Literature DB >> 28475749

Ineffective esophageal motility: clinical, manometric, and outcome characteristics in patients with and without abnormal esophageal acid exposure.

K P Shetler1, S Bikhtii1, G Triadafilopoulos2.   

Abstract

The etiology and clinical impact of ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) remain poorly understood. Unless gastroesophageal acid reflux (GERD) is identified, symptomatic patients with IEM are challenging to treat. We sought to determine whether any clinical or functional characteristics could distinguish those patients with IEM and either normal or abnormal esophageal acid exposure.In this retrospective cohort study, we identified 46 consecutive patients presenting with heartburn, and other GER symptoms who underwent clinical, endoscopic, and functional evaluation that included high-resolution manometry (HRM) and ambulatory pH monitoring. IEM was defined using the Chicago Classification criteria (v.3) as ≥50% ineffective swallows (DCI ≤ 450 mmHg.s.cm). Esophageal acid exposure by ambulatory pH monitoring was considered abnormal when total time with esophageal pH < 4 exceeded 4.2%.Of the 46 IEM patients identified, 19 (mean age: 42 years, 37% female), had normal esophageal acid exposure and 27 patients, mean age 54 years, 33% female, evidence of pathologic acid reflux. There was a 12 years age difference between the groups, with those with normal acid exposure being significantly younger (P < 0.01); the mean body mass index (BMI) was 22.6 ± 0.6 in the normal group and 25.4 ± 0.7 in the abnormal group (P < 0.001); otherwise the groups were endoscopically and histologically similar. Symptoms were not discriminatory and heartburn and regurgitation were the most prevalent in both groups. HRM did not discriminate symptomatic patients with IEM and either normal or abnormal esophageal acid exposure. Proton pump inhibition (PPI) therapy was significantly more effective (74% vs. 10%) in patients with pathologic acid reflux (P < 0.001). As pH exposure becomes abnormal in the context of IEM, there is dominance for supine reflux.IEM appears to be an early, primary event, eventually associated with pathologic acid exposure, particularly supine. Higher BMI is also associated with abnormal esophageal acid exposure in such patients. GER symptoms are not discriminatory in patients with IEM with and without underlying pathologic acid reflux. Clinical response to PPI in such patients depends on the presence of esophageal pathologic acid exposure. Those with IEM and normal acid exposure remain symptomatic and mostly resistant to therapy.
© The Authors 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  esophageal motility; esophageal pH monitoring; gastroesophageal reflux disease; high-resolution esophageal manometry

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28475749     DOI: 10.1093/dote/dox012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Esophagus        ISSN: 1120-8694            Impact factor:   3.429


  10 in total

Review 1.  Neuronal Control of Esophageal Peristalsis and Its Role in Esophageal Disease.

Authors:  K Nikaki; A Sawada; A Ustaoglu; D Sifrim
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2019-11-23

Review 2.  Esophageal Dysphagia in the Elderly.

Authors:  Megan Q Chan; Gokulakishnan Balasubramanian
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-12

3.  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

Review 4.  Esophageal Motility Disorders: Current Approach to Diagnostics and Therapeutics.

Authors:  Dhyanesh A Patel; Rena Yadlapati; Michael F Vaezi
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 33.883

Review 5.  Minor esophageal functional disorders: are they relevant?

Authors:  Ryan A Balko; Don C Codipilly; Karthik Ravi
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-01-17

Review 6.  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

Review 7.  Current Advancement on the Dynamic Mechanism of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Authors:  Zhi Zheng; Yuxi Shang; Ning Wang; Xiaoye Liu; Chenglin Xin; Xiaosheng Yan; Yuhao Zhai; Jie Yin; Jun Zhang; Zhongtao Zhang
Journal:  Int J Biol Sci       Date:  2021-10-03       Impact factor: 6.580

8.  Modified Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy Technique for Type II Achalasia: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Huahui Zhang; Kuangjing Wang; Ying Fang; Zhe Xiong; Min Lin; Lifeng Jiang; Qiuya Niu; Jin Huang
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2022-03-25       Impact factor: 2.260

9.  Impact of Surgical Intervention on Nonobstructive Dysphagia: A Retrospective Study Based on High-Resolution Impedance Manometry in a Taiwanese Population at a Single Institution.

Authors:  Gang-Hua Lin; Kuan-Hsun Lin; Szu-Yu Lin; Tsai-Wang Huang; Hung Chang; Hsu-Kai Huang
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-04-07

Review 10.  Manometric and pH-monitoring changes after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Andrea Balla; Francesca Meoli; Livia Palmieri; Diletta Corallino; Maria Carlotta Sacchi; Emanuela Ribichini; Diego Coletta; Annamaria Pronio; Danilo Badiali; Alessandro M Paganini
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 3.445

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.