Glucose breath test for the detection of small intestine bacterial overgrowth: Impact of diet prior to the test.

BACKGROUND: Glucose breath test (GBT) is used for the diagnosis of small intestine bacterial overgrowth. A restrictive diet without fibers and/or fermentable food is recommended on the day before the test. The aim of our retrospective study was to evaluate the impact of two different restrictive diets on the results of GBT. METHODS: A change of the pretest restrictive diet was applied in our lab on September 1, 2020. The recommended diet was a fiber-free diet before this date, and a fiber-free diet plus restriction of all fermentable food afterward. We thus compared the results of GBT performed before (group A) and after (group B) this pretest diet modification. Demographics, reasons to perform GBT, digestive symptoms, and hydrogen and methane baseline values and variations after glucose ingestion were compared between the two groups. KEY RESULTS: 269 patients underwent GBT in group A, and 316 patients in group B. The two groups were comparable in terms of demographics. Methane and hydrogen baseline values were significantly higher in group A (respectively 14 [18] vs. 8 [14] ppm, p < 0.01 and 11 [14] vs. 6 [8] ppm, p < 0.01). The percentage of positive tests was higher in group A for methane (43% vs. 28%, p < 0.05), and for hydrogen (18% vs. 12%, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION & INFERENCES: This retrospective study suggests the importance of the restrictive diet prior to GBT. A strict limitation of fibers and fermentable food decreased hydrogen and methane baseline values, and the prevalence of positive GBT. Thus a strict restrictive diet should be recommended on the day before the test, in order to limit the impact of food on hydrogen and methane breath levels, and possibly improve the diagnosis quality of GBT.

The Role of High-Resolution Manometry Prior to and Following Antireflux Surgery: The Padova Consensus.

BACKGROUND: In the last two decades the development of high-resolution manometry (HRM) has changed and revolutionized the diagnostic assessment of patients complain foregut symptoms. The role of HRM before and after antireflux procedure remains unclear, especially in surgical practice, where a clear understanding of esophageal physiology and hiatus anatomy is essential for optimal outcome of antireflux surgery (ARS). Surgeons and gastroenterologists (GIs) agree that assessing patients following antireflux procedures can be challenging. Although endoscopy and barium-swallow can reveal anatomic abnormalities, physiologic information on HRM allowing insight into the cause of eventually recurrent symptoms could be key to clinical decision making. METHOD: A multi-disciplinary international working group (14 surgeons and 15 GIs) collaborated to develop consensus on the role of HRM pre- and post- ARS, and to develop a postoperative classification to interpret HRM findings. The method utilized was detailed literature review to develop statements, and the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methodology (RAM) to assess agreement with the statements. Only statements with an approval rate >80% or a final ranking with a median score of 7 were accepted in the consensus. The working groups evaluated the role of HRM prior to ARS and the role of HRM following ARS. CONCLUSION: This international initiative developed by surgeons and GIs together, summarizes the state of our knowledge of the use of HRM pre- and post-ARS. The Padova Classification was developed to facilitate the interpretation of HRM studies of patients underwent ARS.

Translation of the nine item avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder screen (NIAS) questionnaire in French (NIAS-Fr).

BACKGROUND: The Nine Item Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID) Screen (NIAS) questionnaire is originally available in English. Given the significant overlap of ARFID-like symptoms in gastrointestinal (GI) diseases, ARFID screening becomes crucial in these patient populations. Consequently, the translation of the NIAS questionnaire into French is necessary for its utilization in French-speaking countries. METHODS: Clinical experts in neuro-gastroenterology and dietetics from four medical centres in two French-speaking countries (France and Belgium) took part in a well-structured questionnaire translation procedure. This process involved six steps before final approval: translation from English to French, backward translation, comparison between the original and retranslated versions, testing the translated version on patients, making corrections based on patient feedback, and testing the corrected version on an additional sample of patients. KEY RESULTS: The NIAS questionnaire in French (NIAS-Fr) was tested on 18 outpatients across the involved centres. For the majority of native French-speaking patients, the translated questionnaire was well understood and clear. After incorporating two relevant modifications suggested by the patients, the translated questionnaire was approved through testing on an additional sample of patients. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: The involvement of two French-speaking countries was crucial for the harmonization and cultural adaptation of the questionnaire. As a result, the NIAS-Fr is now available for use in 54 French-speaking countries, serving approximately 321 million French speakers across five continents for screening ARFID, for both clinical and research purposes.

Quality Indicator Development for the Approach to Ineffective Esophageal Motility: A Modified Delphi Study.

GOALS: Develop quality indicators for ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). BACKGROUND: IEM is identified in up to 20% of patients undergoing esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) based on the Chicago Classification. The clinical significance of this pattern is not established and management remains challenging. STUDY: Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methods, we employed a modified-Delphi approach for quality indicator statement development. Quality indicators were proposed based on prior literature. Experts independently and blindly scored proposed quality statements on importance, scientific acceptability, usability, and feasibility in a 3-round iterative process. RESULTS: All 10 of the invited esophageal experts in the management of esophageal diseases invited to participate rated 12 proposed quality indicator statements. In round 1, 7 quality indicators were rated with mixed agreement, on the majority of categories. Statements were modified based on panel suggestion, modified further following round 2's virtual discussion, and in round 3 voting identified 2 quality indicators with comprehensive agreement, 4 with partial agreement, and 1 without any agreement. The panel agreed on the concept of determining if IEM is clinically relevant to the patient's presentation and managing gastroesophageal reflux disease rather than the IEM pattern; they disagreed in all 4 domains on the use of promotility agents in IEM; and had mixed agreement on the value of a finding of IEM during anti-reflux surgical planning. CONCLUSION: Using a robust methodology, 2 IEM quality indicators were identified. These quality indicators can track performance when physicians identify this manometric pattern on HRM. This study further highlights the challenges met with IEM and the need for additional research to better understand the clinical importance of this manometric pattern.

Factors associated with early failure of peroral endoscopic myotomy in achalasia.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Achalasia can be treated very effectively with peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM), but factors associated with early failure remain to be determined, especially in European cohorts. METHODS: All consecutive adult patients who underwent a first POEM to treat primary achalasia were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Early failure was defined by an Eckardt score (ES) >3 at 3 months after POEM. When evaluating factors predictive of early failure, 2 cohorts were considered: one consisted of the total population, for whom only basic variables were collected, and the other a cohort built for a case-control study that included matched early-failure and early-success patients (ratio, 1:2). RESULTS: Among 746 patients, the early failure rate was 9.4%. Predictive factors were age ≤45 years (P = .019), achalasia types I and III (P < .001), and the development of a severe adverse event during the procedure (P = .023). In the case-control study, the only additional independent risk factor for early failure was a high pre-POEM ES (P = .001). Only the retrosternal pain subscore was significantly associated with the early failure rate. CONCLUSION: The early failure rate of POEM used to treat primary achalasia is <10%. Younger age, type I/III achalasia, and a high pre-POEM ES were significantly associated with failure.

Updates to the modern diagnosis of GERD: Lyon consensus 2.0.

The Lyon Consensus provides conclusive criteria for and against the diagnosis of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and adjunctive metrics that consolidate or refute GERD diagnosis when primary criteria are borderline or inconclusive. An international core and working group was assembled to evaluate research since publication of the original Lyon Consensus, and to vote on statements collaboratively developed to update criteria. The Lyon Consensus 2.0 provides a modern definition of actionable GERD, where evidence from oesophageal testing supports revising, escalating or personalising GERD management for the symptomatic patient. Symptoms that have a high versus low likelihood of relationship to reflux episodes are described. Unproven versus proven GERD define diagnostic strategies and testing options. Patients with no prior GERD evidence (unproven GERD) are studied using prolonged wireless pH monitoring or catheter-based pH or pH-monitoring off antisecretory medication, while patients with conclusive GERD evidence (proven GERD) and persisting symptoms are evaluated using pH-impedance monitoring while on optimised antisecretory therapy. The major changes from the original Lyon Consensus criteria include establishment of Los Angeles grade B oesophagitis as conclusive GERD evidence, description of metrics and thresholds to be used with prolonged wireless pH monitoring, and inclusion of parameters useful in diagnosis of refractory GERD when testing is performed on antisecretory therapy in proven GERD. Criteria that have not performed well in the diagnosis of actionable GERD have been retired. Personalisation of investigation and management to each patient's unique presentation will optimise GERD diagnosis and management.

Development and modification of a dysphagia question prompt list to improve patient-physician communication: Incorporating both esophageal expert and patient perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions, intended to encourage question-asking by patients and enhance patient-physician communication. To date, a dysphagia-specific QPL has not been developed for patients with esophageal dysphagia symptoms. We aim to develop a dysphagia-specific QPL incorporating both esophageal expert and patient perspectives, applying rigorous methodology. METHODS: The QPL content was generated applying a two-round modified Delphi (RAND/UCLA) method among 11 experts. In round one, experts provided five answers to the prompts: "What general questions should patients ask when being seen for dysphagia?" and "What questions do I not hear patients asking but, given my experience, I believe they should be asking?" In round two, experts rated proposed questions on a 5-point Likert scale. Responses rated as "essential" or "important", determined by an a priori median threshold of ≥4.0, were accepted for inclusion. Subsequently, 20 patients from Stanford Health Care were enrolled to modify the preliminary QPL, to incorporate their perspectives and opinions. Patients independently rated questions applying the same 5-point Likert scale. At the end, patients were encouraged to propose additional questions to incorporate into the QPL by open-endedly asking "Are there questions we didn't ask, that you think we should?" KEY RESULTS: Eleven experts participated in both voting rounds. Of 85 questions generated from round one, 60 (70.6%) were accepted for inclusion, meeting a median value of ≥4.0. Questions were combined to reduce redundancy, narrowing down to 44 questions. Questions were categorized into the following six themes: 1. "What is causing my dysphagia?"; 2. "Associated symptoms"; 3. "Testing for dysphagia"; 4. "Lifestyle modifications"; 5. "Treatment for dysphagia"; and 6. "Prognosis". The largest number of questions covered "What is causing my dysphagia" (27.3%). Twenty patients participated and modified the QPL. Of the 44 questions experts agreed were important, only 30 questions (68.2%) were accepted for inclusion. Six patients proposed 10 additional questions and after incorporating the suggested questions, the final dysphagia-specific QPL created by esophageal experts and modified by patients consisted of 40 questions. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Incorporating expert and patient perspectives, we developed a dysphagia-specific QPL to enhance patient-physician communication. Our study highlights importance of incorporating patient perspective when developing such a communication tool. Further studies will measure the impact of this communication tool on patient engagement.

The role of the RAPID score in surgical planning for empyema.

Background: The RAPID [Renal (urea), Age, fluid Purulence, Infection source, Dietary (albumin)] score is a validated scoring system which allows risk stratification in patients with pleural infection at presentation. Surgical intervention plays a key role in managing pleural empyema. Methods: A retrospective study of patients with complicated pleural effusions and/or empyema undergoing thoracoscopic or open decortication admitted to multiple affiliated Texas hospitals from September 1, 2014 to September 30, 2018. The primary outcome was all-cause 90-day mortality. The secondary outcomes were organ failure, length of stay and 30-day readmission rate. The outcomes were compared between early surgery (≤3 days from diagnosis) and late surgery (>3 days from diagnosis) and low [0-3] vs. high [4-7] RAPID scores. Results: We enrolled 182 patients. Late surgery was associated with increased organ failure (64.0% vs. 45.6%, P=0.0197) and longer length of stay (16 vs. 10 days, P<0.0001). High RAPID scores were associated with a higher 90-day mortality (16.3% vs. 2.3%, P=0.0014), and organ failure (81.6% vs. 49.6%, P=0.0001). High RAPID scores with early surgery were associated with higher 90-day mortality (21.4% vs. 0%, P=0.0124), organ failure (78.6% vs. 34.9%, P=0.0044), 30-day readmission (50.0% vs. 16.3%, P=0.027) and length of stay (16 vs. 9 days, P=0.0064). High vs. low RAPID scores with late surgery was associated with a higher rate of organ failure (82.9% vs. 56.7%, P=0.0062), but there was not a significant association with mortality. Conclusions: We found a significant association between RAPID scores and surgical timing with new organ failure. Patients with complicated pleural effusions who had early surgery and low RAPID scores experienced better outcomes including decreased length of stay and organ failure compared with those who had late surgery and low RAPID scores. This suggests that using the RAPID score may help identify those who would benefit from early surgery.

From Chicago classification v3.0 to v4.0: Diagnostic changes and clinical implications.

BACKGROUND: The Chicago Classification (CC) used to define esophageal motility disorders in high-resolution manometry (HRM) has evolved over time. Our aim was to compare the frequency of motility disorders diagnosed with the last two versions (CCv3.0 and CCv4.0) and to evaluate symptoms severity according to the diagnoses. METHODS: From June to December 2020, patients who underwent esophageal HRM with swallows in supine and sitting positions were included. HRM studies were retrospectively analyzed using CCv3.0 and CCv4.0. Symptoms severity and quality of life were assessed with validated standardized questionnaires. KEY RESULTS: Among the 130 patients included (73 women, mean age 52 years), motility disorder diagnoses remained unchanged in 102 patients (78%) with both CC. The 3 patients with esophago-gastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO) with CCv3.0 were EGJOO, ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) and normal with CCv4.0. Twenty-four out of 63 IEM diagnosed with the CCv3.0 (38%) turned into normal motility with the CCv4.0. Whatever the CC used, brief esophageal dysphagia questionnaire score was significantly higher in patients with EGJ relaxation disorders compared to those with IEM (25 (0-34) vs 0 (0-19), p = 0.01). Gastro-Esophageal Reflux disease questionnaire (GERD-Q) score was higher in patients with IEM with both CC compared to those who turned to normal with CCv4.0. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: While motility disorders diagnoses remained mainly unchanged with both CC, IEM was less frequent with CCv4.0 compared to CCv3.0. The higher GERD-Q score in IEM patients with CCv4.0 suggests that CCv4.0 might identify IEM more likely associated with GERD.

Development of a Preliminary Question Prompt List as a Communication Tool for Adults With Achalasia: A Modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions that enhance patient-physician communication by encouraging patients to ask questions during consultations. AIM: The aim of this study was to develop a preliminary achalasia-specific QPL created by esophageal experts. METHODS: The QPL content was derived through a modified Delphi method consisting of 2 rounds. In round 1, experts provided 5 answers to the prompts "What general questions should patients ask when given a new diagnosis of achalasia" and "What questions do I not hear patients asking, but given my expertise, I believe they should be asking?" In round 2, experts rated questions on a 5-point Likert scale. Questions considered "essential" or "important" were accepted into the QPL. Feedback regarding the QPL was obtained in a pilot study wherein patients received the QPL before their consultation and completed surveys afterwards. RESULTS: Nineteen esophageal experts participated in both rounds. Of 148 questions from round 1, 124 (83.8%) were accepted into the QPL. These were further reduced to 56 questions to minimize redundancy. Questions were categorized into 6 themes: "What is achalasia," "Risks with achalasia," "Symptom management in achalasia," "Treatment of achalasia," "Risk of reflux after treatment," and "Follow-up after treatment." Nineteen patients participated in the pilot, most of whom agreed that the QPL was helpful (84.2%) and recommended its wider use (84.2%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first QPL developed specifically for adults with achalasia. Although well-received in a small pilot, follow-up studies will incorporate additional patient feedback to further refine the QPL content and assess its usability, acceptability, and feasibility.

Achalasia.

Achalasia is a rare disorder of the oesophageal smooth muscle characterized by impaired relaxation of the lower oesophageal sphincter (LES) and absent or spastic contractions in the oesophageal body. The key pathophysiological mechanism is loss of inhibitory nerve function that probably results from an autoimmune attack targeting oesophageal myenteric nerves through cell-mediated and, possibly, antibody-mediated mechanisms. Achalasia incidence and prevalence increase with age, but the disorder can affect all ages and both sexes. Cardinal symptoms consist of dysphagia, regurgitation, chest pain and weight loss. Several years can pass between symptom onset and an achalasia diagnosis. Evaluation starts with endoscopy to rule out structural causes, followed by high-resolution manometry and/or barium radiography. Functional lumen imaging probe can provide complementary evidence. Achalasia subtypes have management and prognostic implications. Although symptom questionnaires are not useful for diagnosis, the Eckardt score is a simple symptom scoring scale that helps to quantify symptom response to therapy. Oral pharmacotherapy is not particularly effective. Botulinum toxin injection into the LES can temporize symptoms and function as a bridge to definitive therapy. Pneumatic dilation, per-oral endoscopic myotomy and laparoscopic Heller myotomy can provide durable symptom benefit. End-stage achalasia with a dilated, non-functioning oesophagus may require oesophagectomy or enteral feeding into the stomach. Long-term complications can, rarely, include oesophageal cancer, but surveillance recommendations have not been established.

Role of functional luminal imaging probe in the management of postmyotomy clinical failure.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A small percentage of patients with esophageal dysmotility disorders (EDDs) fail to improve or relapse after management by laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) and peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). In this study, we aimed to describe the role of functional luminal imaging probe (FLIP) in identifying patients who might benefit from lower esophageal sphincter (LES)-directed retreatment. METHODS: This was a retrospective study at 6 tertiary care centers (United States, 4; Europe, 1; Asia, 1) between January 2015 and April 2021 involving patients with prior failed myotomy. The primary outcome was the impact of the use of FLIP on the management of patients with prior failed myotomy. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three patients (62 women [50%]; mean age, 53 ± 21.1 years) who underwent LHM (n = 53, 43%) or POEM (n = 70, 57%) for the management of achalasia (n = 98) or other EDDs (n = 25) had clinical failure at a median time of 10.8 months (interquartile range, .8-17.3) postprocedure. Twenty-nine patients had apposing "abnormal" diagnoses in terms of integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) >15 mm Hg on HRM and distensibility index (DI) <2.8 mm2/mm Hg on FLIP, with ultimate change in management noted in 15 patients (10 directed toward conservative management, 5 directed toward LES-directed retreatment). The impact of FLIP on both diagnosis and management was noted in 15 of 29 patients (52%). In the subgroup analysis of 44 patients who underwent LES-directed retreatment, clinical success was highest among patients with both abnormal IRP and DI (21/25 [84%]) versus patients with only abnormal IRP (8/14 [57%]) or only abnormal DI (3/5 [60%], P = .04), with DI at 40-mL distension volume on FLIP identified as an independent predictor of clinical success (odd ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.1; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: The finding of this study further suggests the important role of using FLIP in addition to HRM in evaluating patients with clinical failure postmyotomy.

High-Resolution Manometry Thresholds and Motor Patterns Among Asymptomatic Individuals.

OBJECTIVE: High-resolution manometry (HRM) is the current standard for characterization of esophageal body and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) function. We aimed to examine the prevalence of abnormal esophageal motor patterns in health, and to determine optimal thresholds for software metrics across HRM systems. DESIGN: Manometry studies from asymptomatic adults were solicited from motility centers worldwide, and were manually analyzed using integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), distal latency (DL), and distal contractile integral (DCI) in standardized fashion. Normative thresholds were assessed using fifth and/or 95th percentile values. Chicago Classification v3.0 criteria were applied to determine motor patterns across HRM systems, study positions (upright vs supine), ages, and genders. RESULTS: Of 469 unique HRM studies (median age 28.0, range 18-79 years). 74.6% had a normal HRM pattern; none had achalasia. Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) was the most frequent motor pattern identified (15.1% overall), followed by EGJ outflow obstruction (5.3%). Proportions with IEM were lower using stringent criteria (10.0%), especially in supine studies (7.1%-8.5%). Other motor patterns were rare (0.2%-4.1% overall) and did not vary by age or gender. DL thresholds were close to current norms across HRM systems, while IRP thresholds varied by HRM system and study position. Both fifth and 95th percentile DCI values were lower than current thresholds, both in upright and supine positions. CONCLUSIONS: Motor abnormalities are infrequent in healthy individuals and consist mainly of IEM, proportions of which are lower when using stringent criteria in the supine position. Thresholds for HRM metrics vary by HRM system and study position.

Question Prompt List as a Communication Tool for Adults With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Incorporation of Patients' Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions intended for patient use, enhancing the patient-physician communication by encouraging patients to ask relevant questions during a consultation. Recently, a preliminary 78 question gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) specific QPL was created by 12 esophageal experts through a modified Delphi (RAND/University of California, Los Angeles) technique. Patients' perspectives and opinions on each question, however, had not been accounted for in the preliminary expert' version. AIM: The aim was to modify a preliminary experts' QPL, specific to adults with GERD, following patient perspectives and opinions. METHODS: A preliminary GERD QPL was modified through patient input and opinions. Thirty-eight patients with a clinical diagnosis of GERD followed at Stanford University Esophageal Clinic between January and November 2019 were consented to modify the preliminary 78 question expert QPL version. After receiving the QPL in Qualtrics (Provo, UT) by a direct e-mail invitation, patients independently rated questions on a 5-point Likert scale, where 1="should not be included," 2="unimportant," 3="don't know/depends," 4="important," and 5="essential." Questions were accepted for inclusion in the QPL with an a priori interagreement of 80% ranking in the range of 4 to 5. At the end, patients were encouraged to propose additional questions to incorporate into the QPL by open-endedly asking "Are there questions we didn't ask, that you think we should?" RESULTS: Twenty-three patients with GERD (19 female, median age 64) fully participated and modified the existing QPL (60.5%). Of the 78 questions from the preliminary GERD QPL, 66 questions (84.6%) were accepted for inclusion. The question with the highest agreement among patients rating a question as essential consisted of "what habits, food, and drinks do I have to avoid?" (82.6%). Questions eliminated because of disagreement included "What is the natural history of GERD," "Do I have a high chance to die from my Barrett's?," and "Why are you prescribing an antidepressant to treat my GERD?" Nine patients suggested additional questions totaling to 16 separate questions, including "What type of surgeries are there to help GERD?," "What stage is my GERD?," "What are the odds/percentage of getting cancer from GERD?" Incorporating the suggested questions, the final GERD QPL-created by esophageal experts and modified by patients-consisted of 82 questions. CONCLUSION: Esophageal experts and GERD patients have a high level of agreement on important questions, though there is some variation in perspective. Future studies can simplify this list and measure the impact of a shared GERD QPL on patients' decisional conflict and perceived involvement in care.

Episode-level reflux characteristics: How experienced reviewers differentiate true reflux from artifact on pH-impedance studies.

BACKGROUND: Accurate reflux episode identification is crucial for pH-impedance interpretation. Individual reflux episode characteristics associated with inter-reviewer concordance are incompletely understood. METHODS: Ambulatory pH-impedance studies from 19 GERD patients (median age 52 years, 78.9% F) were analyzed by 5 reviewers. Metadata from pH-impedance studies were exported to a dedicated software tool designed to compare episode-by-episode identification between reviewers within a ±7.5 s window. Patient position, acidic vs. nonacidic episodes, acid clearance time (ACT), bolus clearance time (BCT), and proximal extent of reflux episodes were compared between episodes identified by all reviewers against those identified by automated analysis, and one to four reviewers, respectively. RESULTS: Automated analysis identified 1644 episodes (median 78 episodes per patient, IQR 64-108), of which 84.9% were identified by ≥3 reviewers and 57.1% by all reviewers; 339 unique episodes were added by at least 1 reviewer. Characteristics defining 5 reviewer concordance included acid reflux episodes (88.9%), upright episodes (88.4%), high proximal extent (median 17 cm, IQR 15-17 cm), and longer acid clearance times (67.0 s, IQR 29.0-146.0 s) (P < 0.001 compared to 1-4 reviewer concordance for each). In contrast, 1 reviewer-identified episodes were 69.8% acidic, 76.9% upright, and limited to the distal esophagus. Using 5-reviewer concordance, designation of GERD evidence changed from automated analysis in 16%-19% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Acidic episodes with high proximal extent in the upright position and longer acid clearance times on pH-impedance studies have the highest concordance for identification by expert reviewers. Reflux episode identification may be influenced by reviewer opinion despite availability of established criteria.

Validation in French of the Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire in Patients Referred For Esophageal Manometry.

A brief esophageal dysphagia questionnaire (BEDQ) was recently developed in English to evaluate frequency and intensity of dysphagia. Our aim was to validate this questionnaire in French in a cohort of patients referred for esophageal manometry. Patients referred for esophageal high resolution manometry were offered to fill out different questionnaires including Eckart score, GERDQ score and BEDQ. BEDQ was translated in French by two French native speakers and experts in esophageal motility. Patients were grouped according to the indications of esophageal high resolution manometry (dysphagia, GERD, others). The total BEDQ score was calculated and compared between groups. The validation method used the assessment of internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha and reliability with Guttman split-half reliability. BEDQ questionnaire was completed by 608 patients (44% males, mean age 54 years). The total score had an excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.90) and reliability (Guttman statistic = 0.92). The correlation was good with Eckardt score (r = 0.65, p < 0.001) but poor with the GERDQ score (r = 0.21, p < 0.01). Patients referred for dysphagia (n = 197) had an Eckardt score and a BEDQ score significantly higher than those referred for GERD or other indications (5.48 vs 3.65 and 3.53 respectively for Eckardt score and 15.85 vs 4.64 and 5.78 for BEDQ, p < 0.001). BEDQ is a valid questionnaire in French to assess dysphagia in clinical practice. It remains to be determined if this score is sensitive to symptom variation and thus useful for the follow up of patients with dysphagia.

Durability of per-oral endoscopic myotomy beyond 6 years.

Background and study aims The aim of this study was to assess long-term clinical outcomes beyond 6 years in patients who underwent per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for the treatment of achalasia. Patients and methods Patients with achalasia who underwent POEM between 2010 and 2012 and had follow-up of at least 6 years were retrospectively identified at eight tertiary care centers. The primary outcome evaluated was clinical success defined by an Eckardt symptom score (ESS) ≤ 3 for the duration of the follow-up period. The clinical success cohort was compared to failure (ESS > 3 at any time during follow-up) in order to identify characteristics associated with symptom relapse. The incidence of patient-reported gastroesophageal reflux (GER) was also evaluated. Results Seventy-three patients with 6-year follow-up data were identified. Sustained clinical remission was noted in 89 % (65/73) at 6-years. Mean ESS decreased from 7.1 ±â€Š2.3 pre-procedure to 1.1 ±â€Š1.1 at 6 years ( P  < 0.001). Symptomatic reflux was reported by 27 of 72 patients (37.5 %). Type I achalasia (OR 10.8, P  = 0.04) was found to be associated with clinical failure on logistic regression analysis. Conclusions In patients with achalasia, POEM provides high initial clinical success with excellent long-term outcomes. There are high rates of patient-reported gastroesophageal reflux post-procedure which persist at long-term follow-up.

Value of pH Impedance Monitoring While on Twice-Daily Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy to Identify Need for Escalation of Reflux Management.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Acid exposure time (AET) and reflux episode thresholds from the Lyon Consensus may not apply for pH impedance studies performed while on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. We aimed to determine metrics from "on PPI" pH impedance studies predicting need for escalation of therapy. METHODS: De-identified pH impedance studies performed while on twice-daily PPI (Diversatek, Boulder, CO) in healthy volunteers (n = 66, median age 37.5 years, 43.9% female), and patients with proven gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (European heartburn-predominant cohort: n = 43, median age 57.0 years, 55.8% female; North American regurgitation-predominant cohort: n = 42, median age 41.6 years, 42.9% female) were analyzed. Median values and interquartile ranges for pH impedance metrics in healthy volunteers were compared with proven GERD patients with and without 50% symptom improvement on validated measures. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses identified optimal thresholds predicting symptom response. RESULTS: Both conventional and novel reflux metrics were similar between PPI responders and nonresponders (P ≥ .1 for each) despite differences from healthy volunteers. Combinations of metrics associated with conclusively abnormal reflux burden (AET >4%, >80 reflux episodes) were seen in 32.6% and 40.5% of heartburn and regurgitation-predominant patients, respectively, 57.1% and 82.4% of whom reported nonresponse; and 85% with these metrics improved with invasive GERD management. On ROC analysis, AET threshold of 0.5% modestly predicted nonresponse (sensitivity, 0.62; specificity, 0.51; P = .22), and 40 reflux episodes had better performance characteristics (sensitivity, 0.80; specificity, 0.51; P = .002); 79% with these metrics improved with invasive GERD management. CONCLUSION: Combinations of abnormal "on PPI" pH impedance metrics are associated with PPI nonresponse in proven GERD patients, and can be targeted for treatment escalation, including surgery, particularly in regurgitation-predominant GERD.