HIGH RESOLUTION ESOPHAGEAL MANOMETRY IN RUSSIAN FEDERATION. EXPERT CONSENSUS AND AGREED PROTOCOL OF CONCLUSION

2018 ◽  
Vol 158 (10) ◽  
pp. 4-9
Author(s):  
S.R. Abdulhakov ◽  
◽  
S.F. Bagnenko ◽  
D.S. Bordin ◽  
A.J. Bredenoord ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Catiele Antunes ◽  
Elinor Zhou ◽  
Jad Abimansour ◽  
Daniella Assis ◽  
Olaya I. Brewer Gutierrez ◽  
...  

High-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM) is frequently used in the outpatient setting, but its role in the inpatient setting is unknown. We conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent inpatient or outpatient HRM. Few differences were noted between groups and 28% of inpatients had an additional intervention. Tolerance of oral diet and diabetes were associated with a lower likelihood of additional intervention. Ultimately, the inpatient HRM group had unique characteristics and few subsequent interventions.


2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel C Sadowski ◽  
Linda Broenink

INTRODUCTION: High-resolution manometry (HRM) of the esophagus is a new technique that provides a more precise assessment of esophageal motility than conventional techniques. Because HRM measures pressure events along the entire length of the esophagus simultaneously, clinical procedure time should be shorter because less catheter manipulation is required. According to manufacturer advertising, the new HRM system is more accurate and up to 50% faster than conventional methods.OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that clinical testing with HRM requires less procedural time than a standard water perfusion (WP) method.METHODS: Forty-one consecutive patients were studied (20 underwent WP and 21 underwent HRM). Using time-motion analysis, the start and end times for each task associated with performing the study were recorded. Patient discomfort and study quality were also assessed by using five- and four-point qualitative scales, respectively.RESULTS: Total procedure time was reduced on average by 25.6% in the HRM group (from 41.8 minutes with WP to 30.7 minutes with HRM, P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the discomfort scores reported by the study subjects and no difference in study quality.CONCLUSIONS: HRM requires less time to complete than conventional manometry and should therefore shorten the wait-times of patients scheduled for esophageal manometry and have a significant impact on the cost of performing this commonly used clinical investigation.


2019 ◽  
Vol 156 (6) ◽  
pp. S-999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dustin Carlson ◽  
C. Prakash Gyawali ◽  
Sabine Roman ◽  
Marcelo F. Vela ◽  
Michael D. Crowell ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maximilien Barret ◽  
Marie-Anne Guillaumot ◽  
Chloé Leandri ◽  
Sarah Leblanc ◽  
Romain Coriat ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 80 (10) ◽  
pp. 1026-1029 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek Serna-Gallegos ◽  
Benjamin Basseri ◽  
Vahak Bairamian ◽  
Mark Pimentel ◽  
Harmik J. Soukiasian

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is commonly reported on esophagram (UGI) studies. The correlation of findings suggestive of GERD on UGI with pH monitoring and high-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM) studies is unclear. We investigate the correlation between reflux on UGI with the findings on pH studies and HRM. Subjects completed a symptom questionnaire before their scheduled study. Data from pH and HRM studies were compared with findings of the UGI. Sixty-five patients were evaluated. Reflux was reported on UGI in 19 of 65 (29.2%). Thirty-six patients had both UGI and pH studies; 22 of 36 (61.1%) had reflux on pH studies. UGI had a false-negative finding in 11 of 20 (55%) with no radiographic evidence of reflux. There was a false-positive finding in five of 16 (31.2%) patients on UGI. There was concordance in 11 of 36 (30.5%). Sixty-three patients had both UGI and HRM; there was positive concordance in eight of 63 (12.7%). Using pH monitoring as the gold standard for GERD, sensitivity was 0.50, specificity 0.64, positive predictive value 0.68, and negative predictive value 0.45 for reflux on UGI. The correlation between reflux reported on UGI and 24-hour pH monitoring is poor. Esophagram (UGI) should be reserved for defining structural defects in the esophagus and not reflux.


2017 ◽  
Vol 152 (5) ◽  
pp. S697
Author(s):  
David Lin ◽  
Jeremy Wang ◽  
Andrew A. Erman ◽  
Dinesh Chhetri ◽  
Conklin Jeffrey

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document