Philipp Gehwolf1, Ronald A Hinder2, Kenneth R DeVault3, Michael Edlinger4, Heinz F Wykypiel5, Paul J Klingler6,2. 1. Center of Operative Medicine, Department of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University Innsbruck, Anichstrasse 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. philipp.gehwolf@i-med.ac.at. 2. Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL, USA. 3. Department of Gastroenterology, Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL, USA. 4. Department of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Health Economics, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. 5. Center of Operative Medicine, Department of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University Innsbruck, Anichstrasse 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. heinz.wykypiel@i-med.ac.at. 6. Center of Operative Medicine, Department of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University Innsbruck, Anichstrasse 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: High-resolution manometry of the esophagus has gained worldwide acceptance, using different solid-state catheters. Thus, normal values for lower esophageal sphincter (LES) resting pressure in suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease patients have been established using water-perfused manometry. These standard values are commonly applied using also solid-state techniques, although they have never been compared before. The aim of the study was to compare LES measurements obtained with water-perfused manometry with a solid-state technique. METHODS: Thirty healthy subjects were studied twice on the same day: Technique 1: Station pull through using a water-perfused catheter with ports arranged at 0°, 90°, 180° and 270° which were averaged to give a mean LES pressure. Technique 2: Solid-state circumferential probe with a single station pull through. Data were collected using the same computer system and program. The LES pressures were randomly and blindly analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-seven subjects out of 30 were analyzed. Using the solid-state system, the mean LES pressure was higher (15.0 vs. 23.3 mmHg, p = 0.003) and 19 of 27 (70%) individual measurements were higher. Two subjects had a hypertensive LES by solid state (58.6 resp. 47.5 mmHg), while their pressures were normal with water-perfused manometry (21.0 resp. 23.4 mmHg). The distal esophageal pressures (mean of pressure at 3 and 8 cm above LES) were the same with the two techniques. CONCLUSION: In normal control subjects, LES measurement using circumferential solid-state transducers yields higher pressures than standard water-perfused manometry. Which system yields the "true" resting pressure of the physiologic LES remains to be determined.
OBJECTIVE: High-resolution manometry of the esophagus has gained worldwide acceptance, using different solid-state catheters. Thus, normal values for lower esophageal sphincter (LES) resting pressure in suspected gastroesophageal reflux diseasepatients have been established using water-perfused manometry. These standard values are commonly applied using also solid-state techniques, although they have never been compared before. The aim of the study was to compare LES measurements obtained with water-perfused manometry with a solid-state technique. METHODS: Thirty healthy subjects were studied twice on the same day: Technique 1: Station pull through using a water-perfused catheter with ports arranged at 0°, 90°, 180° and 270° which were averaged to give a mean LES pressure. Technique 2: Solid-state circumferential probe with a single station pull through. Data were collected using the same computer system and program. The LES pressures were randomly and blindly analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-seven subjects out of 30 were analyzed. Using the solid-state system, the mean LES pressure was higher (15.0 vs. 23.3 mmHg, p = 0.003) and 19 of 27 (70%) individual measurements were higher. Two subjects had a hypertensive LES by solid state (58.6 resp. 47.5 mmHg), while their pressures were normal with water-perfused manometry (21.0 resp. 23.4 mmHg). The distal esophageal pressures (mean of pressure at 3 and 8 cm above LES) were the same with the two techniques. CONCLUSION: In normal control subjects, LES measurement using circumferential solid-state transducers yields higher pressures than standard water-perfused manometry. Which system yields the "true" resting pressure of the physiologic LES remains to be determined.
Authors: A J Bredenoord; M Fox; P J Kahrilas; J E Pandolfino; W Schwizer; A J P M Smout Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 3.598
Authors: M B Fennerty; D Castell; A M Fendrick; M Halpern; D Johnson; P J Kahrilas; D Leiberman; J E Richter; R E Sampliner Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 1996-03-11
Authors: G Perdikis; R J Lund; R A Hinder; T R McGinn; C J Filipi; N Katada; R Cina; P R Hinder; S J Lanspa Journal: Am J Surg Date: 1997-12 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Shahin Ayazi; Jeffrey A Hagen; Joerg Zehetner; Oliver Ross; Calvin Wu; Arzu Oezcelik; Emmanuele Abate; Helen J Sohn; Farzaneh Banki; John C Lipham; Steven R DeMeester; Tom R Demeester Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2009-09-25 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: T R DeMeester; C I Wang; J A Wernly; C A Pellegrini; A G Little; P Klementschitsch; G Bermudez; L F Johnson; D B Skinner Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 1980-05 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: A Schäfer; Philipp Gehwolf; J Umlauft; T Dziodzio; M Biebl; A Perathoner; F Cakar-Beck; H Wykypiel Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 4.129