The treatment of achalasia patients with esophageal varices: an international study.

Background: Treatment options for achalasia include endoscopic and surgical techniques that carry the risk of esophageal bleeding and perforation. The rare coexistence of esophageal varices has only been anecdotally described and treatment is presumed to carry additional risk. Methods: Experience from physicians/surgeons treating this rare combination of disorders was sought through the International Manometry Working Group. Results: Fourteen patients with achalasia and varices from seven international centers were collected (mean age 61 ± 9 years). Five patients were treated with botulinum toxin injections (BTI), four had dilation, three received peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), one had POEM then dilation, and one patient underwent BTI followed by Heller's myotomy. Variceal eradication preceded achalasia treatment in three patients. All patients experienced a significant symptomatic improvement (median Eckardt score 7 vs 1; p < 0.0001) at 6 months follow-up, with treatment outcomes resembling those of 20 non-cirrhotic achalasia patients who underwent similar therapy. No patients had recorded complications of bleeding or perforation. Conclusion: This study shows an excellent short-term symptomatic response in patients with esophageal achalasia and varices and demonstrates that the therapeutic outcomes and complications, other than transient encephalopathy in both patients who had a portosystemic shunt, did not differ to disease-matched patients without varices.

The 2018 ISDE achalasia guidelines.

Achalasia is a relatively rare primary motor esophageal disorder, characterized by absence of relaxations of the lower esophageal sphincter and of peristalsis along the esophageal body. As a result, patients typically present with dysphagia, regurgitation and occasionally chest pain, pulmonary complication and malnutrition. New diagnostic methodologies and therapeutic techniques have been recently added to the armamentarium for treating achalasia. With the aim to offer clinicians and patients an up-to-date framework for making informed decisions on the management of this disease, the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus Guidelines proposed and endorsed the Esophageal Achalasia Guidelines (I-GOAL). The guidelines were prepared according the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE-REX) tool, accredited for guideline production by NICE UK. A systematic literature search was performed and the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations were graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Given the relative rarity of this disease and the paucity of high-level evidence in the literature, this process was integrated with a three-step process of anonymous voting on each statement (DELPHI). Only statements with an approval rate >80% were accepted in the guidelines. Fifty-one experts from 11 countries and 3 representatives from patient support associations participated to the preparations of the guidelines. These guidelines deal specifically with the following achalasia issues: Diagnostic workup, Definition of the disease, Severity of presentation, Medical treatment, Botulinum Toxin injection, Pneumatic dilatation, POEM, Other endoscopic treatments, Laparoscopic myotomy, Definition of recurrence, Follow up and risk of cancer, Management of end stage achalasia, Treatment options for failure, Achalasia in children, Achalasia secondary to Chagas' disease.

Diagnostic yield in the evaluation of dysphagia: experience at a single tertiary care center.

Evaluation of dysphagia typically starts with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD); further testing is pursued if this is negative. When no mucosal, structural, or motor esophageal disorders are identified with persisting symptoms, functional dysphagia is considered. We evaluated outcomes in patients undergoing EGD for dysphagia, and estimated prevalence of functional dysphagia. The endoscopy database at single tertiary care center was interrogated to identify EGDs performed for an indication of 'dysphagia' over a 12-month period (2008-09). Electronic medical records were reviewed over the next 8 years to assess if an etiology was identified. Data were analyzed to assess the diagnostic yield of endoscopy and subsequent tests in the evaluation of dysphagia. Of 5486 EGDs, 822 (15.0%) were performed for dysphagia in 694 patients (58.4 ± 0.6 year, range: 18-95 year, 55.8% female). Of these, 529 (76.2%) had EGD findings that explained dysphagia; another 22 (3.2%) had findings on histopathology. Of the remainder 143 patients (20.6%) with normal index EGD, 38 (26.6%) patients underwent barium esophagram with 15 (39.5%) having abnormal studies. 19 patients (13.3%) underwent esophageal high resolution manometry with 12 (63.2%) being abnormal, and 7 had a mechanism for dysphagia on alternate testing. A repeat EGD was abnormal in 6 patients, while 45 patients were lost to follow-up. 42 patients had complete resolution of symptoms despite normal endoscopy, of which 30 were treated empirically with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI). Only 16 patients had no findings on evaluation, and had continued dysphagia symptoms, representing true functional dysphagia in 2.3% of all dysphagia patients and 11.2% of patients with normal EGD. Endoscopy remains the test with the highest yield (over 75%) for a diagnosis in patients presenting with dysphagia; secondary tests are useful when endoscopy does not provide a diagnosis. Benign strictures and GERD-related etiologies are leading causes; PPI therapy is useful even when testing is negative. Functional dysphagia is extremely rare, accounting for <2.5% of all dysphagia.

Curriculum for neurogastroenterology and motility training: A report from the joint ANMS-ESNM task force.

Although neurogastroenterology and motility (NGM) disorders are some of the most frequent disorders encountered by practicing gastroenterologists, a structured competency-based training curriculum developed by NGM experts is lacking. The American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society (ANMS) and the European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) jointly evaluated the components of NGM training in North America and Europe. Eleven training domains were identified within NGM, consisting of functional gastrointestinal disorders, visceral hypersensitivity and pain pathways, motor disorders within anatomic areas (esophagus, stomach, small bowel and colon, anorectum), mucosal disorders (gastro-esophageal reflux disease, other mucosal disorders), consequences of systemic disease, consequences of therapy (surgery, endoscopic intervention, medications, other therapy), and transition of pediatric patients into adult practice. A 3-tiered training curriculum covering these domains is proposed here and endorsed by all NGM societies. Tier 1 NGM knowledge and training is expected of all gastroenterology trainees and practicing gastroenterologists. Tier 2 knowledge and training is appropriate for trainees who anticipate NGM disorder management and NGM function test interpretation being an important part of their careers, which may require competency assessment and credentialing of test interpretation skills. Tier 3 knowledge and training is undertaken by trainees interested in a dedicated NGM career and may be restricted to specific domains within the broad NGM field. The joint ANMS and ESNM task force anticipates that the NGM curriculum will streamline NGM training in North America and Europe and will lead to better identification of centers of excellence where Tier 2 and Tier 3 training can be accomplished.

Opioid medication use in patients with gastrointestinal diagnoses vs unexplained gastrointestinal symptoms in the US Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: While opioid prescriptions have increased alarmingly in the United States (US), their use for unexplained chronic gastrointestinal (GI) pain (eg, irritable bowel syndrome) carries an especially high risk for adverse effects and questionable benefit. AIM: To compare opioid use among US veterans with structural GI diagnoses (SGID) and those with unexplained GI symptoms or functional GI diagnoses (FGID), a group for whom opioids have no accepted role. METHODS: Veterans Health Administration (VHA) administrative data from fiscal year 2012 were used to identify veterans with diagnostic codes recorded for SGID and FGID. This cohort study examined VHA pharmacy data to compare groups receiving ≥ 1 opioid prescription during the year and number of prescriptions filled. Bivariate and multiple logistic regression analyses adjusted for potential confounding factors (demographics, medical diagnoses, social factors) and identified potential mediators (service use, psychiatric comorbidity) of opioid use in these groups. RESULTS: A greater proportion of veterans with FGID received an opioid prescription during fiscal year 2012 (36.0% of 272 431) compared to only 28.9% of 1 223 744 in the SGID group (Relative Risk [RR] = 1.25). In multivariate logistic regression, personality disorders and drug abuse (OR 1.23 for each group), recent homelessness (OR 1.22), psychotropic medication fills (OR 1.55) and emergency department encounters (OR 1.21) were independently associated with opioid prescription use. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the potential for adverse consequences, opioids more often are prescribed for veterans with chronic, unexplained GI symptoms compared to those with structural diagnoses. Psychiatric comorbidities and frequent healthcare encounters mediate some of the opioid use risk.

Esophagogastric junction and esophageal body contraction metrics on high-resolution manometry predict esophageal acid burden.

BACKGROUND: Distal contractile integral (DCI) and esophagogastric junction contractile integral (EGJ-CI) are high-resolution manometry (HRM) software metrics assessing esophageal motor function in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: Patients undergoing HRM and ambulatory pH monitoring off antisecretory therapy prospectively completed symptom questionnaires assessing symptom burden and a global symptom score (GSS) at baseline and after GERD therapy. DCI<450 mm Hg/cm/s in ≥5 swallows diagnosed ineffective esophageal motility (IEM); proportions of failed (DCI<100 mm Hg/cm/s) and weak (DCI 100-450 mm Hg/cm/s) sequences were separately assessed. EGJ-CI assessed vigor of the EGJ barrier. Univariate and multivariate analyses addressed performance of esophageal body and EGJ metrics in predicting abnormal esophageal reflux burden, and symptom outcome from antireflux therapy. KEY RESULTS: Of 188 patients (55.2 ± 0.9 year, 64% F), 42.6% had low EGJ-CI, and 25.0% had IEM. While low EGJ-CI was associated with abnormal reflux burden (P = 0.003), IEM alone was not (P = 0.2). Increasing proportions of failed swallows predicted abnormal AET better than the current IEM definition. Combined low EGJ-CI and IEM segregated abnormal total and supine acid burden compared to patients with normal EGJ-CI and no IEM (P ≤ 0.007 for each comparison). Medical therapy and surgical antireflux therapy were similarly effective in improving symptom burden; surgery resulted in better outcomes with low EGJ-CI (P ≤ 0.04), especially with intact esophageal body motor function (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: While abnormal EGJ and esophageal body metrics are collectively associated with elevated esophageal reflux burden, increasing proportions of failed swallows are better predictors of reflux burden and outcome compared to the current IEM definition.

Optimal number of multiple rapid swallows needed during high-resolution esophageal manometry for accurate prediction of contraction reserve.

BACKGROUND: Multiple rapid swallows (MRS) is a provocative test for assessment of contraction reserve, however reproducibility on repetitive MRS is incompletely understood. Our aim was to determine the optimal number of MRS sequences for consistent assessment of contraction reserve. METHODS: One hundred and fifty-nine consecutive patients (79 IEM and 80 normal motility) who underwent high-resolution manometers were enrolled. Ten single swallows (SS) and 10 MRS were performed. Gold standard for evaluation of the contraction reserve was the ratio between the mean DCI of 10 MRS and the mean DCI of 10 SS (MRS/SS DCI ratio). Rates of false negatives and false positives were calculated for increasing numbers of MRS sequences, using either mean DCI or the MRS with the highest DCI. KEY RESULTS: According to the gold standard, 50 IEM and 50 normal motility patients had contraction reserve. With progressively increasing numbers of MRS sequences, contraction reserve was detected using mean MRS DCI within three and four MRS sequences in IEM and normal motility respectively, whereas two and three MRS sequences were needed using the MRS sequence with the highest DCI. False positives were much higher with highest DCI method compared with mean DCI, (22% vs 9% respectively in IEM; 24% vs 9% in normal motility) when three MRS sequences were considered. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: At least three MRS are needed to reliably assess contraction reserve. The mean DCI of the three MRS sequences is the best variable to utilize as evidence of contraction reserve.

Genetic risk factors for perception of symptoms in GERD: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Genetic polymorphisms in G-protein beta-3 subunit (GNß3) and beta-2 adrenergic receptor (ADRB2) are associated with pain and gut hypersensitivity, which can overlap with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). AIM: To evaluate relationships between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within GNß3 and ADRB2 systems, and reflux symptom burden, GERD phenotypes from ambulatory reflux monitoring, and quality of life. METHODS: Symptomatic adults undergoing ambulatory reflux testing were recruited and phenotyped based on acid burden and symptom reflux association; major oesophageal motor disorders and prior foregut surgery were exclusions. A comparison asymptomatic control cohort was also identified. Subjects and controls completed questionnaires assessing symptom burden on visual analog scales, short-form health survey-36 (SF-36), and Beck Anxiety and Depression Inventories (BAI and BDI). Genotyping was performed from saliva samples; 6 SNPs selected from each of the two genes of interest were compared. RESULTS: Saliva from 151 study subjects (55.3 ± 1.2 years, 63.6% F) and 60 control subjects (50.9 ± 2.2 years, 66.7%) had sufficient genetic material for genotyping. Study subjects had higher symptom burden, worse total and physical health, and higher anxiety scores compared to controls (P ≤ .002). Tested SNPs within ADRB2 were similar between study subjects and controls (P > .09). Study subjects with recessive alleles in 3 GNß3 SNPs (Rs2301339, Rs5443, and Rs5446) had worse symptom severity (P = .011), worse mental health (P = .03), and higher depression scores (P = .005) despite no associations with GERD phenotypes or reflux metrics. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic variation within GNß3 predicts oesophageal symptom burden and affect, but not oesophageal acid burden or symptom association with reflux episodes.

Upper esophageal sphincter (UES) metrics on high-resolution manometry (HRM) differentiate achalasia subtypes.

BACKGROUND: The upper esophageal sphincter (UES) reflexively responds to bolus presence within the esophageal lumen, therefore UES metrics can vary in achalasia. METHODS: Within consecutive patients undergoing esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM), 302 patients (58.2±1.0 year, 57% F) with esophageal outflow obstruction were identified, and compared to 16 asymptomatic controls (27.7±0.7 year, 56% F). Esophageal outflow obstruction was segregated into achalasia subtypes 1, 2, and 3, and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO with intact peristalsis) using Chicago Classification v3.0. UES and lower esophageal sphincter (LES) metrics were compared between esophageal outflow obstruction and normal controls using univariate and multivariate analysis. Linear regression excluded multicollinearity of pressure metrics that demonstrated significant differences across individual subtype comparisons. KEY RESULTS: LES integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) had utility in differentiating achalasia from controls (P<.0001), but no utility in segregating between subtypes (P=.27). In comparison to controls, patients collectively demonstrated univariate differences in UES mean basal pressure, relaxation time to nadir, recovery time, and residual pressure (UES-RP) (P≤.049). UES-RP was highest in type 2 achalasia (P<.0001 compared to other subtypes and controls). In multivariate analysis, only UES-RP retained significance in comparison between each of the subgroups (P≤.02 for each comparison). Intrabolus pressure was highest in type 3 achalasia; this demonstrated significant differences across some but not all subtype comparisons. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: Nadir UES-RP can differentiate achalasia subtypes within the esophageal outflow obstruction spectrum, with highest values in type 2 achalasia. This metric likely represents a surrogate marker for esophageal pressurization.

Classification of esophageal motor findings in gastro-esophageal reflux disease: Conclusions from an international consensus group.

BACKGROUND: High-resolution manometry (HRM) has resulted in new revelations regarding the pathophysiology of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). The impact of new HRM motor paradigms on reflux burden needs further definition, leading to a modern approach to motor testing in GERD. METHODS: Focused literature searches were conducted, evaluating pathophysiology of GERD with emphasis on HRM. The results were discussed with an international group of experts to develop a consensus on the role of HRM in GERD. A proposed classification system for esophageal motor abnormalities associated with GERD was generated. KEY RESULTS: Physiologic gastro-esophageal reflux is inherent in all humans, resulting from transient lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxations that allow venting of gastric air in the form of a belch. In pathological gastro-esophageal reflux, transient LES relaxations are accompanied by reflux of gastric contents. Structural disruption of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) barrier, and incomplete clearance of the refluxate can contribute to abnormally high esophageal reflux burden that defines GERD. Esophageal HRM localizes the LES for pH and pH-impedance probe placement, and assesses esophageal body peristaltic performance prior to invasive antireflux therapies and antireflux surgery. Furthermore, HRM can assess EGJ and esophageal body mechanisms contributing to reflux, and exclude conditions that mimic GERD. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Structural and motor EGJ and esophageal processes contribute to the pathophysiology of GERD. A classification scheme is proposed incorporating EGJ and esophageal motor findings, and contraction reserve on provocative tests during HRM.

Ambulatory reflux monitoring for diagnosis of gastro-esophageal reflux disease: Update of the Porto consensus and recommendations from an international consensus group.

BACKGROUND: An international group of experts evaluated and revised recommendations for ambulatory reflux monitoring for the diagnosis of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: Literature search was focused on indications and technical recommendations for GERD testing and phenotypes definitions. Statements were proposed and discussed during several structured meetings. KEY RESULTS: Reflux testing should be performed after cessation of acid suppressive medication in patients with a low likelihood of GERD. In this setting, testing can be either catheter-based or wireless pH-monitoring or pH-impedance monitoring. In patients with a high probability of GERD (esophagitis grade C and D, histology proven Barrett's mucosa >1 cm, peptic stricture, previous positive pH monitoring) and persistent symptoms, pH-impedance monitoring should be performed on treatment. Recommendations are provided for data acquisition and analysis. Esophageal acid exposure is considered as pathological if acid exposure time (AET) is greater than 6% on pH testing. Number of reflux episodes and baseline impedance are exploratory metrics that may complement AET. Positive symptom reflux association is defined as symptom index (SI) >50% or symptom association probability (SAP) >95%. A positive symptom-reflux association in the absence of pathological AET defines hypersensitivity to reflux. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: The consensus group determined that grade C or D esophagitis, peptic stricture, histology proven Barrett's mucosa >1 cm, and esophageal acid exposure greater >6% are sufficient to define pathological GERD. Further testing should be considered when none of these criteria are fulfilled.

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

BACKGROUND: The Chicago Classification (CC) uses high-resolution manometry (HRM) software tools to designate esophageal motor diagnoses. We evaluated changes in diagnostic designations between two CC versions, and determined motor patterns not identified by either version. METHODS: In this observational cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing esophageal HRM over a 6-year period, proportions meeting CC 2.0 and 3.0 criteria were segregated into esophageal outflow obstruction, hypermotility, and hypomotility disorders. Contraction wave abnormalities (CWA), and 'normal' cohorts were recorded. Symptom burden was characterized using dominant symptom intensity and global symptom severity. Motor diagnoses, presenting symptoms, and symptom burden were compared between CC 2.0 and 3.0, and in cohorts not meeting CC diagnoses. KEY RESULTS: Of 2569 eligible studies, 49.9% met CC 2.0 criteria, but only 40.3% met CC 3.0 criteria (P<.0001). Between CC 2.0 and 3.0, 82.8% of diagnoses were concordant. Discordance resulted from decreasing proportions of hypermotility (4.4%) and hypomotility (9.0%) disorders, and increase in 'normal' designations (13.0%); esophageal outflow obstruction showed the least variation between CC versions. Symptom burden was higher with CC 3.0 diagnoses (P≤.005) but not with CC 2.0 diagnoses (P≥.1). Within 'normal' cohorts for both CC versions, CWA were associated with higher likelihood of esophageal symptoms, especially dysphagia, regurgitation, and heartburn, compared to truly normal studies (P≤.02 for each comparison). CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: Despite lower sensitivity, CC 3.0 identifies esophageal motor disorders with higher symptom burden compared to CC 2.0. CWA, which are associated with both transit and perceptive symptoms, are not well identified by either version.

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

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.

Benchmarks for the interpretation of esophageal high-resolution manometry.

BACKGROUND: Competent interpretation of esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) is integral to a quality study. Currently, methods to assess physician competency for the interpretation of esophageal HRM do not exist. The aim of this study was to use formal techniques to (i) develop an HRM interpretation exam, and (ii) establish minimum competence benchmarks for HRM interpretation skills at the trainee, physician interpreter, and master level. METHODS: A total of 29 physicians from 8 academic centers participated in the study: 9 content experts separated into 2 study groups-expert test-takers (n=7) and judges (n=2), and 20 HRM inexperienced trainees ("trainee test-taker"; n=20). We designed the HRM interpretation exam based on expert consensus. Expert and trainee test-takers (n=27) completed the exam. According to the modified Angoff method, the judges reviewed the test-taker performance and established minimum competency cut scores for HRM interpretation skills. KEY RESULTS: The HRM interpretation exam consists of 22 HRM cases with 8 HRM interpretation skills per case: identification of pressure inversion point, hiatal hernia >3 cm, integrated relaxation pressure, distal contractile integral, distal latency, peristaltic integrity, pressurization pattern, and diagnosis. Based on the modified Angoff method, minimum cut scores for HRM interpretation skills at the trainee, physician interpreter, and master level ranged from 65-80%, 85-90% (with the exception of peristaltic integrity), and 90-95%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Using a formal standard setting technique, we established minimum cut scores for eight HRM interpretation skills across interpreter levels. This examination and associated cut scores can be applied in clinical practice to judge competency.

The learning curve for interpretation of oesophageal high-resolution manometry: a prospective interventional cohort study.

BACKGROUND: High-resolution manometry has become the preferred choice of oesophagologists for oesophageal motor assessment, but the learning curve among trainees remains unclear. AIM: To determine the learning curve of high-resolution manometry interpretation. METHODS: A prospective interventional cohort study was performed on 18 gastroenterology trainees, naïve to high-resolution manometry (median age 32 ± 4.0 years, 44.4% female). An intake questionnaire and a 1-h standardised didactic session were performed at baseline. Multiple 1-h interpretation sessions were then conducted periodically over 15 months where 10 studies were discussed; 5 additional test studies were provided for interpretation, and results were compared to gold standard interpretation by the senior author. Hypothetical management decisions based on trainee interpretation were separately queried. Accuracy was compared across test interpretations and sessions to determine the learning curve, with a goal of 90% accuracy. RESULTS: Baseline accuracy was low for abnormal body motor patterns (53.3%), but higher for achalasia/outflow obstruction (65.9%). Recognition of achalasia reached 90% accuracy after six sessions (P = 0.01), while overall accurate management decisions reached this threshold by the 4th session (P < 0.001). Based on our data, the threshold of 90% accuracy for recognition of any abnormal from normal pattern was reached after 30 studies (3rd session) but fluctuated. Diagnosis of oesophageal body motor patterns remained suboptimal; accuracy of advisability of fundoplication improved, but did not reach 90%. CONCLUSIONS: High-resolution manometry has a steep learning curve among trainees. Achalasia recognition is achieved early, but diagnosis of other abnormal motor patterns and management decisions require further supervised training.

Distal mean nocturnal baseline impedance on pH-impedance monitoring predicts reflux burden and symptomatic outcome in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI), a novel pH-impedance metric, may be a surrogate marker of reflux burden. AIM: To assess the predictive value of MNBI on symptomatic outcomes after anti-reflux therapy. METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study, pH-impedance studies performed over a 5-year period were reviewed. Baseline impedance was extracted from six channels at three stable nocturnal 10-min time periods, and averaged to yield MNBI. Distal and proximal oesophageal MNBI values were calculated by averaging MNBI values at 3, 5, 7 and 9 cm, and 15 and 17 cm respectively. Symptomatic outcomes were measured as changes in global symptom severity (GSS, rated on 100-mm visual analogue scales) on prospective follow-up after medical or surgical anti-reflux therapy. Univariate and multivariate analyses assessed the predictive value of MNBI on symptomatic outcomes. RESULTS: Of 266 patients, 135 (50.8%) were tested off proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and formed the study cohort (52.1 ± 1.1 years, 63.7% F). The 59 with elevated acid exposure time (AET) had lower composite and distal MNBI values than those with physiological AET (P < 0.0001), but similar proximal MNBI (P = 0.62). Linear AET negatively correlated with distal MNBI, both individually and collectively (Pearson's r = -0.5, P < 0.001), but not proximal MNBI (Pearson's r = 0, P = 0.72). After prospective follow-up (94 patients were followed up for 3.1 ± 0.2 years), univariate and multivariate regression models showed that distal MNBI, but not proximal MNBI, was independently predictive of linear GSS improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Distal oesophageal MNBI negatively correlates with AET and, when assessed off PPI therapy, is independently predictive of symptomatic improvement following anti-reflux therapy.

Comparison of two high-resolution manometry software systems in evaluating esophageal motor function.

BACKGROUND: High-resolution manometry (HRM) utilizes software tools to diagnose esophageal motor disorders. Performance of these software metrics could be affected by averaging and by software characteristics of different manufacturers. METHODS: High-resolution manometry studies on 86 patients referred for antireflux surgery (61.6 ± 1.4 year, 70% F) and 20 healthy controls (27.9 ± 0.7 year, 45% F) were first subject to standard analysis (Medtronic, Duluth, GA, USA). Coordinates for each of 10 test swallows were exported and averaged to generate a composite swallow. The swallows and averaged composites were imported as ASCII file format into Manoview (Medtronic) and Medical Measurement Systems database reporter (MMS, Dover, NH, USA), and analyses repeated. Comparisons were made between standard and composite swallow interpretations. KEY RESULTS: Correlation between the two systems was high for mean distal contractile integral (DCI, r2 ≥ 0.9) but lower for integrated relaxation pressure (IRP, r2 = 0.7). Excluding achalasia, six patients with outflow obstruction (mean IRP 23.2 ± 2.1 with 10-swallow average) were identified by both systems. An additional nine patients (10.5%) were identified as outflow obstruction (15 mmHg threshold) with MMS 10-swallow and four with MMS composite swallow evaluation; only one was confirmed. Ineffective esophageal motility was diagnosed by 10-swallow evaluation in 19 (22.1%) with Manoview, and 20 (23.3%) with MMS. On Manoview composite, 17 had DCI <450 mmHg/cm/s, and on MMS composite, 21, (p ≥ 0.85 for each comparison) but these did not impact diagnostic conclusions. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Comparison of 10 swallow and composite swallows demonstrate variability in software metrics between manometry systems. Our data support use of manufacturer specific software metrics on 10-swallow sequences.

The impact of abuse and mood on bowel symptoms and health-related quality of life in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common abdominal pain disorder without an organic explanation. Abuse histories (physical, sexual, emotional) are prevalent in IBS. While abuse relates to mood disorders (depression and anxiety) also common in IBS, the influence of abuse on gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and its independence from psychological symptom comorbidity has not been studied. METHODS: Consecutive GI outpatients completed the ROME III Research Diagnostic Questionnaire and questionnaires on trauma (Life-Stress Questionnaire), mood (Beck Depression/Anxiety Inventories), somatic symptoms (PHQ-12), and HRQOL (SF-36). Current GI symptom severity and bother were assessed using 10-cm Visual Analog Scales. KEY RESULTS: 272 ROME-defined IBS (47.6 ± 0.9 years, 81% female) and 246 non-FGID (51.6 ± 1.0 years, 65% female) subjects participated. IBS patients reported greater rates of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse (p < 0.006 each), and higher depression, anxiety, and somatic symptoms (p < 0.001). Greater bowel symptom bother (7.4 ± 0.2 vs 6.7 ± 0.2, p = 0.040), severity (7.7 ± 0.2 vs 6.5 ± 0.2, p < 0.001), recent symptomatic days (9.8 ± 0.4 vs 8.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.02), and poorer HRQOL (40.9 ± 2.3 vs 55.5 ± 1.7, p < 0.001) were noted in IBS with abuse. Abuse effects were additive, with greater IBS symptom severity and poorer HRQOL noted in cases with multiple forms of abuse. Mediation analyses suggested that abuse effects on GI symptoms and HRQOL were partially mediated by mood. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Abuse experiences common among IBS sufferers are associated with reports of greater GI symptoms and poorer HRQOL, particularly in those with multiple forms of abuse; this relationship may be partially mediated by concomitant mood disturbances.