Euroasian Journal of Hepato-Gastroenterology

Register      Login

VOLUME 7 , ISSUE 2 ( July-December, 2017 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Does Chicago Classification address Symptom Correlation with High-resolution Esophageal Manometry?

Melpakkam Srinivas, Piyush Bawane

Citation Information : Srinivas M, Bawane P. Does Chicago Classification address Symptom Correlation with High-resolution Esophageal Manometry?. Euroasian J Hepatogastroenterol 2017; 7 (2):122-125.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10018-1231

License: CC BY 3.0

Published Online: 00-12-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

To assess the correlation of symptoms with findings on esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) in Indian patients.

Materials and methods

Prospective data collection of all patients undergoing esophageal manometry was done at two centers in India—Indore and Chennai—over a period of 18 months. Symptom profile of the study group was divided into four: Motor dysphagia, noncardiac chest pain (NCCP), gastroesophageal reflux (GER), and esophageal belchers. The symptoms were correlated with manometric findings.

Results

Of the study group (154), 35.71% patients had a normal study, while major and minor peristaltic disorders were noted in 31.16 and 33.76% respectively. In patients with symptoms of dysphagia, achalasia cardia was the commonest cause (45.1%), followed by ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) (22.53%) and normal study (19.71%). In patients with NCCP, normal peristalsis (50%) and ineffective motility (31.25%) formed the major diagnosis. Of the 56 patients with GER symptoms, 26 (46.4%) had normal manometry. An equal number had ineffective motility. Of the 11 esophageal belchers, 7 (63.6%) of these had a normal study and 3 had major motility disorder. Dysphagia was the only symptom to have a high likelihood ratio and positive predictive value to pick up major motility disorder.

Conclusion

Dysphagia correlates with high chance to pick up a major peristaltic abnormality in motor dysphagia. The role of manometry in other symptoms in Indian setting needs to be ascertained by larger studies.

Clinical significance

The present study highlights lack of symptom correlation with manometry findings in Indian patients.

How to cite this article

Jain M, Srinivas M, Bawane P, Venkataraman J. Does Chicago Classification address Symptom Correlation with High-resolution Esophageal Manometry? Euroasian J Hepato-Gastroenterol 2017;7(2):122-125.


PDF Share
  1. Evaluation of esophageal motor function in clinical practice. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2013 Feb;25(2):99-133.
  2. The Chicago Classification of esophageal motility disorders, v3.0. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2015 Feb;27(2):160-174.
  3. Achalasia: a review of Western and Iranian experiences. World J Gastroenterol 2009 Oct;15(40):5000-5009.
  4. AGA technical review on the clinical use of esophageal manometry. Gastroenterology 2005 Jan;128(1):209-224.
  5. Relationship between esophageal clinical symptoms and manometry findings in patients with esophageal motility disorders: a cross-sectional study. Med J Islam Rep Iran 2015 Oct;29:271.
  6. Physiology of the esophageal pressure transition zone: separate contraction waves above and below. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2006 Mar;290(3):G568-G576.
  7. Relationship between esophageal contraction patterns and clearance of swallowed liquid and solid boluses in healthy controls and patients with dysphagia. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2012 Aug;24(8):e364-e372.
  8. Association of gastroesophageal reflux disease with asthma control. Dis Esophagus 2013 Nov-Dec;26(8):794-798.
  9. Role of esophageal manometry in patients with reflux symptoms, dysphagia and non cardiac chest pain. Int J Recent Scientific Res 2015 Feb;6(2):2599-2601.
  10. Role of stationary esophageal manometry in clinical practice. Manometric results in patients with gastroesophageal reflux, dysphagia or non-cardiac chest pain. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 2004 Sep;96(9):606-608.
  11. Role of oesophageal manometry in clinical practice. Dis Esophagus 1999 Jan;12(1):41-46.
  12. Ineffective esophageal motility progressing into distal esophageal spasm and then type III achalasia. ACG Case Rep J 2016 Aug;3(4):e183.
  13. Ineffective esophageal motility: is it a transient manometric finding? Kor J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2008;14:103-107.
  14. Perception of dysphagia: lack of correlation with objective measurements of esophageal function. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2010 Dec;22(12):1292-1297, e336-e337.
  15. Lack of correlation between HRM metrics and symptoms during the manometric protocol. Am J Gastroenterol 2014 Apr;109(4):521-526.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.