Esophageal Motility Disorders: Are We Missing in Our Busy Endoscopy Practice?

Esophageal motility disorders (EMDs) form a significant part of a busy endoscopist's practice. Endoscopy plays an all-encompassing role in the diagnosis and management of EMDs including achalasia cardia. The focus on in-vogue third-space endoscopic procedures such as per-oral endoscopic myotomy often digresses the important role of endoscopy. Endoscopic evaluation forms the part of standard first-line evaluation of any dysphagia and serves to rule out a secondary cause such as an esophagogastric junction malignancy and eosinophilic esophagitis. Moreover, endoscopic evaluation may itself provide corroborative evidence that may contribute to the diagnosis of the motility disorder. Achalasia cardia may present with a wide spectrum of endoscopic findings from being entirely normal and the well-known and pathognomonic dilated sigmoid-shaped esophagus with food residue, to lesser-known ornate signs. The evidence on the role of endosonography in EMDs is conflicting and largely restricted to evaluation of pseudoachalasia. High-resolution manometry (HRM) remains the gold standard in the diagnosis of EMDs. Endoscopists must also keep abreast of the latest iteration of the Chicago classification version 4.0, which differs significantly from its predecessor in being more stringent in making diagnosis of esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction and disorders of peristalsis since these manometric findings may be seen in normal individuals and may be mimicked by opioid use and gastroesophageal reflux. The latest rendition also includes the use of provocative maneuvers and testing in both supine and sitting posture. Despite being the gold standard, there are certain lacunae in the use and interpretation of the Chicago classification of which the users should be well aware. Emerging technologies such as functional lumen imaging probe and planimetry, and timed barium esophagogram fill the lacuna in diagnosis of these motility disorders, which at times is beyond the resolution of HRM.

Elevated Average Maximum Intrabolus Pressure on High-Resolution Manometry is Associated with Esophageal Dysmotility and Delayed Esophageal Emptying on Timed Barium Esophagram

Background Intrabolus pressure (IBP) recorded by high-resolution manometry (HRM) portrays the compartmentalized force on a bolus during esophageal peristalsis. HRM may be a reliable screening tool for esophageal dysmotility in patients with elevated average maximum IBP (AM-IBP). Timed barium esophagram (TBE) is a validated measure of esophageal emptying disorders, such as esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction and achalasia. This study aimed to determine if an elevated AM-IBP correlates with esophageal dysmotility on HRM and/or delayed esophageal emptying on TBE. Methods A retrospective analysis of all HRM (unweighted sample n=155) performed at a tertiary referral center from 09/2015-03/2017 yielded a case group (n=114) with abnormal AM-IBP and a control group (n=41) with a normal AM-IBP (pressure<17mmHg) as consistent with Chicago Classification 3. All patients received a standardized TBE, with abnormalities classified as greater than 1 cm of retained residual liquid barium in the esophagus at 1 and 5 minutes or as tablet retention after 5 minutes. Results AM-IBP was significantly related to liquid barium retention (p=0.003) and tablet arrest on timed barium esophagram (p=0.011). A logistic regression model correctly predicted tablet arrest in 63% of cases. Tablet arrest on AM-IBP correlated with an optimal prediction point at 20.1 mmHg on HRM. Patients with elevated AM-IBP were more likely to have underlying esophageal dysmotility (95.6% vs. 70.7% respectively; p<0.001), particularly esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction disorders. Elevated AM-IBP was associated with incomplete liquid bolus transit on impedance analysis (p=0.002). Conclusions Our findings demonstrate that an elevated AM-IBP is associated with abnormal TBE findings of esophageal tablet retention and/or bolus stasis. An abnormal AM-IBP (greater than 20.1 mm Hg) was associated with a higher probability of retaining liquid bolus or barium tablet arrest on TBE and esophageal dysmotility on HRM. This finding supports the recent incorporation of IBP in Chicago Classification v4.0.

Spastic Motility Disorders: Diagnosis and Management in the Era of the Chicago Classification

Spastic esophageal motility disorders are represented, as per the Chicago classification 4.0, by diffuse esophageal spasm and hypercontractile esophagus. They are very rare and therefore poorly understood. The diagnosis is usually made by manometry in presence of dysphagia or chest pain, but often it is often an unexpected finding. In this paper, the authors review the current knowledge and possible treatments of these disorders, when needed. They underline that invasive treatments, as surgical myotomy or POEM, are rarely necessary and that the indications for them are based on low quality studies. Therefore, they should be used with extreme caution in treating spastic motility disorders other than achalasia.

800 ASSOCIATION OF MULTIPLE RAPID SWALLOW PARAMETERS WITH SYMPTOMS IN PATIENTS WITH INEFFECTIVE AND NORMAL ESOPHAGEAL MOTILITY

Multiple rapid swallows (MRS) is a provocative test to assess inhibitory swallowing mechanisms and esophageal peristaltic reserve. MRS response has been purposed to predict post-fundoplication dysphagia and has been associated with increased acid exposure time. Recently it was added to the Chicago classification v 4.0 protocol as an adjunctive test. This study aimed to understand the association of MRS parameters with symptoms in patients within ineffective (IEM) or normal esophageal motility (NEM). Methods After IRB approval, a prospectively maintained esophageal motility database was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients with IEM and NEM who also had an MRS evaluation. Patients with previous gastroesophageal surgery, manometric hiatal hernia, or a diagnosed motility disorder (except IEM) were excluded. Patient-reported symptoms (0–4) (heartburn, regurgitation, dysphagia, and chest pain) were grouped by score: 0, 1–2, or 3–4. We compared the prevalence of normal or abnormal MRS and individual MRS parameters (distal contractile integral [DCI], integrated relaxation pressure, distal latency, adequate inhibition, and post-MRS DCI/mean single swallow DCI ratio) with patient-reported symptoms. Results From 2019–2020, a total of 531 patients (254 = IEM, 277 = NEM) met the inclusion criteria and formed the study cohort. The presence of normal or abnormal MRS results was not associated with any patient-reported symptom in either the NEM or IEM group. Furthermore, patient-reported symptoms were not associated with individual MRS parameters in either group. Conclusion In patients with IEM and NEM, adjunct assessment with MRS does not correlate with patient-reported symptoms. Further studies are needed to assess the role of MRS as an adjunctive test during routine manometry.