Literature DB >> 27723241

Impact of symptom burden and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) on esophageal motor diagnoses.

C A Reddy1,2, A Patel1,3, C P Gyawali1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: High-resolution manometry (HRM) categorizes esophageal motor processes into specific Chicago Classification (CC) diagnoses, but the clinical impact of these motor diagnoses on symptom burden remain unclear.
METHODS: Two hundred and eleven subjects (56.8±1.0 years, 66.8% F) completed symptom questionnaires (GERDQ, Mayo dysphagia questionnaire [MDQ], visceral sensitivity index, short-form 36, dominant symptom index, and global symptom severity [GSS] on a 100-mm visual analog scale) prior to HRM. Subjects were stratified according to CC v3.0 and by dominant presenting symptom; contraction wave abnormalities (CWA) were evaluated within "normal" CC. Symptom burden, impact of diagnoses, and HRQOL were compared within and between cohorts. KEY
RESULTS: Major motor disorders had highest global symptom burden (P=.02), "normal" had lowest (P<.01). Dysphagia (MDQ) was highest with esophageal outflow obstruction (P=.02), but reflux symptoms (GERDQ) were similar in CC cohorts (P=ns). Absent contractility aligned best with minor motor disorders. Consequently, pathophysiologic categorization into outflow obstruction, hypermotility, and hypomotility resulted in a gradient of decreasing dysphagia and increasing reflux burden (P<.05 across groups); GSS (P=.05) was highest with hypomotility and lowest with "normal" (P=.002). Within the "normal" cohort, 33.3% had CWA; this subgroup had symptom burden similar to hypermotility. Upon stratification by symptoms, symptom burden (GSS, MDQ, HRQOL) was most profound with dysphagia. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: Chicago Classification v3.0 diagnoses identify subjects with highest symptom burden, but pathophysiologic categorization may allow better stratification by symptom type and burden. Contraction wave abnormalities are clinically relevant and different from true normal motor function. Transit symptoms have highest yield for a motor diagnosis.
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chicago Classification; dysphagia; high-resolution manometry; symptom burden

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27723241      PMCID: PMC5367979          DOI: 10.1111/nmo.12970

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


  26 in total

1.  Value of preoperative esophageal function studies before laparoscopic antireflux surgery.

Authors:  Walter W Chan; Laura R Haroian; C Prakash Gyawali
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-03-18       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Manometric patterns using esophageal body and lower sphincter characteristics. Findings in 1013 patients.

Authors:  R E Clouse; A Staiano
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  High resolution manometry patterns distinguish acid sensitivity in non-cardiac chest pain.

Authors:  V M Kushnir; C Prakash Gyawali
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2011-09-19       Impact factor: 3.598

Review 4.  Evaluation of esophageal motor function in clinical practice.

Authors:  C P Gyawali; A J Bredenoord; J L Conklin; M Fox; J E Pandolfino; J H Peters; S Roman; A Staiano; M F Vaezi
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 3.598

5.  Unexplained chest pain: the hypersensitive, hyperreactive, and poorly compliant esophagus.

Authors:  S S Rao; H Gregersen; B Hayek; R W Summers; J Christensen
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1996-06-01       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Oesophageal motor and sensitivity abnormalities in non-obstructive dysphagia.

Authors:  Benoit Bohn; Bruno Bonaz; Nasser Gueddah; Alain Rolachon; Emmanuel Papillon; Richard Bost; Jacques Fournet
Journal:  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 2.566

7.  Influence of spastic motor disorders of the esophageal body on outcomes from laparoscopic antireflux surgery.

Authors:  E R Winslow; R E Clouse; K M Desai; P Frisella; T Gunsberger; N J Soper; M E Klingensmith
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-03-07       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Symptomatic and physiologic outcomes one year after peroral esophageal myotomy (POEM) for treatment of achalasia.

Authors:  Ezra N Teitelbaum; Nathaniel J Soper; Byron F Santos; Fahd O Arafat; John E Pandolfino; Peter J Kahrilas; Ikuo Hirano; Eric S Hungness
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Abnormal sensory perception in patients with esophageal chest pain.

Authors:  J E Richter; C F Barish; D O Castell
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 22.682

10.  The Mayo Dysphagia Questionnaire-30: documentation of reliability and validity of a tool for interventional trials in adults with esophageal disease.

Authors:  Judith McElhiney; Matthew R Lohse; Amindra S Arora; Joanna M Peloquin; Debra M Geno; Melissa M Kuntz; Felicity B Enders; Mary Fredericksen; Adil A Abdalla; Yulia Khan; Nicholas J Talley; Nancy N Diehl; Timothy J Beebe; Ann M Harris; Gianrico Farrugia; Darlene E Graner; Joseph A Murray; G Richard Locke; Rayna M Grothe; Michael D Crowell; Dawn L Francis; April M B Grudell; Tushar Dabade; Angelica Ramirez; MhdMaan Alkhatib; Jeffrey A Alexander; Jessica Kimber; Ganapathy Prasad; Alan R Zinsmeister; Yvonne Romero
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2009-10-24       Impact factor: 3.438

View more
  15 in total

Review 1.  What Is the Impact of High-Resolution Manometry in the Functional Diagnostic Workup of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease?

Authors:  Jutta Keller
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2018-04-12

2.  Higher Esophageal Symptom Burden in Obese Subjects Results From Increased Esophageal Acid Exposure and Not From Dysmotility.

Authors:  Benjamin D Rogers; Amit Patel; Dan Wang; Gregory S Sayuk; C Prakash Gyawali
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2019-08-20       Impact factor: 11.382

Review 3.  Expert consensus document: Advances in the physiological assessment and diagnosis of GERD.

Authors:  Edoardo Savarino; Albert J Bredenoord; Mark Fox; John E Pandolfino; Sabine Roman; C Prakash Gyawali
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-09-27       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 4.  Proton Pump Inhibitor-Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Authors:  Rena Yadlapati; Kelli DeLay
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 5.456

5.  High-Resolution Manometry Diagnosis of Ineffective Esophageal Motility Is Associated with Higher Reflux Burden.

Authors:  Chanakyaram A Reddy; Jason R Baker; Joyee Lau; Joan W Chen
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  ACG Clinical Guidelines: Clinical Use of Esophageal Physiologic Testing.

Authors:  C Prakash Gyawali; Dustin A Carlson; Joan W Chen; Amit Patel; Robert J Wong; Rena H Yadlapati
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 12.045

7.  Value of adjunctive evidence from MII-pH monitoring and high-resolution manometry in inconclusive GERD patients with AET 4-6.

Authors:  Ya Jiang; Liuqin Jiang; Bixing Ye; Lin Lin
Journal:  Therap Adv Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-05-30       Impact factor: 4.409

8.  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 9.  Ineffective esophageal motility: Concepts, future directions, and conclusions from the Stanford 2018 symposium.

Authors:  C Prakash Gyawali; Daniel Sifrim; Dustin A Carlson; Mary Hawn; David A Katzka; John E Pandolfino; Roberto Penagini; Sabine Roman; Edoardo Savarino; Roger Tatum; Michel Vaezi; John O Clarke; George Triadafilopoulos
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2019-04-11       Impact factor: 3.960

10.  Comparison of motor diagnoses by Chicago Classification versions 2.0 and 3.0 on esophageal high-resolution manometry.

Authors:  A Patel; B Cassell; N Sainani; D Wang; B Shahid; M Bennett; F A Mirza; S Munigala; C P Gyawali
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 3.598

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.