OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether routinely performing upper esophageal sphincter/pharyngeal (UES/P) manometry in patients referred for esophageal testing alters clinical practice. METHODS: Clinical history along with radiography and manometry studies were reviewed in 470 patients referred for manometry. A total of 435 (92.6%) were found to have adequate evaluation of the UES/P and were included in the study. RESULTS: Of 435 studies, 80 (17.7%) had one or more UES/P abnormalities. Indications for these 80 studies were dysphagia in 30 cases (37.5%), chest pain in 26 (32.5%), both in four (5.0%), and other in 20 (25%). There were 85 manometric abnormalities in the 80 studies: hypertensive UES in 16 cases (18.8%), incomplete UES relaxation in 38 (44.7%), hypertensive pharynx in seven (8.2%), hypotensive pharynx in 15 (17.6%), and abnormal coordination in nine (10.6%). A total of 41 patients had a barium study, which was normal in 11 cases (26%), confirmed the problem in 16 (40%), and suggested another problem in 14 (34%). In 17 patients (21%), there was clinical suspicion for an oropharyngeal disorder before manometry, whereas in 58 cases it was an unexpected finding. Of the 58 patients with an unexpected finding, therapy based on this finding was offered in six (three esophageal dilations, two dietary changes, and one swallowing therapy). If patients with concomitant esophageal body disorders are excluded, in only three patients an unexpected UES finding led to change in management. CONCLUSIONS: An unexpected UES/P finding resulted in a change in therapy in only six of the manometries. Barium esophagogram was diagnostic of the oropharyngeal abnormality in nearly two-thirds of the patients in whom it was clinically suspected. These data, along with limited therapeutic options, suggest limited usefulness for routine UES/P manometry.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether routinely performing upper esophageal sphincter/pharyngeal (UES/P) manometry in patients referred for esophageal testing alters clinical practice. METHODS: Clinical history along with radiography and manometry studies were reviewed in 470 patients referred for manometry. A total of 435 (92.6%) were found to have adequate evaluation of the UES/P and were included in the study. RESULTS: Of 435 studies, 80 (17.7%) had one or more UES/P abnormalities. Indications for these 80 studies were dysphagia in 30 cases (37.5%), chest pain in 26 (32.5%), both in four (5.0%), and other in 20 (25%). There were 85 manometric abnormalities in the 80 studies: hypertensive UES in 16 cases (18.8%), incomplete UES relaxation in 38 (44.7%), hypertensive pharynx in seven (8.2%), hypotensive pharynx in 15 (17.6%), and abnormal coordination in nine (10.6%). A total of 41 patients had a barium study, which was normal in 11 cases (26%), confirmed the problem in 16 (40%), and suggested another problem in 14 (34%). In 17 patients (21%), there was clinical suspicion for an oropharyngeal disorder before manometry, whereas in 58 cases it was an unexpected finding. Of the 58 patients with an unexpected finding, therapy based on this finding was offered in six (three esophageal dilations, two dietary changes, and one swallowing therapy). If patients with concomitant esophageal body disorders are excluded, in only three patients an unexpected UES finding led to change in management. CONCLUSIONS: An unexpected UES/P finding resulted in a change in therapy in only six of the manometries. Barium esophagogram was diagnostic of the oropharyngeal abnormality in nearly two-thirds of the patients in whom it was clinically suspected. These data, along with limited therapeutic options, suggest limited usefulness for routine UES/P manometry.
Authors: Daniel Tavares Rezende; Fernando A M Herbella; Luciana C Silva; Sebastião Panocchia-Neto; Marco G Patti Journal: Arq Bras Cir Dig Date: 2014 Jul-Sep
Authors: Simon C Mathews; Maria Ciarleglio; Yamile Haito Chavez; John O Clarke; Ellen Stein; Bani Chander Roland Journal: World J Clin Cases Date: 2014-09-16 Impact factor: 1.337
Authors: Barbara Roa Pauloski; Alfred W Rademaker; Cathy Lazarus; Guy Boeckxstaens; Peter J Kahrilas; Jerilyn A Logemann Journal: Dysphagia Date: 2008-10-28 Impact factor: 3.438