Interrater Reliability of Functional Lumen Imaging Probe Panometry and High-Resolution Manometry for the Assessment of Esophageal Motility Disorders.

INTRODUCTION: High-resolution manometry (HRM) and functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) are primary and/or complementary diagnostic tools for the evaluation of esophageal motility. We aimed to assess the interrater agreement and accuracy of HRM and FLIP interpretations. METHODS: Esophageal motility specialists from multiple institutions completed the interpretation of 40 consecutive HRM and 40 FLIP studies. Interrater agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for continuous variables and Fleiss' κ statistics for nominal variables. Accuracies of rater interpretation were assessed using the consensus of 3 experienced raters as the reference standard. RESULTS: Fifteen raters completed the HRM and FLIP studies. An excellent interrater agreement was seen in supine median integral relaxation pressure (ICC 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.95-0.98), and a good agreement was seen with the assessment of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow, peristalsis, and assignment of a Chicago Classification version 4.0 diagnosis using HRM (κ = 0.71, 0.75, and 0.70, respectively). An excellent interrater agreement for EGJ distensibility index and maximum diameter (0.91 [0.90-0.94], 0.92 [0.89-0.95]) was seen, and a moderate-to-good agreement was seen in the assignment of EGJ opening classification, contractile response pattern, and motility classification (κ = 0.68, 0.56, and 0.59, respectively) on FLIP. Rater accuracy for Chicago Classification version 4.0 diagnosis on HRM was 82% (95% confidence interval 78%-84%) and for motility diagnosis on FLIP Panometry was 78% (95% confidence interval 72%-81%). DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates high levels of interrater agreement and accuracy in the interpretation of HRM and FLIP metrics and moderate-to-high levels for motility classification in FLIP, supporting the use of these approaches for primary or complementary evaluation of esophageal motility disorders.

Initial assessment of medical post-traumatic stress among patients with chronic esophageal diseases.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis and management of chronic esophageal disease requires the use of potentially traumatic medical procedures, performed with or without sedation. Medical trauma and post-traumatic stress (PTS) are emerging as important considerations in patients with digestive illness. To date, no study assesses medical PTS from procedures in patients with esophageal disease. METHODS: Adult patients with achalasia, eosinophilic esophagitis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, or functional esophageal disease at a university-based gastroenterology clinic completed: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), Gastroesophageal Disease Questionnaire, Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire, Northwestern Esophageal Quality of Life scale (HRQoL), NIH-PROMIS Depression scale, and a study-specific questionnaire about esophageal procedures (endoscopy with sedation; functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) with sedation; high-resolution manometry (HRM); wireless pH testing; or 24-h pH-impedance testing). KEY RESULTS: Half of 149 participants reported at least one traumatic procedure, with HRM most often cited. Only 2.7% met the cutoff for PTS on PCL-5. This increased to 7.1% for patients with a traumatic procedure combined with experiencing intense fear. Rates of moderate-severe PTS ranged from 7.4%-12% for all patients and 14%-29% for those with a traumatic procedure with fear. Medical PTS was associated with poorer HRQoL, and increased esophageal symptoms, depression, and hypervigilance and symptom anxiety. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Preliminary evidence suggests medical PTS affects few patients with esophageal disease. However traumatic procedures, most often associated with HRM, significantly increase PTS symptoms. The potential impacts of medical PTS on esophageal patient assessment and outcomes are considerable and warrants further study.

A Comparative Assessment of the Diagnosis of Swallowing Impairment and Gastroesophageal Reflux in Canines and Humans.

Swallowing impairment is a highly prevalent and clinically significant problem affecting people and dogs. There are myriad causes of swallowing impairment of which gastroesophageal reflux is the most common in both species. Similarities in anatomy and physiology between humans and canines results in analogous swallowing disorders including cricopharyngeus muscle achalasia, esophageal achalasia, hiatal herniation, and gastroesophageal reflux with secondary esophagitis and esophageal dysmotility. Accordingly, the diagnostic approach to human and canine patients with swallowing impairment is similar. Diagnostic procedures such as swallowing fluoroscopy, high-resolution manometry, pH/impedance monitoring, and endolumenal functional luminal imaging probe can be performed in both species; however, nasofacial conformation, increased esophageal length, and the difficulty of completing several of these procedures in awake dogs are inherent challenges that need to be considered. Human patients can convey their symptoms and respond to verbal cues, whereas veterinarians must rely on clinical histories narrated by pet owners followed by comprehensive physical examination and observation of the animal eating different food consistencies and drinking water. Dogs may also be unwilling to drink or eat in the hospital setting and may be resistant to physical restraint during diagnostic procedures. Despite the species differences and diagnostic challenges, dogs are a natural animal model for many oropharyngeal and esophageal disorders affecting people, which presents a tremendous opportunity for shared learnings. This manuscript reviews the comparative aspects of esophageal anatomy and physiology between humans and canines, summarizes the diagnostic assessment of swallowing impairment in both species, and discusses future considerations for collaborative medicine and translational research.

Esophageal Hypervigilance and Symptom-Specific Anxiety in Patients with Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patient symptom reporting often does not correlate with the pathophysiological markers of esophageal disease, including eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Esophageal hypervigilance and symptom-specific anxiety are emerging as important considerations in understanding symptom reporting. As such, we aimed to conduct the first study of these constructs in EoE. METHODS: A retrospective review of an EoE patient registry was conducted and included eosinophils per high power field (from esophagogastroduodenoscopy biopsy: proximal, distal), endoscopic reference score, distal distensibility plateau (functional luminal imaging probe), Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire, Visual Dysphagia Question of EoE Activity Index, Northwestern Esophageal Quality of Life scale, and the Esophageal Hypervigilance and Anxiety Scale. Correlational and regression analyses evaluated relationships of hypervigilance and anxiety with Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire, Visual Dysphagia Question of EoE Activity Index, and Northwestern Esophageal Quality of Life scale when controlling for histology and endoscopic severity. RESULTS: One hundred and three patients had complete data, 69.9% were male, and the mean (SD) age was 40.66 (13.85) years. Forty-one percent had elevated dysphagia and 46% had elevated hypervigilance and anxiety. Esophageal symptom-specific anxiety emerged as the most important predictor of Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire severity (44.8% of the variance), Visual Dysphagia Question of EoE Activity Index severity (26%), and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (55.3%). Hypervigilance was also important, but to a lesser extent. Pathophysiological variables did not significantly predict symptoms or HRQoL. Recent food impaction can predict symptom-specific anxiety and proton pump inhibitor use can reduce hypervigilance. CONCLUSIONS: Hypervigilance and symptom-specific anxiety are important for our understanding of self-reported patient outcomes in EoE. These processes outweigh endoscopic and histologic markers of EoE disease activity across dysphagia, difficulty eating, and HRQoL. Clinicians should assess hypervigilance and anxiety, especially in patients with refractory symptoms and poor HRQoL.

Development of quality indicators for the diagnosis and management of achalasia.

BACKGROUND: The management of achalasia has improved due to diagnostic and therapeutic innovations. However, variability in care delivery remains and no established measures defining quality of care for this population exist. We aimed to use formal methodology to establish quality indicators for achalasia patients. METHODS: Quality indicator concepts were identified from the literature, consensus guidelines and clinical experts. Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Method, experts in achalasia independently ranked proposed concepts in a two-round modified Delphi process based on 1) importance, 2) scientific acceptability, 3) usability, and 4) feasibility. Highly valid measures required strict agreement (≧ 80% of panelists) in the range of 7-9 for across all four categories. KEY RESULTS: There were 17 experts who rated 26 proposed quality indicator topics. In round one, 2 (8%) quality measures were rated valid. In round two, 19 measures were modified based on panel suggestions, and experts rated 10 (53%) of these measures as valid, resulting in a total of 12 quality indicators. Two measures pertained to patient education and five to diagnosis, including discussing treatment options with risk and benefits and using the most recent version of the Chicago Classification to define achalasia phenotypes, respectively. Other indicators pertained to treatment options, such as the use of botulinum toxin for those not considered surgical candidates and management of reflux following achalasia treatment. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Using a robust methodology, achalasia quality indicators were identified, which can form the basis for establishing quality gaps and generating fully specified quality measures.

Chicago classification version 4.0© technical review: Update on standard high-resolution manometry protocol for the assessment of esophageal motility.

The Chicago Classification v4.0 (CCv4.0) is the updated classification scheme for esophageal motility disorders using metrics from high-resolution manometry (HRM). A key feature of CCv.4.0 is the more rigorous and expansive protocol that incorporates single wet swallows acquired in different positions (supine, upright) and provocative testing, including multiple rapid swallows and rapid drink challenge. Additionally, solid bolus swallows, solid test meal, and/or pharmacologic provocation can be used to identify clinically relevant motility disorders and other conditions (eg, rumination) that occur during and after meals. The acquisition and analysis for performing these tests and the evidence supporting their inclusion in the Chicago Classification protocol is detailed in this technical review. Provocative tests are designed to increase the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of HRM studies for disorders of esophageal motility. These changes attempt to minimize ambiguity in prior iterations of Chicago Classification, decrease the proportion of HRM studies that deliver inconclusive diagnoses and increase the number of patients with a clinically relevant diagnosis that can direct effective therapy. Another aim in establishing a standard manometry protocol for motility laboratories around the world is to facilitate procedural consistency, improve diagnostic reliability, and promote collaborative research.

Assessment of esophageal body peristaltic work using functional lumen imaging probe panometry.

The goal of this study was to conceptualize and compute measures of "mechanical work" done by the esophagus using data generated during functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) panometry and compare work done during secondary peristalsis among patients and controls. Eighty-five individuals were evaluated with a 16-cm FLIP during sedated endoscopy, including asymptomatic controls (n = 14) and those with achalasia subtypes I, II, and III (n = 15, each); gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD; n = 13); eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE; n = 9); and systemic sclerosis (SSc; n = 5). The FLIP catheter was positioned to have its distal segment straddling the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) during stepwise distension. Two metrics of work were assessed: "active work" (during bag volumes ≤ 40 mL where contractility generates substantial changes in lumen area) and "work capacity" (for bag volumes ≥ 60 mL when contractility cannot substantially alter the lumen area). Controls showed median [interquartile range (IQR)] of 7.3 (3.6-9.2) mJ of active work and 268.6 (225.2-332.3) mJ of work capacity. Patients with all achalasia subtypes, GERD, and SSc showed lower active work done than controls (P ≤ 0.003). Patients with achalasia subtypes I and II, GERD, and SSc had lower work capacity compared with controls (P < 0.001, 0.004, 0.04, and 0.001, respectively). Work capacity was similar between controls and patients with achalasia type III and EoE. Mechanical work of the esophagus differs between healthy controls and patient groups with achalasia, EoE, SSc, and GERD. Further studies are needed to fully explore the utility of this approach, but these work metrics would be valuable for device design (artificial esophagus), to measure the efficacy of peristalsis, to gauge the physiological state of the esophagus, and to comment on its pumping effectiveness.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) panometry assesses esophageal response to distension and provides a simultaneous assessment of pressure and dimension during contractility. This enables an objective assessment of "mechanical work" done by the esophagus. Eighty-five individuals were evaluated, and two work metrics were computed for each subject. Controls showed greater values of work compared with individuals with achalasia, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and systemic sclerosis (SSc). These values can quantify the mechanical behavior of the distal esophagus and assist in the estimation of muscular integrity.

Esophageal Manometry Competency Program Improves Gastroenterology Fellow Performance in Motility Interpretation.

INTRODUCTION: Competency-based medical education (CBME) for interpretation of esophageal manometry is lacking; therefore, motility experts and instructional designers developed the esophageal manometry competency (EMC) program: a personalized, adaptive learning program for interpretation of esophageal manometry. The aim of this study was to implement EMC among Gastroenterology (GI) trainees and assess the impact of EMC on competency in manometry interpretation. METHODS: GI fellows across 14 fellowship programs were invited to complete EMC from February 2018 to October 2018. EMC includes an introductory video, baseline assessment of manometry interpretation, individualized learning pathways, and final assessment of manometry interpretation. The primary outcome was competency for interpretation in 7 individual skill sets. RESULTS: Forty-four GI trainees completed EMC. Participants completed 30 cases, each including 7 skill sets. At baseline, 4 (9%) participants achieved competency for all 7 skills compared with 24 (55%) at final assessment (P < 0.001). Competency in individual skills increased from a median of 4 skills at baseline to 7 at final assessment (P < 0.001). The greatest increase in skill competency was for diagnosis (Baseline: 11% vs Final: 68%; P < 0.001). Accuracy improved for distinguishing between 5 diagnostic groups and was highest for the Outflow obstructive motility disorder (Baseline: 49% vs Final: 76%; P < 0.001) and Normal motor function (50% vs 80%; P < 0.001). DISCUSSION: This prospective multicenter implementation study highlights that an adaptive web-based training platform is an effective tool to promote CBME. EMC completion was associated with significant improvement in identifying clinically relevant diagnoses, providing a model for integrating CBME into subspecialized areas of training.

A budget impact analysis of a magnetic sphincter augmentation device for the treatment of medication-refractory mechanical gastroesophageal reflux disease: a United States payer perspective.

BACKGROUND: Medication-refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is sometimes treated with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF); however, this is a non-reversible procedure associated with important side effects and the need for repeat surgery. Removable magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) devices are an alternative, effective, and safe treatment option for such patients who have some lower esophageal sphincter function. The objective of this study was to assess the economic impact of introducing MSA technology (i.e., LINX Reflux Management System) into current practice from a US-payer perspective. METHODS: An economic budget impact model was developed over a 1-year time horizon that compared current treatment of GERD patients who are medically managed (but refractory) or receiving LNF to future treatment of GERD patients that included a mix of patients treated with medical management only, LNF, or MSA. Resources included within the analyses were index procedures (inpatient and outpatient use), reoperations (revisions and removals), readmissions, healthcare visits, diagnostic tests, procedures, and medications. Medicare payment rates were typically used to inform unit costs. RESULTS: Assuming a hypothetical commercial insurance population of 1 million members, the base-case analysis estimated a net cost savings of $111,367 with introduction of the MSA. This translates to a savings of $0.01 per member per month. Results were largely driven by avoided inpatient procedures with use of the MSA device. Alternative analyses exploring the potential impact of increasing surgical volumes predicted that results would remain cost saving if the proportion of MSA market share taken from LNF was ≥ 90%. CONCLUSIONS: This study predicts that the introduction of the MSA device would lead to favorable budget impact results for the treatment of medication-refractory mechanical GERD for commercial payers. Future analyses will benefit from inclusion of middle-ground treatments as well as longer time horizons.

Intraoperative assessment of esophageal motility using FLIP during myotomy for achalasia.

BACKGROUND: The functional luminal imaging probe (FLIP) can evaluate esophagogastric junction (EGJ) distensibility and esophageal peristalsis in real time. FLIP measurements performed during diagnostic endoscopy can accurately discriminate between healthy controls and patients with achalasia based on EGJ-distensibility and distinct motility patterns termed repetitive antegrade contractions (RACs) and repetitive retrograde contractions (RRCs). We sought to evaluate real-time motility changes in patients undergoing surgical myotomy for achalasia. METHODS: FLIP measurements using a stepwise volumetric distention protocol were performed at three time points during assessment and performance of laparoscopic Heller myotomy and POEM: (1) During preoperative outpatient endoscopy, (2) Intraoperatively following induction of anesthesia, and (3) Intraoperatively after myotomy completion. EGJ-distensibility, contractility, RACs, and RRCs were measured. RESULTS: FLIP measurements were performed in 32 patients. The EGJ-distensibility index was similar between the preoperative and initial operative measurements (1.1 vs 1.4 mm2/mmHg, p = NS). There was a significant increase in distensibility following surgical myotomy (1.4 to 4.7 mm2/mmHg, p < 0.01). Intraoperative contractile patterns varied between achalasia subtypes. Contractility was seen in < 20% of assessments in patients with types I and II achalasia. Type III patients demonstrated contractility in 100% of assessments, with 70% exhibiting RRCs and 60% RACs. There was a reduction in the frequency of RRC presence (70% to 20%), and contractile vigor (80% to 0% of patients with lumen occluding contractions) in type III patients following surgical myotomy. CONCLUSIONS: This first report of real-time intraoperative measurement of esophageal motility using FLIP demonstrates the feasibility of such assessments during surgical myotomy for achalasia. Patients with type I and II achalasia exhibited rare intraoperative contractility, while the presence of motility was the norm in those with type III. Patients with type III achalasia demonstrated an immediate reduction in repetitive contraction motility patterns and contractile vigor following myotomy.

How to select patients for antireflux surgery? The ICARUS guidelines (international consensus regarding preoperative examinations and clinical characteristics assessment to select adult patients for antireflux surgery).

OBJECTIVE: Antireflux surgery can be proposed in patients with GORD, especially when proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use leads to incomplete symptom improvement. However, to date, international consensus guidelines on the clinical criteria and additional technical examinations used in patient selection for antireflux surgery are lacking. We aimed at generating key recommendations in the selection of patients for antireflux surgery. DESIGN: We included 35 international experts (gastroenterologists, surgeons and physiologists) in a Delphi process and developed 37 statements that were revised by the Consensus Group, to start the Delphi process. Three voting rounds followed where each statement was presented with the evidence summary. The panel indicated the degree of agreement for the statement. When 80% of the Consensus Group agreed (A+/A) with a statement, this was defined as consensus. All votes were mutually anonymous. RESULTS: Patients with heartburn with a satisfactory response to PPIs, patients with a hiatal hernia (HH), patients with oesophagitis Los Angeles (LA) grade B or higher and patients with Barrett's oesophagus are good candidates for antireflux surgery. An endoscopy prior to antireflux surgery is mandatory and a barium swallow should be performed in patients with suspicion of a HH or short oesophagus. Oesophageal manometry is mandatory to rule out major motility disorders. Finally, oesophageal pH (±impedance) monitoring of PPI is mandatory to select patients for antireflux surgery, if endoscopy is negative for unequivocal reflux oesophagitis. CONCLUSION: With the ICARUS guidelines, we generated key recommendations for selection of patients for antireflux surgery.

The dysphagia stress test for rapid assessment of swallowing difficulties in esophageal conditions.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal dysphagia is a common symptom in gastroenterology practice. Current rapid assessment tools are limited to oropharyngeal dysphagia and do not translate well to esophageal conditions. We aim to create a novel tool, the dysphagia stress test (DST), to evaluate swallowing in patients with esophageal disease characterized by dysphagia. METHODS: Adults with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), achalasia, and dysphagia not otherwise specified (NOS) participated. Patient controls with non-esophageal diagnoses and healthy controls were also recruited. Participants completed the DST with five bolus challenges: water, applesauce, rice, bread, barium tablet and rated their swallowing difficulty and pain. A study clinician observed and documented water use and refusal of any challenges. Participants also completed measures of esophageal symptoms, hypersensitivity, and symptom anxiety to evaluate the DST validity. Collinearity of bolus challenges guided item reduction. KEY RESULTS: A total of 132 subjects participated. Both control groups and GERD patients had the best swallowing ability, while achalasia, EOE, and dysphagia NOS scored poorer. About 90% of patients were able to attempt or pass each of the bolus challenges, suggesting high acceptability. Construct validity of the DST is evidenced by modest negative correlations with symptom severity, hypersensitivity, and anxiety. The DST does not appear to be influenced by brain-gut processes. Applesauce, rice, and bread demonstrated collinearity; thus, the DST was reduced to three challenges. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: The DST is the first rapid assessment tool designed for gastroenterology clinics with direct observation of swallowing ability across several conditions to mitigate issues related to patient self-report of esophageal symptoms.

Advances in the physiological assessment and diagnosis of GERD.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/nrgastro.2017.130.

Improved Assessment of Bolus Clearance in Patients With Achalasia Using High-Resolution Impedance Manometry.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophageal retention is typically evaluated by timed-barium esophagram in patients treated for achalasia. Esophageal bolus clearance can also be evaluated using high-resolution impedance manometry. We evaluated the associations of conventional and novel high-resolution impedance manometry metrics, esophagram, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in achalasia. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 70 patients with achalasia (age, 20-81 y; 30 women) treated by pneumatic dilation or myotomy who underwent follow-up evaluations from April 2013 through December 2015 (median, 12 mo after treatment; range, 3-183 mo). Patients were assessed using timed-barium esophagrams, high-resolution impedance manometry, and PROs, determined from Eckardt scores (the primary outcome) and the brief esophageal dysphagia questionnaire. Barium column height was measured from esophagrams taken 5 minutes after ingestion of barium (200 mL). Impedance-manometry was analyzed for bolus transit (dichotomized) and with a customized MATLAB program (The MathWorks, Inc, Natick, MA) to calculate the esophageal impedance integral (EII) ratio. RESULTS: Optimal cut points to identify a good PRO (defined as Eckardt score of ≤3) were esophagram barium column height of 3 cm (identified patients with a good PRO with 63% sensitivity and 75% specificity) and an EII ratio of 0.41 (identified patients with a good PRO with 83% sensitivity and 75% specificity). Complete bolus transit identified patients with a good PRO with 28% sensitivity and 75% specificity. Of the 25 patients who met these cut points for both esophagram barium column height and EII ratio, 23 (92%) had a good PRO. Of the 17 patients who met neither cut point, 14 (82%) had a poor PRO (Eckardt score above 3). CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective study of 70 patients with achalasia, we found EII ratio identified patients with good PROs with higher levels of sensitivity (same specificity) than timed-barium esophagram or impedance-manometry bolus transit assessments. The EII ratio should be added to achalasia outcome evaluations that involve high-resolution impedance manometry as an independent measure and to complement timed-barium esophagram.

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

GERD is a common condition worldwide. Key mechanisms of disease include abnormal oesophagogastric junction structure and function, and impaired oesophageal clearance. A therapeutic trial of acid-suppressive PPI therapy is often the initial management, with endoscopy performed in the setting of alarm symptoms and to exclude other conditions. If symptoms persist and endoscopy does not reveal evidence of GERD, oesophageal function tests are performed, including oesophageal manometry and ambulatory reflux monitoring. However, reflux episodes can be physiological, and some findings on endoscopy and manometry can be encountered in asymptomatic individuals without GERD symptoms. The diagnosis of GERD on the basis of functional oesophageal testing has been previously reported, but no updated expert recommendations on indications and the interpretation of oesophageal function testing in GERD has been made since the Porto consensus over a decade ago. In this Consensus Statement, we aim to describe modern oesophageal physiological tests and their analysis with an emphasis on establishing indications and consensus on interpretation parameters of oesophageal function testing for the evaluation of GERD in clinical practice. This document reflects the collective conclusions of the international GERD working group, incorporating existing data with expert consensus opinion.

High-Resolution Impedance Manometry Metrics of the Esophagogastric Junction for the Assessment of Treatment Response in Achalasia.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the value of novel high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) metrics, bolus flow time (BFT), and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) contractile integral (CI), as well as EGJ pressure (EGJP) and the integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), as indicators of treatment response in achalasia. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 75 patients (ages 19-81, 32 female) with achalasia during follow-up after pneumatic dilation or myotomy with Eckardt score (ES), timed-barium esophagram (TBE), and HRIM. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves for good symptomatic outcome (ES≤3) and good radiographic outcome (TBE column height at 5 min<5 cm) were generated for each potential predictor of treatment response (EGJP, IRP, BFT, and EGJ-CI). RESULTS: Follow-up occurred at a median (range) 12 (3-291) months following treatment. A total of 49 patients had good symptomatic outcome and 46 had good radiographic outcome. The area-under-the-curves (AUCs) on the ROC curve for symptomatic outcome were 0.55 (EGJP), 0.62 (IRP), 0.77 (BFT) and 0.56 (EGJ-CI). The AUCs for radiographic outcome were 0.64 (EGJP), 0.48 (IRP), 0.73 (BFT), and 0.65 (EGJ-CI). Optimal cut-points were determined as 11 mm Hg (EGJP), 12 mm Hg (IRP), 0 s (BFT), and 30 mm Hg•cm (EGJ-CI) that provided sensitivities/specificities of 57%/46% (EGJP), 65%/58% (IRP), 78%/77% (BFT), and 53%/62% (EGJ-CI) to predict symptomatic outcome and 57%/66% (EGJP), 57%/41% (IRP), 76%/69% (BFT), and 57%/66% (EGJ-CI) to predict radiographic outcome. CONCLUSIONS: BFT, a novel HRIM metric, provided an improved functional assessment over manometric measures of EGJP, IRP, and EGJ-CI at follow-up after achalasia treatment and may help direct clinical management.

Diagnosis of Esophageal Motility Disorders: Esophageal Pressure Topography vs. Conventional Line Tracing.

OBJECTIVES: Enhanced characterization of esophageal peristaltic and sphincter function provided by esophageal pressure topography (EPT) offers a potential diagnostic advantage over conventional line tracings (CLT). However, high-resolution manometry (HRM) and EPT require increased equipment costs over conventional systems and evidence demonstrating a significant diagnostic advantage of EPT over CLT is limited. Our aim was to investigate whether the inter-rater agreement and/or accuracy of esophageal motility diagnosis differed between EPT and CLT. METHODS: Forty previously completed patient HRM studies were selected for analysis using a customized software program developed to perform blinded independent interpretation in either EPT or CLT (six pressure sensors) format. Six experienced gastroenterologists with a clinical focus in esophageal disease (attendings) and six gastroenterology trainees with minimal manometry experience (fellows) from three academic centers interpreted each of the 40 studies using both EPT and CLT formats. Rater diagnoses were assessed for inter-rater agreement and diagnostic accuracy, both for exact diagnosis and for correct identification of a major esophageal motility disorder. RESULTS: The total group agreement was moderate (κ=0.57; 95% CI: 0.56-0.59) for EPT and fair (κ=0.32; 0.30-0.33) for CLT. Inter-rater agreement between attendings was good (κ=0.68; 0.65-0.71) for EPT and moderate (κ=0.46; 0.43-0.50) for CLT. Inter-rater agreement between fellows was moderate (κ=0.48; 0.45-0.50) for EPT and poor to fair (κ=0.20; 0.17-0.24) for CLT. Among all raters, the odds of an incorrect exact esophageal motility diagnosis were 3.3 times higher with CLT assessment than with EPT (OR: 3.3; 95% CI: 2.4-4.5; P<0.0001), and the odds of incorrect identification of a major motility disorder were 3.4 times higher with CLT than with EPT (OR: 3.4; 2.4-5.0; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Superior inter-rater agreement and diagnostic accuracy of esophageal motility diagnoses were demonstrated with analysis using EPT over CLT among our selected raters. On the basis of these findings, EPT may be the preferred assessment modality of esophageal motility.

Economic evaluations of gastroesophageal reflux disease medical management.

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) contributes to substantial medication use and costs worldwide. Economic evaluations provide insight into the value of healthcare, taking into account cost, quality, and benefits of particular treatments. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to systematically review the existing literature to identify economic evaluations of GERD management strategies, to assess the scientific quality of these reports, and to summarize the economic outcomes of these evaluations. METHODS: We identified economic evaluations and cost studies of GERD management strategies by searching PubMed and the UK NHS Economic Evaluation Database via the Cochrane Library. Searching was restricted to articles in English-language journals from July 2003 to July 2013. Cost-identification articles were excluded from the final analysis. RESULTS: Eighteen articles were included in the final analysis; 61 % of these met all criteria for quality reporting. Overall, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy was preferred (most effective and least costly) as empiric therapy for patients with reflux symptoms, except in patient populations with high Helicobacter pylori prevalence (>40 %). Initial empiric PPI therapy (vs. initial endoscopy stratification or H. pylori testing) is likely the most cost-effective initial strategy for patients with typical GERD symptoms. Surgery may be cost effective in patients with chronic GERD symptoms at time horizons of 3-10 years. Endoscopic anti-reflux procedures were not cost effective based on available data. CONCLUSIONS: Further economic evaluations should adhere to standard reporting measures of cost estimates and outcomes, and should attempt to account for and compare the large heterogeneity of patient phenotypes and treatment effects seen with anti-reflux therapies.