BACKGROUND: In the past, ambulatory 24-h manometry has been shown useful for the evaluation of patients with non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP). With the diagnostic improvements brought by pH-impedance monitoring and high-resolution manometry (HRM), the contribution of ambulatory 24-h manometry to the diagnosis of esophageal hypertensive disorders has become uncertain. Our aim was to assess the additional diagnostic yield of ambulatory manometry to HRM and ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring in this patient population. METHODS: All patients underwent 24-h ambulatory pressure-pH-impedance monitoring and HRM. Patients had retrosternal pain as a predominant symptom and no explanation after cardiologic and digestive endoscopic evaluations. Diagnostic measurements were analyzed by two independent physicians. KEY RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients met the inclusion criteria; 37.3% of the patients had their symptoms explained by abnormalities on pH-impedance monitoring and 6.8% by ambulatory manometry. Functional chest pain was diagnosed in 52.5% of the patients. High-resolution manometry, using the Chicago Classification v3.0 criteria alone, did not identify any of the four patients with esophageal spasm on ambulatory manometry. However, taking into account other abnormalities, such as simultaneous (rapid) or repetitive contractions, HRM had a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 98.2% for the diagnosis of esophageal spasm. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: In the work-up of NCCP, ambulatory 24-h manometry has a low additional diagnostic yield. However, it remains the best technique to identify esophageal spasm as the cause of symptoms. This is particularly useful when an unequivocal diagnosis is needed before treatment.
BACKGROUND: In the past, ambulatory 24-h manometry has been shown useful for the evaluation of patients with non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP). With the diagnostic improvements brought by pH-impedance monitoring and high-resolution manometry (HRM), the contribution of ambulatory 24-h manometry to the diagnosis of esophageal hypertensive disorders has become uncertain. Our aim was to assess the additional diagnostic yield of ambulatory manometry to HRM and ambulatory pH-impedance monitoring in this patient population. METHODS: All patients underwent 24-h ambulatory pressure-pH-impedance monitoring and HRM. Patients had retrosternal pain as a predominant symptom and no explanation after cardiologic and digestive endoscopic evaluations. Diagnostic measurements were analyzed by two independent physicians. KEY RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients met the inclusion criteria; 37.3% of the patients had their symptoms explained by abnormalities on pH-impedance monitoring and 6.8% by ambulatory manometry. Functional chest pain was diagnosed in 52.5% of the patients. High-resolution manometry, using the Chicago Classification v3.0 criteria alone, did not identify any of the four patients with esophageal spasm on ambulatory manometry. However, taking into account other abnormalities, such as simultaneous (rapid) or repetitive contractions, HRM had a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 98.2% for the diagnosis of esophageal spasm. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: In the work-up of NCCP, ambulatory 24-h manometry has a low additional diagnostic yield. However, it remains the best technique to identify esophageal spasm as the cause of symptoms. This is particularly useful when an unequivocal diagnosis is needed before treatment.
Authors: Thomas V K Herregods; Albert J Bredenoord; Jacobus M Oors; Auke Bogte; André J P M Smout Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 10.864