584 MULTIPLE OBSERVER DETERMINATION OF GASTRO-ESOPHAGEAL JUNCTION CHARACTERISTICS ON VIDEO-FLUOROSCOPY RELATING TO TROUBLESOME DYSPHAGIA POST-FUNDOPLICATION

Dysphagia is a common adverse effect of fundoplication and in some patients, there is no clear identifiable cause despite extensive investigation. Subtle anatomical features of anti-reflux surgery may relate to dysphagia. In this study multiple observers examine gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) anatomy using objective measures of video-fluoroscopy swallow study (VFSS) to explore possible correlates with post-fundoplication dysphagia. Methods Thirty-one patients underwent structured VFSS 6–12 months after laparoscopic total (TotLF) or partial anterior (PAntLF) fundoplication recording: standing AP, 2x standing oblique (SOb), 2x prone oblique (POb), and prone oblique with continuous drinking (PObCont). Post-operative dysphagia was evaluated (Dakkak & Bennett Score: range 0–45; troublesome ≥12). Three observers (Obs1–3) independently measured: GEJ displacement anteriorly; degree of axis deviation of esophagus & GEJ (E-GEJ); posterior distal esophageal angle (PDEA); and GEJ opening diameter cf. maximal distal esophageal diameter (ME-GEJ). Correlations between measurements and dysphagia by operation type were assessed using linear regression analysis and linear mixed-effects models. Results Post-operatively, 5/18 TotLF and 4/13 PAntLF patients reported troublesome dysphagia. Three observers independently found: patients with troublesome dysphagia after TotLF had greater anterior displacement of the GEJ (SOb, range 0.61 cm–1.18 cm, Obs1 p = 0.04), and larger axis deviation of E-GEJ (POb, range 3.28°-13.07°, Obs2 p = 0.03) compared to patients with no/mild dysphagia. There was a trend for greater PDEA in patients with troublesome dysphagia after TotLF (POb, range 0.46°-2.12° and PObCont, range 3.37°-13.4°), but this trend did not reach statistical significance. Following PAntLF, all observers recorded a reduction in ME-GEJ for each unit of worsening dysphagia (PObCont, range 0.03 cm–0.04 cm, Obs1 p = 0.02, Obs2 p = 0.02). Conclusion Multiple observers concur that anterior GEJ displacement, the angle between the esophagus axis—GEJ axis, and posterior distal esophageal angulation are anatomical factors associated with troublesome dysphagia after total fundoplication. After partial anterior fundoplication, a small reduction in GEJ opening diameter relative to the distal esophagus related to worsening dysphagia. To reduce post-fundoplication dysphagia, attention to operative techniques affecting angulation and luminal diameter at the GEJ by fundoplication and hiatal repair is warranted.

Man versus machine: comparison of naked-eye estimation and quantified capillary refill

BackgroundCapillary refill (CR) time is traditionally assessed by ‘naked-eye’ inspection of the return to original colour of a tissue after blanching pressure. Few studies have addressed intra-observer reliability or used objective quantification techniques to assess time to original colour. This study compares naked-eye assessment with quantified CR (qCR) time using polarisation spectroscopy and examines intra-observer and interobserver agreements in using the naked eye.MethodA film of 18 CR tests (shown in a random fixed order) performed in healthy adults was assessed by a convenience sample of 14 doctors, 15 nurses and 19 secretaries (Department of Emergency Medicine, Linköping University, September to November 2017), who were asked to estimate the time to return to colour and characterise it as ‘fast’, ‘normal’ or ‘slow’. The qCR times and corresponding naked-eye time assessments were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Three videos were shown twice without observers’ knowledge to measure intra-observer repeatability. Intra-observer categorical assessments were compared using Cohen’s Kappa analysis. Interobserver repeatability was measured and depicted with multiple-observer Bland-Altman plotting. Differences in naked-eye estimation between professions were analysed using ANOVA.ResultsNaked-eye assessed CR time and qCR time differ substantially, and agreement for the categorical assessments (naked-eye assessment vs qCR classification) was poor (Cohen’s kappa 0.27). Bland-Altman intra-observer repeatability ranged from 6% to 60%. Interobserver agreement was low as shown by the Bland-Altman plotting with a 95% limit of agreement with the mean of ±1.98 s for doctors, ±1.6 s for nurses and ±1.75 s for secretaries. The difference in CR time estimation (in seconds) between professions was not significant.ConclusionsOur study suggests that naked-eye-assessed CR time shows poor reproducibility, even by the same observers, and differs from an objective measure of CR time.