Safety and Tolerability of High-Resolution Esophageal Manometry in Children and Adults.

INTRODUCTION: While high-resolution manometry (HRM) is widely accepted as a safe procedure, no study has assessed the safety profile of HRM in clinical practice. This study aimed to determine the safety and tolerability of HRM and to investigate potential determinants of intolerability. METHODS: We obtained HRM procedure reports, demographics, and clinical data (2005-2022) at a tertiary center using electronic chart review. Our primary outcome was HRM tolerability. Multivariable regression was performed to identify associations between the outcome and covariates including age, sex, race, and comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 5,107 patients (60.3% female) were included. Of them, 5,050 patients (98.9%) tolerated HRM well and 57 patients (1.1%) did not. Age had a statistically significant effect on tolerance: those younger than 18 years had more than a 5-fold increase in not tolerating HRM compared with those aged 18-79 years (5.77% vs 0.99%; odds ratio [OR] = 5.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.60-18.45; P = 0.007), and those aged 80 years or older were also more likely to terminate HRM (2.43% vs 0.99%; OR = 2.56, 95% CI 1.13-5.76; P = 0.024). While prior foregut surgery had a significant effect on tolerance (OR = 8.06, 95% CI 2.29-28.39; P = 0.001), other factors of race, sex, body mass index, and psychological or cognitive disorders had no significant impact. No serious complications were identified. DISCUSSION: HRM is safe and well-tolerated with approximately 1 in every 100 patients being unable to tolerate HRM. Intolerance was more commonly seen in children and seniors due to minor symptoms of discomfort without serious complications. These data points are crucial to counsel patients in whom HRM is being considered.

A Single Fasting Exhaled Methane Level Correlates With Fecal Methanogen Load, Clinical Symptoms and Accurately Detects Intestinal Methanogen Overgrowth.

INTRODUCTION: A 2-hour breath test is the gold standard for diagnosing intestinal methanogen overgrowth (IMO). This method can be cumbersome especially if used repetitively to monitor treatment response. Therefore, we aimed to assess the reliability of a fasting single methane measurement (SMM) in diagnosing IMO and its utility as a biomarker to monitor treatment response in subjects with IMO. METHODS: First, we calculated the test characteristics of SMM compared with lactulose and glucose breath test in 2 large-scale retrospective cohorts. Second, the symptomology associated with SMM using various cutoffs was analyzed. Third, in a double-blind randomized control trial, the temporal stability of SMM levels in subjects taking placebo was analyzed. Fourth, stool Methanobrevibacter smithii loads were quantified using quantitative polymerase chain reaction and compared with SMM levels. Last, the change in SMM over time during antibiotic therapy was analyzed. RESULTS: Using the cutoff of SMM ≥10 ppm, SMM had a sensitivity of 86.4% and specificity of 100% for diagnosing IMO on the glucose and lactulose breath tests and was associated with constipation (5.65 ± 3.47 vs 4.32 ± 3.62, P = 0.008). SMM remained stable for 14 weeks without treatment (P = 0.45), and antibiotics lead to a decrease in SMM after 2 days (P < 0.0001). SMM was positively associate with stool M. smithii load (R = 0.65, P < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Fasting SMM ≥10 ppm seems to accurately diagnose IMO, is associated with constipation, and correlates with stool M. smithii. SMM seems to be stable without treatment and decreases after antibiotics. SMM may be a useful test to diagnose IMO and monitor treatment response.