High resolution esophageal manometry—The switch from “intuitive” visual interpretation to Chicago classification

Abstract

High resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) has been interpreted all along by visual interpretation of color plots until the recent introduction of Chicago classification which categorises HREM using objective measurements. It compares HREM diagnosis of esophageal motor disorders by visual interpretation and Chicago classification. Using software Trace 1.2v, 77 consecutive tracings diagnosed by visual interpretation were re-analyzed by Chicago classification and findings compared for concordance between the two systems of interpretation. Kappa agreement rate between the two observations was determined. There were 57 males (74 %) and cohort median age was 41 years (range: 14-83 years). Majority of the referrals were for gastroesophageal reflux disease, dysphagia and achalasia. By "intuitive" visual interpretation, the tracing were reported as normal in 45 (58.4 %), achalasia 14 (18.2 %), ineffective esophageal motility 3 (3.9 %), nutcracker esophagus 11 (14.3 %) and nonspecific motility changes 4 (5.2 %). By Chicago classification, there was 100 % agreement (Kappa 1) for achalasia (type 1: 9; type 2: 5) and ineffective esophageal motility ("failed peristalsis" on visual interpretation). Normal esophageal motility, nutcracker esophagus and nonspecific motility disorder on visual interpretation were reclassified as rapid contraction and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow obstruction by Chicago classification. Chicago classification identified distinct clinical phenotypes including EGJ outflow obstruction not identified by visual interpretation. A significant number of unclassified HREM by visual interpretation were also classified by it.