Literature DB >> 24164976

Inter- and intra-rater reproducibility of automated and integrated pressure-flow analysis of esophageal pressure-impedance recordings.

W O Rohof1, J C Myers, F A Estremera, L S Ferris, J van de Pol, G E Boeckxstaens, T I Omari.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Automated impedance manometry pressure-flow analysis (AIM analysis) determines pressure measurements relative to bolus flow and has to date shown subtle variations in esophageal motility in relation to dysphagia. In this study, we assessed intra- and inter-rater reproducibility of AIM metrics derived using purpose designed software.
METHODS: Fifty patients referred for evaluation of gastro-esophageal reflux symptoms (33 men, age 52 ± 1.9 years) underwent combined high-resolution impedance manometry and completed a dysphagia questionnaire. From 10 liquid and 10 viscous swallows, a subset of four swallows (two saline and two viscous) was systematically selected from each patient for manual and AIMplot analysis, which was performed twice by five observers (two experts, three non-experts). Intra- and inter-rater agreement were determined using intraclass correlation coefficients. KEY
RESULTS: AIMplot-based analysis showed high intra-rater and inter-rater reproducibility for all metrics (mean ICCs of 0.95 and 0.94, respectively). Reproducibility of metrics derived for liquid and viscous did not differ (ICCs of 0.96 and 0.91 for liquid and viscous, respectively). In addition, metrics derived by experts had an equivalent level of reproducibility compared to non-experts (ICCs of 0.96 and 0.94, respectively). Variables that could be derived with commercial software (ManoView™) correlated highly with variables from AIMplot-based analysis, such as 4-s integrated relaxation pressure (r = 0.85) and the 20-mmHg isobaric contour defect (r = 0.92). CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Esophageal AIM analysis is highly reproducible, independent of an observer's level of experience in esophageal motility. Therefore, AIM analysis produces data that are reliable for clinical and research purposes.
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  dysphagia; electrical impedance; esophageal manometry; esophagus; reproducibility

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24164976     DOI: 10.1111/nmo.12246

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil        ISSN: 1350-1925            Impact factor:   3.598


  8 in total

Review 1.  Impedance as an adjunct to manometric testing to investigate symptoms of dysphagia: What it has failed to do and what it may tell us in the future.

Authors:  T Omari; J Tack; N Rommel
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.623

2.  Laryngeal Injury and Upper Airway Symptoms After Oral Endotracheal Intubation With Mechanical Ventilation During Critical Care: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Martin B Brodsky; Matthew J Levy; Erin Jedlanek; Vinciya Pandian; Brendan Blackford; Carrie Price; Gai Cole; Alexander T Hillel; Simon R Best; Lee M Akst
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 7.598

3.  High-resolution impedance manometry parameters enhance the esophageal motility evaluation in non-obstructive dysphagia patients without a major Chicago Classification motility disorder.

Authors:  D A Carlson; T Omari; Z Lin; N Rommel; K Starkey; P J Kahrilas; J Tack; J E Pandolfino
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 3.598

Review 4.  Esophageal Impedance Monitoring: Clinical Pearls and Pitfalls.

Authors:  Karthik Ravi; David A Katzka
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 10.864

5.  Inter-rater agreement of novel high-resolution impedance manometry metrics: Bolus flow time and esophageal impedance integral ratio.

Authors:  D A Carlson; Z Lin; W Kou; J E Pandolfino
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 3.598

6.  Esophageal Hypervigilance and Visceral Anxiety Are Contributors to Symptom Severity Among Patients Evaluated With High-Resolution Esophageal Manometry.

Authors:  Dustin A Carlson; C Prakash Gyawali; Sabine Roman; Marcelo Vela; Tiffany H Taft; Michael D Crowell; Karthik Ravi; Joseph R Triggs; Farhan Quader; Jacqueline Prescott; Frederick T J Lin; Francois Mion; Dario Biasutto; Laurie Keefer; Peter J Kahrilas; John E Pandolfino
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 12.045

Review 7.  The Potential Benefits of Applying Recent Advances in Esophageal Motility Testing in Patients with Esophageal Atresia.

Authors:  Nathalie Rommel; Maissa Rayyan; Charlotte Scheerens; Taher Omari
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 3.418

8.  British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for oesophageal manometry and oesophageal reflux monitoring.

Authors:  Nigel J Trudgill; Daniel Sifrim; Rami Sweis; Mark Fullard; Kumar Basu; Mimi McCord; Michael Booth; John Hayman; Guy Boeckxstaens; Brian T Johnston; Nicola Ager; John De Caestecker
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 23.059

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.