evaluations that involve high-resolution impedance manometry as an independent measure and to complement timed-barium esophagram.
AB - Background & Aims: Esophageal retention is typically evaluated by timed-barium esophagram in patients treated for achalasia. Esophageal bolus clearance can also be evaluated using high-resolution impedance manometry. We evaluated the associations of conventional and novel high-resolution impedance manometry metrics, esophagram, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in achalasia. Methods: We performed a prospective study of 70 patients with achalasia (age, 20–81 y; 30 women) treated by pneumatic dilation or myotomy who underwent follow-up evaluations from April 2013 through December 2015 (median, 12 mo after treatment; range, 3–183 mo). Patients were assessed using timed-barium esophagrams, high-resolution impedance manometry, and PROs, determined from Eckardt scores (the primary outcome) and the brief esophageal dysphagia questionnaire. Barium column height was measured from esophagrams taken 5 minutes after ingestion of barium (200 mL). Impedance-manometry was analyzed for bolus transit (dichotomized) and with a customized MATLAB program (The MathWorks, Inc, Natick, MA) to calculate the esophageal impedance integral (EII) ratio. Results: Optimal cut points to identify a good PRO (defined as Eckardt score of ≤3) were esophagram barium column height of 3 cm (identified patients with a good PRO with 63% sensitivity and 75% specificity) and an EII ratio of 0.41 (identified patients with a good PRO with 83% sensitivity and 75% specificity). Complete bolus transit identified patients with a good PRO with 28% sensitivity and 75% specificity. Of the 25 patients who met these cut points for both esophagram barium column height and EII ratio, 23 (92%) had a good PRO. Of the 17 patients who met neither cut point, 14 (82%) had a poor PRO (Eckardt score above 3). Conclusions: In a prospective study of 70 patients with achalasia, we found EII ratio identified patients with good PROs with higher levels of sensitivity (same specificity) than timed-barium esophagram or impedance-manometry bolus transit assessments. The EII ratio should be added to achalasia outcome evaluations that involve high-resolution impedance manometry as an independent measure and to complement timed-barium esophagram.
KW - Esophagram
KW - Outcome
KW - Swallow
KW - Symptom
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045704047&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045704047&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.11.019
DO - 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.11.019
M3 - Article
C2 - 29155168
AN - SCOPUS:85045704047
SN - 1542-3565
VL - 16
SP - 672-680.e1
JO - Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
JF - Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
IS - 5
ER -