François Mion1, Salvatore Tolone2, Aurélien Garros3, Edoardo Savarino4, Elise Pelascini5, Maud Robert5, Gilles Poncet5, Pierre-Jean Valette6, Sophie Marjoux3, Ludovico Docimo2, Sabine Roman3. 1. Pavillon L, Hospital E. Herriot, 69437, Lyon, Cedex 03, France. francois.mion@chu-lyon.fr. 2. Division of General and Bariatric Surgery, University of Naples S.U.N, Caserta, Italy. 3. Hospices Civils de Lyon, Hospital E. Herriot, Digestive Physiology, Lyon, & University Lyon I, Lyon, France. 4. Gastroenterology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy. 5. Hospices Civils de Lyon, Hospital E. Herriot, Digestive and Bariatric Surgery, Lyon, France. 6. Hospices Civils de Lyon, Radiology Department, Lyon, & University Lyon 1, Lyon, France.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is gaining ground in the field of bariatric surgery. Data are scarce on its impact on esophagogastric physiology. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of SG on esophagogastric motility with high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) and to assess the usefulness of HRIM in patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms after SG. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 53 cases of HRIM performed after SG was conducted. Upper GI symptoms at the time of HRIM were scored. HRIM was analyzed according to the Chicago classification v3.0. A special attention was devoted to the occurrence of increased intragastric pressure (IIGP) after water swallows and reflux episodes as detected with impedance. A measurement of sleeve volume and diameter was performed with CT scan in a subgroup of patients. RESULTS: IIGP occurred very frequently in patients after SG (77 %) and was not associated with any upper GI symptoms, specific esophageal manometric profile, or impedance reflux. Impedance reflux episodes were also frequently observed after SG (52 %): they were significantly associated with gastroesophageal reflux (GER) symptoms and ineffective esophageal motility. The sleeve volume and diameters were also significantly smaller in patients with impedance reflux episodes (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: SG significantly modified esophagogastric motility. IIGP is frequent, not correlated to symptoms, and should be regarded as a HRIM marker of SG. Impedance reflux episodes were also frequent, associated with GER symptoms and esophageal dysmotility. HRIM may thus have a clinical impact on the management of patients with upper GI symptoms after SG.
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is gaining ground in the field of bariatric surgery. Data are scarce on its impact on esophagogastric physiology. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of SG on esophagogastric motility with high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) and to assess the usefulness of HRIM in patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms after SG. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 53 cases of HRIM performed after SG was conducted. Upper GI symptoms at the time of HRIM were scored. HRIM was analyzed according to the Chicago classification v3.0. A special attention was devoted to the occurrence of increased intragastric pressure (IIGP) after water swallows and reflux episodes as detected with impedance. A measurement of sleeve volume and diameter was performed with CT scan in a subgroup of patients. RESULTS: IIGP occurred very frequently in patients after SG (77 %) and was not associated with any upper GI symptoms, specific esophageal manometric profile, or impedance reflux. Impedance reflux episodes were also frequently observed after SG (52 %): they were significantly associated with gastroesophageal reflux (GER) symptoms and ineffective esophageal motility. The sleeve volume and diameters were also significantly smaller in patients with impedance reflux episodes (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: SG significantly modified esophagogastric motility. IIGP is frequent, not correlated to symptoms, and should be regarded as a HRIM marker of SG. Impedance reflux episodes were also frequent, associated with GER symptoms and esophageal dysmotility. HRIM may thus have a clinical impact on the management of patients with upper GI symptoms after SG.
Authors: Z Lin; D A Carlson; K Dykstra; J Sternbach; E Hungness; P J Kahrilas; J D Ciolino; J E Pandolfino Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2015-06-18 Impact factor: 3.598
Authors: Paul Robert Burton; Wendy A Brown; Cheryl Laurie; Anna Korin; Kenneth Yap; Melissa Richards; John Owens; Gary Crosthwaite; Geoff Hebbard; Paul E O'Brien Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2009-09-18 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Jan S Burgerhart; Paul C van de Meeberg; Femke A Mauritz; Erik J Schoon; Johannes F Smulders; Peter D Siersema; André J P M Smout Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Mario Musella; Mervyn Deitel; K S Kular; Miguel-A Carbajo; Karl P Rheinwalt; Chetan Parmar; Arun Prasad; Enrique Luque-de-Leon; Gurvinder Jammu; Roger Luciani; David Hargroder; Cesare Pereaglie; Jean Marc Chevallier Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 4.129