Shiko Kuribayashi1,2, Katsuhiko Iwakiri3, Tomohiro Shinozaki4, Hiroko Hosaka5, Akiyo Kawada6, Noriyuki Kawami3, Shintaro Hoshino3, Nana Takenouchi3, Yasuyuki Shimoyama5, Osamu Kawamura5, Motoyasu Kusano5, Toshio Uraoka5. 1. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15 Showa-machi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan. shikokuri@yahoo.co.jp. 2. Clinical Investigation and Research Unit, Gunma University Hospital, Maebashi, Japan. shikokuri@yahoo.co.jp. 3. Department of Gastroenterology, Nippon Medical School Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. 4. Department of Information and Computer Technology, Faculty of Engineering, Tokyo University of Science, Tokyo, Japan. 5. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, 3-39-15 Showa-machi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan. 6. Medical Examination Center of Chubu Medical Association, Chatan-cho, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The values of the parameters in the Chicago classification measured by a high-resolution manometry (HRM) system with the Unisensor catheter (Starlet) are significantly different from those measured by the ManoScan. The contraction vigor is categorized by values of the distal contractile integral (DCI) in the Chicago classification v3.0; however, reference values of the DCI in the Starlet and the clinical impact of the different reference values in the Starlet and ManoScan on diagnosing esophageal motility disorders are not known. METHODS: We evaluated data from a previous report in which ManoScan and Starlet were compared in the same subjects. The DCI values in each system were compared and reference DCI values were calculated. Moreover, diagnoses assessed by Starlet using reference values in ManoScan were compared with those using calculated reference values and those assessed by ManoScan. RESULTS: There was a significant positive correlation between the DCI values measured by ManoScan and those measured by Starlet (r = 0.80, p < 0.01). Based on a linear functional relationship considering measurement errors, the reference DCI values for diagnosing failed, weak and hypercontractile contraction vigor were calculated as 590.6, 1011.3 and 10,085.8 mmHg-s-cm, respectively, in the Starlet. Therefore, the proposed reference values in the Starlet were 500, 1000 and 10,000 mmHg-s-cm, respectively. When the reference values in the ManoScan were used in the Starlet data, approximately 30% of subjects were diagnosed inappropriately. This issue was resolved using the proposed reference values in the Starlet. CONCLUSION: Recognizing systemic differences in HRM systems is important.
BACKGROUND: The values of the parameters in the Chicago classification measured by a high-resolution manometry (HRM) system with the Unisensor catheter (Starlet) are significantly different from those measured by the ManoScan. The contraction vigor is categorized by values of the distal contractile integral (DCI) in the Chicago classification v3.0; however, reference values of the DCI in the Starlet and the clinical impact of the different reference values in the Starlet and ManoScan on diagnosing esophageal motility disorders are not known. METHODS: We evaluated data from a previous report in which ManoScan and Starlet were compared in the same subjects. The DCI values in each system were compared and reference DCI values were calculated. Moreover, diagnoses assessed by Starlet using reference values in ManoScan were compared with those using calculated reference values and those assessed by ManoScan. RESULTS: There was a significant positive correlation between the DCI values measured by ManoScan and those measured by Starlet (r = 0.80, p < 0.01). Based on a linear functional relationship considering measurement errors, the reference DCI values for diagnosing failed, weak and hypercontractile contraction vigor were calculated as 590.6, 1011.3 and 10,085.8 mmHg-s-cm, respectively, in the Starlet. Therefore, the proposed reference values in the Starlet were 500, 1000 and 10,000 mmHg-s-cm, respectively. When the reference values in the ManoScan were used in the Starlet data, approximately 30% of subjects were diagnosed inappropriately. This issue was resolved using the proposed reference values in the Starlet. CONCLUSION: Recognizing systemic differences in HRM systems is important.
Entities:
Keywords:
Chicago classification; High-resolution manometry; ManoScan; Reference values; Starlet
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: S Kuribayashi; K Iwakiri; A Kawada; N Kawami; S Hoshino; N Takenouchi; H Hosaka; Y Shimoyama; O Kawamura; M Yamada; M Kusano Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2014-10-01 Impact factor: 3.598
Authors: P J Kahrilas; A J Bredenoord; M Fox; C P Gyawali; S Roman; A J P M Smout; J E Pandolfino Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2014-12-03 Impact factor: 3.598
Authors: John E Pandolfino; Sudip K Ghosh; John Rice; John O Clarke; Monika A Kwiatek; Peter J Kahrilas Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2007-09-26 Impact factor: 10.864