Literature DB >> 8406145

Audit of the role of oesophageal manometry in clinical practice.

P W Johnston1, B T Johnston, B J Collins, J S Collins, A H Love.   

Abstract

This oesophageal laboratory serves a population of 1.5 million. The study aimed to review referral patterns and assess the cost effectiveness of oesophageal manometry in clinical practice. All 276 consecutive manometry studies performed between 1988 and 1991 were reviewed. Reasons for referral in the 268 first referrals were: dysphagia 50.4%, non-cardiac chest pain 23.1%, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease 14.2%, connective tissue disease 11.2%, and 'other' 1.1%. Manometry was normal in 49.3%, showed achalasia in 17.9%, diffuse oesophageal spasm in 13.4%, connective tissue disease in 7.8%, hypertensive lower oesophageal sphincter in 4.5%, nutcracker oesophagus in 2.6%, and 'other' in 4.5%. A positive diagnosis was significantly more common if dysphagia was the reason for referral (65.9% v 35.3%, p < 0.01). A positive diagnosis was established in 60% of patients referred with connective tissue disease, 30.6% with non-cardiac chest pain, and 21.1% with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. A positive diagnosis was significantly more common in connective tissue disease when symptoms were present (85% v 10%, p < 0.05). Management was changed in 48.9% of all patients because of manometry findings. The cost of each oesophageal manometry study was calculated to be 63.00 pounds: every change in patient management cost 129.00 pounds. In conclusion, oesophageal manometry changed management in over 20% of patients with non-cardiac chest pain or gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and in over 60% of those with dysphagia. It is, therefore, a useful and cost effective test in patients with these symptoms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8406145      PMCID: PMC1375445          DOI: 10.1136/gut.34.9.1158

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gut        ISSN: 0017-5749            Impact factor:   23.059


  12 in total

1.  Esophageal motility testing: shadow and substance.

Authors:  V A Saraswat; S R Naik
Journal:  Indian J Gastroenterol       Date:  1990-07

2.  Controversies, dilemmas, and dialogues. In the community hospital setting, what is the role of esophageal manometry?

Authors:  M Robinson; M L Allen; W C Wu
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Mind over manometry.

Authors:  J Ende
Journal:  Hosp Pract (Off Ed)       Date:  1988-11-30

4.  Oesophageal chest pain: a point of view.

Authors:  J N Blackwell; D O Castell
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 23.059

5.  Esophageal manometry: a benefit and cost analysis.

Authors:  H Meshkinpour; M E Glick; P Sanchez; J Tarvin
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1982-09       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  Esophageal involvement in mixed connective tissue disease.

Authors:  A Doria; L Bonavina; M Anselmino; A Ruffatti; M Favaretto; P Gambari; A Peracchia; S Todesco
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 4.666

7.  Long-term follow-up of symptomatic status of patients with noncardiac chest pain: is diagnosis of esophageal etiology helpful?

Authors:  B W Ward; W C Wu; J E Richter; B T Hackshaw; D O Castell
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 10.864

8.  Studies in esophageal motility: five year clinical experience in a Canadian tertiary care hospital.

Authors:  J P Shoenut; G P Sharma
Journal:  Indian J Gastroenterol       Date:  1990-07

9.  Clinical applications of oesophageal motility studies?

Authors:  J N Blackwell; W C Wu; D O Castell
Journal:  Br J Hosp Med       Date:  1984-11

10.  Esophageal disease in patients with angina-like chest pain.

Authors:  M Kline; R Chesne; R A Sturdevant; R W McCallum
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1981-02       Impact factor: 10.864

View more
  7 in total

1.  Ambulatory esophageal pH testing. Referral patterns, indication, and treatment in a Canadian teaching hospital.

Authors:  J P Shoenut; C S Yaffe
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Symptomatic outcome following laparoscopic Heller's cardiomyotomy with Dor fundoplication versus laparoscopic Heller's cardiomyotomy with angle of His accentuation: results of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Pavithra Balakrishna; Rajinder Parshad; Jitender Rohila; Anoop Saraya; Govind Makharia; Raju Sharma
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-11-27       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM): the primary finding in patients with nonspecific esophageal motility disorder.

Authors:  L P Leite; B T Johnston; J Barrett; J A Castell; D O Castell
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  A comparison of the cost effectiveness of pharmacotherapy or surgery (laparoscopic fundoplication) in the treatment of GORD.

Authors:  Laura Bojke; Edward Hornby; Mark Sculpher
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Clinical utility of selective esophageal manometry in a tertiary care setting.

Authors:  Vaibhav Mehendiratta; Anthony J DiMarino; Sidney Cohen
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  Comparison of the efficiencies of esophageal manometry, vector volume analysis and esophagus pH monitoring in the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux.

Authors:  Emrah Aydın; Rahşan Özcan; Ergun Erdoğan; Gonca Tekant
Journal:  Turk Pediatri Ars       Date:  2015-12-01

7.  British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for oesophageal manometry and oesophageal reflux monitoring.

Authors:  Nigel J Trudgill; Daniel Sifrim; Rami Sweis; Mark Fullard; Kumar Basu; Mimi McCord; Michael Booth; John Hayman; Guy Boeckxstaens; Brian T Johnston; Nicola Ager; John De Caestecker
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 23.059

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.