Esophagogastric Junction Outflow Obstruction (EGJOO): A Manometric Phenomenon or Clinically Impactful Problem.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO), defined manometrically by impaired esophagogastric junction relaxation (EGJ) with preserved peristalsis, can be artifactual, due to secondary etiologies (mechanical, medication-induced), or a true motility disorder. The purpose of this review is to go over the evolving approach to diagnosing and treating clinically relevant EGJOO. RECENT FINDINGS: Timed barium esophagram (TBE) and the functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) are useful to identify clinically relevant EGJOO that merits lower esophageal sphincter (LES) directed therapies. There are no randomized controlled trials evaluating EJGOO treatment. Uncontrolled trials show effectiveness for pneumatic dilation and peroral endoscopic myotomy to treat confirmed EGJOO; Botox and Heller myotomy may also be considered but data for confirmed EGJOO is more limited. Diagnosis of clinically relevant idiopathic EGJOO requires symptoms, exclusion of mechanical and medication-related etiologies, and confirmation of EGJ obstruction by TBE or FLIP. Botox LES injection has limited durability, it can be used in patients who are not candidates for other treatments. PD and POEM are effective in confirmed EGJOO, Heller myotomy may also be considered but data for confirmed EGJOO is limited. Randomized controlled trials are needed to clarify optimal management of EGJOO.

Esophageal high-resolution manometry demands visual interpretation in addition to mathematical software-based analysis.

PURPOSE: Esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) revolutionized esophageal function testing due to the intuitive colorful and agreeable-to-the-eyes plots (Clouse plots). HRM execution and interpretation is guided by the Chicago Classification. The well-established metrics for interpretation allows a reliable automatic software analysis. Analysis based on these mathematical parameters, however, ignores the valuable visual interpretation unique to human eyes and based on expertise. METHODS: We compiled some situations where visual interpretation added useful information for HRM interpretation. RESULTS: Visual interpretation may be useful in cases of hypomotility, premature waves, artifacts, segmental abnormalities of peristalsis, and extra-luminal non-contractile findings. CONCLUSION: These extra findings can be reported apart from the conventional parameters.

Long-term outcomes of peroral endoscopic myotomy for Chicago classification type I vs type III achalasia in treatment-naive patients.

The efficacy of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for achalasia has potential associations with Chicago classification by high-resolution manometry (HRM). Type II achalasia demonstrates the best response to POEM of all subtypes, while there remain controversies between type I and type III. Moreover, previous treatment history might cause discrepancy in direct comparison. We aimed to compare the clinical outcome of POEM for type I vs type III in treatment-naive patients. In total, 82 patients with type I or type III achalasia (45 type I, 37 type III) from February 2015 to December 2018 were enrolled and POEM was carried out as the initial treatment. Clinical success, change of Eckardt scores and HRM parameters were analyzed and compared between type I and type III group. About, 43 (95.6%) patients and 34 (91.9%) patients in type I and type III group acquired the clinical success (P = 0.821). Eckardt score and HRM results after POEM treatment decreased significantly in either group (P<0.01). Compared to type III group, higher reduction rates of Eckardt score (type I vs type III, 78.6 vs 66.9%, P = 0.034) and basal LES pressure (type I vs type III, 58.9 vs 40.4%, P = 0.040) were observed in type I group. Type I achalasia patients showed better response to POEM with more favorable clinical remission in Eckardt score and HRM outcomes than type III.

A Short History of High-Resolution Esophageal Manometry.

High-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM) utilizes sufficient pressure sensors such that intraluminal pressure is monitored as a continuum along luminal length, similar to time viewed as a continuum on polygraph tracings in 'conventional' manometry. When HRM is coupled with pressure topography plotting, and pressure amplitude is transformed into spectral colors with isobaric areas indicated by same-colored regions, "Clouse plots" are generated. HRM has several advantages compared to the technology that it replaced: (1) the contractility of the entire esophagus can be viewed simultaneously in a uniform standardized format, (2) standardized objective metrics of peristaltic and sphincter function can be systematically applied for interpretation, and (3) topographic patterns of contractility are more easily recognized with greater reproducibility. Leveraging these advantages led to the current standard for the interpretation of clinical esophageal HRM studies, the Chicago Classification (CC), now in its fourth iteration. Compared to conventional manometry, HRM has vastly improved the sensitivity for detecting achalasia, largely due to the objectivity and accuracy of identification of impaired esophagogastric junction (EGJ) relaxation. Additionally, it has led to the subcategorization of achalasia into three clinically relevant subtypes, differentiated by the contractile function of the esophageal body, and identified an additional disorder of EGJ outflow obstruction wherein esophageal peristalsis is preserved. Headway has also been made in understanding hypocontractile and hypercontractile conditions. In summary, HRM and the CC process have revolutionized our understanding of esophageal motility and motility disorders. Moving forward, there will always be remaining challenges, but we now have the tools to meet them.

Chicago Classification Version 4.0 Improves Stratification of Ineffective Esophageal Motility Patients into Clinically Meaningful Subtypes: A Two-Center International Study.

The 4th iteration of the Chicago Classification (CC v4.0) for esophageal motility disorders offers more restrictive criteria for the diagnosis of Ineffective Esophageal Motility (IEM) compared to version 3.0 (CC v3.0). In light of the updated criteria for IEM, we aimed to characterize and compare the patients who retained their IEM diagnosis to those who were reclassified as normal motility, and to evaluate the clinical impact of the newly introduced CC v4.0. We performed a retrospective case-control study. We included all individuals who underwent a high-resolution manometry (HRM) between 2020 and 2021 at two centers. Consecutive studies reported as IEM according to the CC v3.0 were reanalyzed according to the CC v4.0. We compared demographics, clinical, manometry, and pH-monitoring parameters. Out of 452 manometry studies, 154 (34%) met criteria for IEM as per the CC v3.0 (CC v3.0 IEM group). Of those, 39 (25%) studies were reclassified as normal studies according to the CC v4.0 (CC v4.0 normal group), while the remaining 115 studies (25% of the overall cohort) retained an IEM diagnosis (CC v4.0 IEM group). The CC v4.0 normal group had more recovered contractions during solid swallows (p = 0.01), less ineffective swallows (p = 0.04), and lower acid exposure time (p = 0.02) compared to the CC4.0 IEM group. Under CC v4.0 criteria, fewer patients are diagnosed with IEM. Those diagnosed with IEM had worse esophageal function and higher acid burden. Though further studies are needed to confirm these findings, our results indicate that CC v4.0 criteria restrict the IEM diagnosis to a more clinically meaningful population.

Histopathology of Colectomy Specimens Predicts Endoscopic Pouch Phenotype in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: The endoscopic appearance in patients with "pouchitis" after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis (UC) can be quite heterogenous. Patients with an endoscopic phenotype resembling Crohn's disease (CD) are at high risk of pouch loss. AIMS: We aimed to assess how the histopathology of colectomy specimens predicts endoscopic pouch phenotypes in UC. METHODS: We retrospectively assessed pouchoscopies from patients with UC who underwent IPAA and classified pouch findings into 7 main phenotypes: (1) normal, (2) afferent limb involvement, (3) inlet involvement, (4) diffuse, (5) focal inflammation of the pouch body, (6) cuffitis, and (7) pouch with fistulas noted ≥ 6 months from ileostomy takedown. We assessed the clinical and pathological data including deep, focal inflammation, granulomas, and terminal ileal involvement in the colectomy specimens. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify contributing factors to each phenotype. RESULTS: This study included 1,203 pouchoscopies from 382 patients with UC. On multivariable analysis, deep inflammation was significantly associated with pouch fistulas (Odds ratio 3.27; 95% confidence interval 1.65-6.47; P = 0.0007). Of the 75 patients with deep inflammation, only two patients (2.7%) were diagnosed with CD based on pathology review. Terminal ileal involvement significantly increased the risk of afferent limb involvement (Odds ratio 2.96; 95% confidence interval 1.04-8.47; P = 0.04). There were no significant associations between other microscopic features and phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: We identify histologic features of colectomy specimens in UC that predict subsequent pouch phenotypes. Particularly, deep inflammation in the resected colon was significantly associated with pouch fistulas, a pouch phenotype with poor prognosis.

The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease in named manometric patterns of dysmotility according to the Chicago Classification 4.0.

Esophageal motility disorders (EMD) may be considered primary disorders only in the absence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). If GERD is present, treatment should be directed toward correction of the abnormal reflux. The actual prevalence of GERD in manometric dysmotility patterns according to the new Chicago Classification 4.0 (CC4) is still elusive. This study aims to evaluate the prevalence of GERD in patients with esophageal motility disorders according to the CC4. We reviewed 400 consecutive patients that underwent esophageal manometry and pH monitoring. Esophageal motility was classified according to the CC4 and GERD + was defined by a DeMeester score > 14.7. Normal motility or unclassified dysmotility was present in 290 (73%) patients, with GERD+ in 184 of them (63%). There were a total of 110 patients (27%) with named esophageal motility disorders, with GERD+ in 67 (61%). The incidence of ineffective esophageal motility was 59% (n = 65) with 69% GERD +, diffuse esophageal spasm was 40% (n = 44) with 48% GERD +, and hypercontractile esophagus was 0.01% (n = 1) with 100% GERD +. There was no correlation between the presence of GERD and the number of non-peristaltic swallows. Our results show that: (i) manometry only is not enough to select patients' treatment as >60% of patients with named esophageal motility disorders have GERD; (ii) there was no correlation between the presence of GERD and the number of non-peristaltic swallows.

Hard to Swallow Results.

The American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society (ANMS) proposed quality measures (QMs) for performance and interpretation of esophageal manometry (EM). We implemented a quality improvement (QI) study at a large community hospital to assess and improve procedural adherence and interpretation of EM studies based on the ANMS QMs using the Chicago Classification 3.0 (CC) Guidelines. For pre-intervention, three motility independent reviewers reinterpreted 60 EM studies conducted by community gastroenterologists without Tier II-III motility training from October to December 2018 for compliance with pre-procedural, procedural, and data interpretation ANMS QMs. In December 2018, we developed a pre-procedural form, educated nurses on EM procedural compliance, and provided preliminary pre-intervention results to gastroenterologists along with literature utilizing the CC 3.0 Guidelines. For post-intervention, we reinterpreted 54 EM studies from January to August 2019 and investigated whether they met QMs for data interpretation with respect to the CC Guidelines and resulted in appropriate treatment. We found a statistically significant improvement in procedural compliance among nursing staff for 30 s of swallows (76% post-intervention versus 12% pre-intervention, p < 0.001) and 7 evaluable swallows (94% post-intervention versus 53% pre-intervention, p < 0.001). However, quality metrics within data interpretation by physicians post-intervention showed mixed results. An incorrect diagnosis was made in 50% (n = 27)) of studies with 72% (n = 39) having at least one missing item based on the CC. The most missed diagnosis was fragmented peristalsis (30%, n = 29). Among the 39% (n = 21) of surgery referrals, 24% (n = 5) were incorrectly referred. Our study shows poor data interpretation by community gastroenterologists without formal motility training despite adequate performance by nursing staff. This further supports the need for a national ANMS certification process for formal HRM education.

Automated Chicago Classification for Esophageal Motility Disorder Diagnosis Using Machine Learning.

The goal of this paper is to provide a Machine Learning-based solution that can be utilized to automate the Chicago Classification algorithm, the state-of-the-art scheme for esophageal motility disease identification. First, the photos were preprocessed by locating the area of interest-the precise instant of swallowing. After resizing and rescaling the photos, they were utilized as input for the Deep Learning models. The InceptionV3 Deep Learning model was used to identify the precise class of the IRP. We used the DenseNet201 CNN architecture to classify the images into 5 different classes of swallowing disorders. Finally, we combined the results of the two trained ML models to automate the Chicago Classification algorithm. With this solution we obtained a top-1 accuracy and f1-score of 86% with no human intervention, automating the whole flow, from image preprocessing until Chicago classification and diagnosis.

Advancing high-resolution manometry: evaluating the use of multiple rapid swallows versus apple viscous swallows in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: High-Resolution Manometry (HRM) with provocative maneuvers, such as Multiple Rapid Swallows (MRS) and Apple Viscous Swallows (AVS), is commonly utilized to diagnose esophageal disorders. Increasing standardization in HRM protocol can help save time and reduce patient discomfort. This study assesses AVS and MRS to determine their respective benefits and limitations. METHODS: Retrospective reviews were performed on 100 patients to analyze their AVS and/or MRS results. Parameters included abnormal motility patterns, tolerance, and DCI. Diagnostic benefits from MRS and AVS were assessed. Based on the previous studies, additional benefit from MRS was defined as detection of good peristaltic reserve, weak peristaltic reserve, or an abnormal motility/pressurization pattern. Additional benefit from AVS was defined as detection of IEM features or abnormal motility/pressurization pattern. RESULTS: When patients completed both MRS and AVS (n = 70), MRS provided additional benefit in assessing 36% of patients, while AVS provided additional benefit in 19% of patients (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, MRS detected significantly more abnormal motility/pressurization patterns than AVS (27% MRS; 8% AVS; p = 0.0005). Two unique strengths of AVS were higher tolerance for test completion (p = 0.009) and better detection of severe hypokinetic disorders in 4% of patients, which were missed by MRS. CONCLUSIONS: MRS may uniquely identify abnormal motility/pressurization patterns, such as paradoxical LES response, distal pressurization, hypercontractile, and spasm patterns. These findings argue for a tailored approach when selecting provocative testing. MRS may be more useful for patients with abnormal pathophysiology, while AVS may help to supplement MRS in detecting severe hypokinetic disorders in preoperative management.

The effects of different postures and provocative swallow materials on the normative Chicago 3.0 metrics in a healthy Asian population.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Variations in the Chicago 3.0 normative metrics may exist with different postures and with different provocative swallow materials in a healthy Asian population. METHOD: Eligible healthy Malay volunteers were invited to undergo the high-resolution esophageal manometry (inSIGHT Ultima, Diversatek Healthcare, Milwaukee, WI, USA). In recumbent and standing positions, test swallows were performed using liquid, viscous, and solid materials. Metrics including integrated relaxation pressure 4 s (IRP-4 s, mmHg), distal contractile integral (DCI, mmHg s cm), distal latency (DL, s), and peristaltic break (PB, cm) were reported in median and 95th percentile. RESULTS: Fifty of 57 screened participants were recruited, and 586 saline, 265 viscous, and 261 solid swallows were analyzed. Per-patient wise, in the recumbent position, 95th percentile for IRP-4 s, DCI, DL, and PB were 16.5 mmHg, 2431 mmHg s cm, 8.5 s, and 7.2 cm, respectively. We observed that with each posture, the use of viscous swallows led to changes in DL, but the use of solid swallows led to more changes in the metrics including DCI and length of PB. Compared with a recumbent posture, anupright posture led to lower IRP-4 s and DCI values. Both per-patient analysis and per-swallow analyses yielded almost similar results when comparing the different postures and types of swallows. No major motility disorders were observed in this cohort of asymptomatic population. However, more motility disorders were reported in the upright position. CONCLUSIONS: Variations in metrics can be observed in different postures and with different provocative swallow materials in a healthy population. The normative Chicago 3.0 metrics are also determined for the Malay population.

Type II achalasia is associated with a comparably favorable outcome following per oral endoscopic myotomy.

Per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a safe and effective treatment for esophageal motility disorder in treatment-naïve patients as well as salvage therapy. Though type II achalasia, compared to other subtypes, is reported to have a more favorable outcome with pneumatic dilation (PD) or Heller myotomy (HM), it is unclear whether achalasia subtype predicts symptom response to POEM. We aimed to evaluate whether type II achalasia is associated with a comparably favorable outcome following POEM. We performed a retrospective review of patients with esophageal motility disorder who were referred for POEM from April 2014 to June 2017. The main outcome was clinical success based on Eckardt score ≤3 and its association with subtype and safety. A total of 63 patients (mean age 51 years [SD 15]; 63% male) underwent a total of 68 POEMs with median of 263 days follow-up. Of these, 45 (71.3%) patients were type II achalasia. In all, 29 (46%) patients were treatment-naïve and 34 (54%) patients had previous endoscopic or surgical therapy including botulinum toxin injection in 16 (25%), PD in 10 (16%), both botulinum toxin injection and PD in 8 (13%) and HM in 3 (5%). Technical success was 100% and clinical success was achieved in 51 (81%) patients. The rate of clinical success was higher in patients with type II achalasia compared to the other subtypes (88.9% vs. 61.1% [P = 0.028]) and type II achalasia patients required fewer redo POEM (2.2% vs. 22.2% [P = 0.021]). Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated the positive prediction of clinical success for type II achalasia following POEM (P = 0.046). As observed with PD and HM, type II achalasia was associated with a favorable clinical outcome following POEM.

The Challenges of Esaphagogastric Junction Outflow Obstruction, Is It Really a Diagnosis? Creating a Systematic Clinical Approach for EGJOO.

Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO) is currently diagnosed according to the Chicago Classification V3 by an elevated median integrated relaxation pressure on high resolution manometry. However, EGJOO may not be an accurate diagnosis, as it may be based on abnormal IRP from an artifact, affected by narcotics, an achalasia variant, or a mechanical cause of obstruction. This heterogenous diagnosis can often lead to unnecessary testing and treatment. The purpose of this study is to develop a stepwise clinical management protocol on how to evaluate EGJOO. Motility studies were reviewed for the last 2 years and 39 patients were diagnosed with EGJOO. Clinical information was reviewed, and patients were classified into six stepwise categories to explain an elevated IRP resulting in EGJOO diagnosis: (1) underlying catheter artifact (2) opioid use (3) achalasia variant (4) jackhammer esophagus with obstruction (5) missed esophageal lesion (ex. Schatzki ring, EOE) and (6) extrinsic compression. 40% (n = 14) of patients with elevated IRP were due to an underlying catheter artifact. 8.6% (n = 3) were due to opioid use. 8.6% (n = 3) were due to achalasia variant. 31.4% (n = 11) were due to jackhammer esophagus with obstruction. 5.7% (n = 2) were due to missed esophageal lesion. 5.7% (n = 2) were due to external compression by cardiomegaly and aortic aneurism. EGJOO is not a diagnostic end point, but a heterogenous category with multiple underlying etiologies. We believe the use of a stepwise approach to these patients can help avoid further unnecessary testing.

Clinical significance of esophagogastroduodenoscopy in patients with esophageal motility disorders.

OBJECTIVES: The first aim of this study was to elucidate the detection rate of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in patients complaining of dysphagia with esophageal motility disorders; the second was to clarify the useful parameters of EGD associated with esophageal motility disorders. METHODS: Participants included 380 patients who underwent EGD before high-resolution manometry (HRM) for dysphagia. EGD findings were investigated according to the following five parameters: resistance when passing through the esophagogastric junction (EGJ), residue in the esophageal lumen, esophageal dilation, and spastic and nonocclusive contractions. HRM diagnoses were based on the Chicago classification (v3.0). RESULTS: The percentage of abnormal EGD findings was 64.4% among patients with esophageal motility disorders, and the results differed for each esophageal motility disorder. The rate of abnormal EGD for both EGJ outflow obstruction and major disorders of peristalsis was significantly higher than that for manometrically normal subjects. On multivariate analysis, resistance when passing through EGJ, residue in the esophageal lumen, spastic and nonocclusive contraction were significantly associated with esophageal motility disorders. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of these parameters for detection of esophageal motility disorders were 75.1%, 86.6%, 84.8% and 77.8%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction and major disorders of peristalsis can be screened with EGD. Among several endoscopic parameters, resistance when passing through EGJ, residue in the esophageal lumen, spastic and nonocclusive contraction are considered significantly useful indicators.

Patterns of esophageal dysmotility elicited by multiple rapid swallows.

BACKGROUND: High-resolution manometry (HRM) is a gastrointestinal motility diagnostic system that measures intraluminal pressures using closely aligned sensors. Multiple rapid swallows (MRS) are used in conjunction with HRM to assess esophageal physiology prior to anti-reflux and hiatal hernia procedures. METHODS: A retrospective, qualitative study was conducted on 90 patients who underwent HRM with MRS in a single community clinic. 80 patients met the inclusion criteria. MRS testing consisted of rapid 2 mL swallows in 2-3 s intervals with patients in a seated, upright position. Clinical information was reviewed including indications for HRM, prior diagnostic workup, manometry, distal contractile integral (DCI), and integrated residual pressure (IRP). HRM studies were visualized using Manoview Analysis Software v3.0 (Medtronic). RESULTS: Certain esophageal dysmotility and pressurization manometry patterns were previously undetected on HRM alone. In our study, the addition of MRS was clinically helpful in (1) assessing contraction reserve, (2) highlighting features of jackhammer, (3) stimulating esophageal spasm, and (4) visualizing distal esophageal pressurization pattern with mechanical obstruction. Additionally, abnormal pathophysiology such as (5) paradoxical LES contraction (achalasia) and (6) loss of deglutition inhibition were identified. MRS had a diagnostic utility of 21.25% (n = 17) among the 80 patients. An intolerance rate of 7.7% (n = 7) was observed in patients unable to complete the protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Augmentation of HRM with MRS produces unique manometric features that have clinical utility in uncovering esophageal disorders. MRS provocation testing is a practical, inexpensive, well-tolerated addition to HRM that may yield useful clinical information to guide complicated diagnoses and medical management.

Esophagogastric Junction Outflow Obstruction: Current Approach to Diagnosis and Management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We summarize the current epidemiology, presentation, diagnostic workup, and treatment of esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO). We also propose a treatment algorithm based upon the literature and our personal clinical experience. RECENT FINDINGS: EGJOO can be caused by functional obstruction (akin to achalasia), mechanical obstruction, medications, or artifact. High-resolution esophageal manometry is currently the gold standard of diagnosis. Recent research on FLIP (functional lumen imaging probe) and timed barium support use as adjunctive testing. The diagnostic yield of cross-sectional imaging is low. Current diagnostic testing and treatment should be targeted to the suspected underlying etiology and clinical presentation of EGJOO. If functional obstruction is present with significant and persistent dysphagia, and either an abnormal FLIP or timed barium swallow, we consider therapy aimed at LES disruption (similar to achalasia). Pharmacologic therapy has a limited role. More research is needed on diagnostic and treatment modalities.

Etiologies and clinical characteristics of non-obstructive dysphagia in a Taiwanese population: A prospective study based on high-resolution impedance manometry.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal motility disorders are the major cause of non-obstructive dysphagia (NOD), but may be underdiagnosed. In this high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM)-based study, we aimed to clarify the etiologies and clinical characteristics of patients presenting with NOD in a Taiwanese population. METHODS: From October 2014 to July 2017, consecutive patients with the chief complaint of dysphagia were prospectively enrolled in the study at a tertiary medical center. All subjects underwent a comprehensive diagnostic work-up, which included validated symptom questionnaires, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, timed barium esophagogram, and HRIM. Those with obstructive esophageal lesions were excluded. Esophageal motility disorders were diagnosed using the updated Chicago Classification v3.0. We categorized all patients based on the HRIM results, and compared the clinical characteristics and parameters between groups. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients (55 men; mean age [range], 52 [13-87] years) were analyzed. Achalasia was the most common diagnosis by HRIM (n = 66, 55%), followed by ineffective esophageal motility (n = 15, 12.5%), and absent contractility (n = 6, 5%). Patients with achalasia experienced increased vomiting (62.1% vs. 31.5%, p = 0.001), significant weight loss (22.7% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.025), delayed esophageal emptying (90.9% vs. 12.9%, p < 0.001), and abnormal bolus transit (100% vs. 25.9%, p < 0.001) compared with non-achalasia patients. CONCLUSION: Based on HRIM and the updated Chicago Classification, achalasia was the most common diagnosis of NOD in a Taiwanese population. HRIM allows for a more detailed assessment and may assist in the tailoring of further treatment plans.

[Esophageal achalasia]. / Akhalaziia kardii.

Prevalence, clinical manifestations and of modern classifications of achalasia are reviewed in the article. Diagnosis and treatment of this pathology were analyzed by using of 58 references.

Whose patient is it? The path to multidisciplinary management of achalasia.

In the past decade, the introduction of high-resolution manometry and the classification of achalasia into subtypes has made possible to accurately diagnose the disease and predict the response to treatment for its different subtypes. However, even to date, in an era of exponential medical progress and increased insight in disease mechanisms, treatment of patients with achalasia is still rather simplistic and mostly confined to mechanical disruption of the lower esophageal sphincter by different means. In addition, there is partial consensus on what is the best form of available treatments for patients with achalasia. Herein, we provide a comprehensive outlook to a general approach to the patient with suspected achalasia by: 1) defining the modern evaluation process; 2) describing the diagnostic value of high-resolution manometry and the Chicago Classification in predicting treatment outcomes and 3) discussing the available treatment options, considering the patient conditions, alternatives available to both the surgeon and the gastroenterologist, and the burden to the health care system. It is our hope that such discussion will contribute to value-based management of achalasia through promoting a leaner clinical flow of patients at all points of care.

Utility of Esophageal High-Resolution Manometry in Clinical Practice: First, Do HRM.

Esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) has advanced the understanding of esophageal motor function and the ability to diagnose and manage disorders of esophageal motility. In this review, we describe the indications for and the technical performance of HRM. The Chicago classification of esophageal motor function, now in its third iteration, streamlines and standardizes the nomenclature and basic interpretation of HRM data depicted as Clouse topographic plots. In clinical practice, HRM is an important diagnostic test for patients with dysphagia as well as patients with suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), particularly in those patients with a suboptimal symptomatic response to antisecretory therapy. HRM can support diagnoses such as achalasia, as well as provide evidence for behavioral disorders such as rumination syndrome or supragastric belching with the assistance of postprandial HRM with impedance. Further, the GERD classification of motor function introduces a three-part hierarchical evaluation of esophageal motor function in GERD, highlighting the value of assessment of esophageal contractile reserve through provocative maneuvers during HRM such as multiple rapid swallows.