Multiple Rapid Swallows Research Articles

Additional Diagnostic Yield of the Rapid Drink Challenge in Chicago Classification Version 4.0 Compared With Version 3.0.

Chicago classification version 4.0 enhances the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders using position change and provocative tests such as multiple rapid swallows and a rapid drink challenge. This study investigates the diagnostic role of the rapid drink challenge based on Chicago classification 4.0 using a functional luminal imaging probe to estimate the cutoff value. This study included 570 patients who underwent esophageal manometry with a rapid drink challenge between January 2019 and October 2022. The diagnostic flow was analyzed according to Chicago classification 4.0. Ninety-nine patients (38, achalasia; 11, esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction; 7, ineffective esophageal motility; 1, hypercontractile esophagus; and 42, normal esophageal function) failed the rapid drink challenge. Among the 453 participants, 50 and 86 were diagnosed with achalasia and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction, respectively, using Chicago classification 4.0. In 249/453 (55.0%) patients initially diagnosed with esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction using Chicago classification 3.0, the diagnosis was changed to achalasia (n = 28), hypercontractile esophagus (n = 7), ineffective esophageal motility (n = 7), or normal esophageal function (n = 121) using Chicago classification 4.0. Rapid drink challenge-integrated relaxation pressure's diagnostic cutoff value was 19 mmHg. Nine patients had diagnoses changed after the rapid drink challenge, including 3 with panesophageal pressurization. Chicago classification 4.0 increased the diagnostic yield of the rapid drink challenge by 2.0% (9/453 patients). However, the rapid drink challenge had a failure rate of 17.9% (99/552 patients). Given the relatively low diagnostic yield and high failure rate of the rapid drink challenge, we recommend adopting an individualized approach to manometry.

383. LOSS OF PERISTALTIC RESERVE DETERMINED BY MULTIPLE RAPID SWALLOWS CORRELATES WITH DYSPHAGIA AND POOR BOLUS TRANSIT IN INEFFECTIVE ESOPHAGEAL MOTILITY

Abstract Introduction Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is a common finding on high resolution esophageal manometry (HRM) and is often of unclear clinical significance as its impact on dysphagia and bolus transit is variable. Multiple rapid swallow (MRS) testing is a provocative maneuver performed during HRM that assesses peristaltic reserve, documented by the presence of contractile augmentation (defined by contractile vigor after MRS greater than that seen with single swallows). Lack of augmentation after MRS is associated with dysphagia after anti-reflux surgery. To date, no studies have evaluated the impact of peristaltic reserve on dysphagia and bolus transit in IEM patients. Methods Retrospective review of 159 patients with Chicago classification 4.0 IEM. 52 patients were excluded due to prior esophageal surgery, technically inadequate MRS, or concomitant esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction. Demographics and brief esophageal dysphagia questionnaire (BEDQ) results were obtained from a prospectively maintained database. MRS and bolus transit data were analyzed using a commercially available software. Impedance analysis documented complete versus incomplete bolus transit. Augmentation was defined as the ratio of post-MRS DCI to mean single swallow DCI > 1. Fisher's exact test for continuous data and linear model ANOVA were used to assess for statistical significance. Results 107 IEM patients were included, 46 of them had loss of peristaltic reserve (no augmentation on MRS). Compared to IEM patients with augmentation, those without augmentation had more severe dysphagia documented by higher mean BEDQ score (6.8 versus 4.8, p= 0.045), and increased rates of impaired bolus transit (73% versus 55%, p-= 0.013). Discussion IEM patients without augmentation on MRS have more severe dysphagia and more frequent incomplete bolus clearance. These findings support adding MRS response to the diagnosis of IEM or using it to describe a subset of patients with more severe disease.

Relevance of ineffective esophageal motility to striated esophageal muscle contraction: Studies with high-resolution manometry.

Striated esophageal muscle contraction (SEC) is important for pharyngeal swallowing and deglutition augmentation against aspiration. Its clinical relevance is unclear in patients with ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). In this study, we aimed to characterize and compare SEC in consecutive patients with and without IEM. All eligible patients were evaluated for SEC, primary and secondary peristalsis using high-resolution manometry (HRM) with one mid-esophageal injection port. Primary peristalsis was assessed with 10 5-mL liquid swallows and multiple rapid swallows (MRS), while secondary peristalsis was performed with rapid air injections of 20 mL. All peristatic parameters of HRM were measured, and SEC and its contractile integral (SECI) were evaluated. One hundred and forty patients (59.3% women, mean age 46.1 ± 13.1 years) were included. There was no difference in SECI between patients with and without IEM (p = 0.91). SECI was also similar between patients with and without secondary peristalsis for IEM (p = 0.63) or normal motility (p = 0.80). No difference in SECI was seen between patients with and without MRS for IEM (p = 0.55) or normal motility (p = 0.88). SECI was significantly higher in male patients than female patients in IEM patients (p = 0.01). SECI significantly correlated with age in patients with normal motility (r = -0.31, p = 0.01). Aging may have a negative impact on SEC in patients with normal motility, while gender difference in SECI occurs in IEM patients. Neither secondary peristalsis nor MRS influences SECI.

Impact of Esophageal Motility on Microbiome Alterations in Symptomatic Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Patients With Negative Endoscopy: Exploring the Role of Ineffective Esophageal Motility and Contraction Reserve.

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is common in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and can be associated with poor esophageal contraction reserve on multiple rapid swallows. Alterations in the esophageal microbiome have been reported in GERD, but the relationship to presence or absence of contraction reserve in IEM patients has not been evaluated. We aim to investigate whether contraction reserve influences esophageal microbiome alterations in patients with GERD and IEM. We prospectively enrolled GERD patients with normal endoscopy and evaluated esophageal motility and contraction reserve with multiple rapid swallows during high-resolution manometry. The esophageal mucosa was biopsied for DNA extraction and 16S ribosomal RNA gene V3-V4 (Illumina)/full-length (Pacbio) amplicon sequencing analysis. Among the 56 recruited patients, 20 had normal motility (NM), 19 had IEM with contraction reserve (IEM-R), and 17 had IEM without contraction reserve (IEM-NR). Esophageal microbiome analysis showed a significant decrease in microbial richness in patients with IEM-NR when compared to NM. The beta diversity revealed different microbiome profiles between patients with NM or IEM-R and IEM-NR (P = 0.037). Several esophageal bacterial taxa were characteristic in patients with IEM-NR, including reduced Prevotella spp. and Veillonella dispar, and enriched Fusobacterium nucleatum. In a microbiome-based random forest model for predicting IEM-NR, an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81 was yielded. In symptomatic GERD patients with normal endoscopic findings, the esophageal microbiome differs based on contraction reserve among IEM. Absent contraction reserve appears to alter the physiology and microbiota of the esophagus.

Identification of Achalasia Within Absent Contractility Phenotypes on High-Resolution Manometry: Prevalence, Predictive Factors, and Treatment Outcome.

Absent contractility on high-resolution manometry (HRM) defines severe hypomotility but needs distinction from achalasia. We retrospectively identified achalasia within absent contractility using HRM provocative maneuvers, barium esophagography, and functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP). Adult patients with absent contractility on HRM during the 4-year study period were eligible for inclusion. Inadequate studies, achalasia after therapy, or prior foregut surgery were exclusions. Upright integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) >12 mm Hg, panesophageal pressurization, and/or elevated IRP on multiple rapid swallows and rapid drink challenge (RDC) were considered abnormal. Esophageal barium retention and abnormal esophagogastric junction distensibility index (<2.0 mm 2 /mm Hg) on FLIP defined achalasia. Clinical, endoscopic, and motor characteristics of patients with achalasia were compared with absent contractility without obstruction. Of 164 patients, 20 (12.2%) had achalasia (17.9% of 112 patients with adjunctive testing), while 92 did not, and 52 did not undergo adjunctive tests. Achalasia was diagnosed regardless of IRP value, but the median supine IRP was higher (odds ratio 1.196, 95% confidence interval 1.041-1.375, P = 0.012). Patients with achalasia were more likely to present with dysphagia (80.0% vs 35.9%, P < 0.001), with obstructive features on HRM maneuvers (83.3% vs 48.9%, P = 0.039), but lower likelihood of GERD evidence (20.0% vs 47.3%, P = 0.027) or large hiatus hernia (15.0% vs 43.8%, P = 0.002). On multivariable analysis, dysphagia presentation ( P = 0.006) and pressurization on RDC ( P = 0.027) predicted achalasia, while reflux and presurgical evaluations and lack of RDC obstruction predicted absent contractility without obstruction. Despite HRM diagnosis of absent contractility, achalasia is identified in more than 1 in 10 patients regardless of IRP value.

Effects of Codeine on Esophageal Peristalsis in Patients With Ineffective Esophageal Motility: Studies Using High-resolution Manometry.

This study aims to evaluate the effects of acute codeine administration on primary and secondary esophageal peristalsis in patients with ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). Eighteen IEM patients (8 women; mean age 37.8 years, range 23-64 years) were enrolled in the study. The patients underwent high-resolution manometry exams, consisting of 10 single wet swallows, multiple rapid swallows, and ten 20 mL rapid air injections to trigger secondary peristalsis. All participants completed 2 separate sessions, including acute administration of codeine (60 mg) and placebo, in a randomized order. Codeine significantly increased the distal contractile integral (566 ± 81 mmHg∙s∙cm vs 247 ± 36 mmHg∙s∙cm, P = 0.001) and shortened distal latency (5.7 ± 0.2 seconds vs 6.5 ± 0.1 seconds, P < 0.001) for primary peristalsis compared with these parameters after placebo treatment. The mean total break length decreased significantly after codeine treatment compared with the length after placebo (P = 0.003). Codeine significantly increased esophagogastric junction-contractile integral (P = 0.028) but did not change the 4-second integrated relaxation pressure (P = 0.794). Codeine significantly decreased the frequency of weak (P = 0.039) and failed contractions (P = 0.009), resulting in increased frequency of normal primary peristalsis (P < 0.136). No significant differences in the ratio of impaired multiple rapid swallows inhibition and parameters of secondary peristalsis were detected. In IEM patients, acute administration of codeine increases contraction vigor and reduces distal latency of primary esophageal peristalsis, but has no effect on secondary peristalsis. Future studies are required to further elucidate clinical relevance of these findings, especially in the setting of gastroesophageal reflux disease with IEM.

Integrated Relaxation Pressure and Its Diagnostic Ability May Vary According to the Conditions Used for HREM Recording.

Integrated Residual Pressure (IRP) measured under conditions alternative to supine single swallows may provide clinically useful information regarding EGJ relaxation. This study aimed to compare IRP values obtained under different situations and explore their potential clinical utility. We analyzed and compared the values of IRP obtained from healthy volunteers and patients with suspected achalasia during supine single swallows (Ssup-IRP), sitting single swallows (Ssit-IRP), supine multiple rapid swallows (Msup-IRP), and sitting multiple rapid swallows (Msit-IRP). We analyzed the HREM recordings of 40 healthy volunteers and 53 patients with suspected achalasia. The four metrics were significantly different from each other in healthy volunteers (Ssup-IRP > Msup-IRP > Ssit-IRP > Msit-IRP) and their corresponding 95th percentiles were substantially distinct (Ssup-IRP: 25.3mmHg, Ssit-IRP: 20.9mmHg, Msup-IRP: 15.9mmHg, and Msit-IRP: 11.9mm Hg, respectively). Complete agreement among the four metrics in predicting abnormal IRP was found in 39 of the 47 patients with suspected achalasia who completed the protocol. Optimal cutoffs derived from ROC curve analysis demonstrated ≥ 0.95 specificities for detection of impaired EGJ relaxation among patients with suspected achalasia. Among the eight patients with suspected achalasia with normal Ssup-IRP, five demonstrated abnormal Msit-IRP and four abnormal Ssit-IRP. Significant differences of IRP exist depending on the measurement situation, indicating that correct interpretation of IRP values requires specific cutoffs for each situation.The sensitivities of Ssit-IRP and Msit-IRP in detecting defective EGJ relaxation appear to be slightly higher than that of Ssup-IRP.

Esophageal motor abnormalities in gastroesophageal reflux disorders.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), a prevalent condition with multifactorial pathogenesis, involves esophageal motor dysmotility as a key contributing factor to its development. When suspected GERD patients have an inadequate response to proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and normal upper endoscopy results, high-resolution manometry (HRM) is utilized to rule out alternative diagnosis such as achalasia spectrum disorders, rumination, or supragastric belching. At present, HRM continues to provide supportive evidence for diagnosing GERD and determining the appropriate treatment. This review focuses on the existing understanding of the connection between esophageal motor findings and the pathogenesis of GERD, along with the significance of esophageal HRM in managing GERD patients. The International GERD Consensus Working Group introduced a three-step method, assessing the esophagogastric junction (EGJ), esophageal body motility, and contraction reserve with multiple rapid swallow (MRS) maneuvers. Crucial HRM abnormalities in GERD include frequent transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations, disrupted EGJ, and esophageal body hypomotility. Emerging HRM metrics like EGJ-contractile integral and innovative provocative maneuver like straight leg raise have the potential to enhance our understanding of factors contributing to GERD, thereby increasing the value of HRM performed in patients who experience symptoms suspected of GERD.

Diagnosis and Management of Esophageal Motility Disorders Beyond Achalasia

Abstract High-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders. Achalasia cardia has been the most extensively studied esophageal motility disorder. However, nonachalasia esophageal motility disorders are common too. The present review highlights the diagnosis and management strategies for these disorders. HREM needs to be complemented with clinical symptoms and timed barium esophagogram/functional lumen imaging probe to properly diagnose spastic and hypomotility disorders. Use of Indian normative values is essential to identify patients with these motility disorders accurately. Adjunctive tests such as multiple rapid swallows and rapid drink challenge increase the diagnostic accuracy of HREM studies. HREM is mainly useful in reflux patients with refractory symptoms and for preoperative assessment. Its role in postsurgical cases is evolving.

Contraction reserve in high resolution manometry is correlated with lower esophageal acid exposure time in patients with normal esophageal motility: A retrospective observational study.

In high resolution manometry (HRM), distal contractile integral post multiple rapid swallow augmentation is considered as contraction reserve. The relationship between contraction reserve and esophageal acid reflux remains unclear. The aim of this study was to explore the correlation between contraction reserve and esophageal acid exposure in ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) and normal HRM. Patients who underwent HRM and ambulatory reflux monitoring were retrospectively screened. Those with diagnosis of normal HRM or IEM were included in the analysis. The proportion of patients with abnormal acid exposure time (AET) was compared between patients with and without contraction reserve. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to determine the predictors of abnormal AET and contraction reserve. A total of 338 patients, including 264 normal HRM and 74 IEM, were included in the analysis. In patients with normal HRM, proportion of abnormal total AET (AET > 6.0%) was significantly lower in patients with supine contraction reserve than patients without contraction reserve (13.85% vs. 24.63%, p = 0.027). Multivariate regression analysis showed that supine contraction reserve could independently predict abnormal total AET (OR = 0.468, 95% CI: 0.249-0.948, p = 0.034), while upright contraction reserve trended strongly (OR = 0.558, 95% CI: 0.290-1.071, p = 0.079). Subgroup analysis showed that upright contraction reserve was an independent predictor of abnormal total AET in patients with 50-70% infective swallows (OR = 0.205, 95% CI: 0.051-0.821, p = 0.025), whereas supine contraction reserve did not have predictive value (p = 0.359). Supine contraction reserve correlates with esophageal acid reflux in patients with normal HRM, while only upright contraction reserve correlates with esophageal acid reflux in patients with infective swallows of 50-70%.

Esophageal Infusion of Menthol Does Not Affect Esophageal Motility in Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Menthol is thought to trigger gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms by influencing esophageal peristalsis and lower esophageal sphincter (LES) function. We evaluated the effect of esophageal menthol infusion on esophageal motility and the LES in healthy volunteers and in patients with GERD. High resolution manometry (HRM) catheter with attached thin tube for menthol infusion was placed transnasally. Protocol which included baseline recording, 16 water swallows (5ml, 10ml, and 15ml) and the multiple rapid swallows was performed before and after esophageal infusion of menthol (3mM, 20min, 8ml/min). We evaluated the effect of this infusion on the HRM parameters of esophageal peristalsis (distal contractile integral, distal latency, contractile front velocity) and the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) barrier function (integrated relaxation pressure and the inspiratory augmentation of the LES). Simultaneously we evaluated the quality and intensity of the symptoms during the menthol infusion. Esophageal infusion of menthol did not appreciably affect HRM measurements characterizing esophageal peristalsis and LES pressure in healthy subjects (N = 13) or GERD patients (N = 11). The magnitude of the distal contractile integral (5ml) was changed neither in the healthy volunteers' group, (735 ± 127 vs. 814 ± 117mmHg, p = 0.5), nor in the GERD patients (295 ± 78 vs. 338 ± 96mmHg, p = 0.99). In healthy volunteers menthol did not change the inspiratory augmentation of the LES (8.67 ± 1.09 vs. 7.69 ± 0.96mmHg, p = 0.15) and neither did for GERD patients (8.8 ± 1.18 vs. 8.22 ± 0.91mmHg, p = 0.43). We observed no significant difference in any HRM parameter following menthol infusion, except for distal latency in 10ml swallows. By contrast, menthol infusion induced significantly more intense discomfort in GERD patient than in healthy volunteers. Our results suggest no significant temporal effect of menthol on the esophageal motility or LES function, neither in healthy volunteers, nor in GERD. Arguably, other mechanisms are responsible for menthol-related heartburn.

The impact of primary peristalsis, contractile reserve, and secondary peristalsis on esophageal clearance measured by timed barium esophagogram.

Primary and secondary peristalsis facilitate esophageal bolus transport; however, their relative impact for bolus clearance remains unclear. We aimed to compare primary peristalsis and contractile reserve on high-resolution manometry (HRM) and secondary peristalsis on functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) Panometry with emptying on timed barium esophagogram (TBE) and incorporate findings into a comprehensive model of esophageal function. Adult patients who completed HRM with multiple rapid swallows (MRS), FLIP, and TBE for esophageal motility evaluation and without abnormal esophagogastric junction outflow/opening or spasm were included. An abnormal TBE was defined as a 1-min column height >5 cm. Primary peristalsis and contractile reserve after MRS were combined into an HRM-MRS model. Secondary peristalsis was combined with primary peristalsis assessment to describe a complementary neuromyogenic model. Of 89 included patients, differences in rates of abnormal TBEs were observed with primary peristalsis classification (normal: 14.3%; ineffective esophageal motility: 20.0%; absent peristalsis: 54.5%; p = 0.009), contractile reserve (present: 12.5%; absent: 29.3%; p = 0.05), and secondary peristalsis (normal: 9.7%; borderline: 17.6%; impaired/disordered: 28.6%; absent contractile response: 50%; p = 0.039). Logistic regression analysis (akaike information criteria, area under the receiver operating curve) demonstrated that the neuromyogenic model (80.8, 0.83) had a stronger relationship predicting abnormal TBE compared to primary peristalsis (81.5, 0.82), contractile reserve (86.8, 0.75), or secondary peristalsis (89.0, 0.78). Primary peristalsis, contractile reserve, and secondary peristalsis were associated with abnormal esophageal retention as measured by TBE. Added benefit was observed when applying comprehensive models to incorporate primary and secondary peristalsis supporting their complementary application.

Effect of inter-swallow interval on striated esophagus peristalsis; a comparative study with smooth muscle esophagus.

Effect of inter-swallow interval on the contractility of smooth muscle esophagus is well-documented. However, the effects on peristalsis of the striated esophagus have not been systematically studied. A better understanding of striated esophagus motor function in health and disease may enhance the interpretation of manometric studies and inform clinical care. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of inter-swallow interval on striated esophagus compared to findings with that of the smooth muscle esophagus. We performed two sets of studies to (1) determine the effect of various inter-swallow interval in 20 healthy volunteers and (2) assess the effect of ultra-short swallow intervals facilitated by straw drinking in 28 volunteers. We analyzed variables using ANOVA with Tukey's pairwise comparison and paired t-test. Unlike smooth muscle esophagus, the striated esophagus contractile integral did not change significantly for swallow intervals ranging from 30 to 5 s. On the contrary, striated esophagus demonstrated absent or reduced peristalsis in response to ultra-short (<2 s) intervals during straw-facilitated multiple rapid swallows. Striated esophagus peristalsis is subject to manometrically observed inhibition during swallows with ultra-short intervals. Inter-swallow intervals as short as 5 s that inhibit smooth muscle esophagus peristalsis do not inhibit striated muscle peristalsis. The mechanisms of these observations are unknown but may relate to central or myenteric nervous system influences or the effects of pharyngeal biomechanics.

Novel Diagnostic Techniques in the Evaluation of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD).

In our present clinical paradigm, patient symptoms and presentation in the setting of traditional findings from endoscopy (erosive esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, reflux-mediated stenosis), esophageal high-resolution manometry, and/or ambulatory reflux monitoring (distal esophageal acid exposure time, numbers of reflux events, reflux-symptom association) guide the care of patients with suspected GERD. However, novel metrics and techniques acquired from or performed at endoscopy, manometry, or pH-impedance monitoring, beyond conventional evaluation, are of great interest to the gastroenterology community given the frequent (and sometimes challenging) presentation of suspected GERD. These novel and evolving diagnostic approaches have the potential to enhance the evaluation of these patients and optimize their management. In this invited review, we discuss the present evidence and potential clinical utility of selected GERD metrics and techniques of interest at endoscopy (dilated intercellular spaces, mucosal impedance), manometry (contractile integral, impedance analysis, straight leg raise, multiple rapid swallow maneuvers), and reflux monitoring (mean nocturnal baseline impedance, post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave indices), and how these tools may be most optimally adopted and utilized for clinical care (Fig.1).

Evaluating the impact of position, volume, and consistency on high-resolution esophageal manometry outcomes.

The Chicago classification primarily utilizes ten 5 mL liquid swallows in a supine position as the standard high-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM) protocol. HRM can be performed with varying volumes and consistencies and in an upright position. We aimed to determine the impact on HRM results by (1) position, (2) swallows of differing volume and consistency, and (3) perception of bolus passage. HRM was performed in healthy volunteers (HV) with the following protocol of swallows: liquids 10 × 5 mL, 5 × 10 mL, and 3 × 10 mL multiple rapid swallows; applesauce 5 × 5 mL and 5 × 10 mL; and bread 5 × 2 × 2 cm and 5 × 4 × 4cm. HV rated difficulty of each swallow on a 5-point Likert scale. All HVs performed the protocol in supine position first and then in "semi-upright" (sitting 70 degrees in a bed) and "upright" (sitting in a chair) in a randomized order. Thirty-seven HVs, median age 27 years, 64% female completed this study. Median distal contractile integral (DCI) and integrated relaxation pressure 4 s (IRP4) of 5 mL liquid swallows significantly differed (all p < 0.01) between position performed. Large volume swallows resulted in higher DCI and lower IRP4. IRP4 results were significantly increased for 2 × 2 cm pieces of bread compared to 5 mL water swallows. DCI results were higher for 2 × 2 cm pieces of bread compared to 5 mL water swallows. Distal latency was shorter in more upright positions. Among this cohort of HV, perceived difficulty of bolus passage was more likely to occur with solid boluses. The volume and consistency of a swallow and the position it is performed in, significantly alter HRM metrics. Interpretation of HRM studies should incorporate different normative values which are specific to the position and bolus type.

The Supportive Role of Provocative Maneuvers and Impedance Clearance in Detecting Ineffective Esophageal Motility.

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is one of the most common esophageal motility disorders. However, the definition of IEM has evolved. Chicago classification version 4.0 (CCv4.0) made IEM parameters more stringent with greater than 70% of ineffective wet swallows (WS) necessary to diagnose conclusive IEM. Of the ineffective swallows, 50-70% are deemed "inconclusive cases". This study sought to determine whether provocative maneuvers, including multiple rapid swallows (MRS) and apple viscous swallows (AVS), and impedance clearance can provide supportive information for inconclusive IEM disorders based on CCv4.0. Esophageal motility data on 100 patients were analyzed. All patients completed WS and at least one additional swallow test (MRS and/or AVS). Patients were classified as having conclusive IEM, inconclusive IEM, or normal motility. IEM features detected on MRS/AVS and incomplete bolus clearance were recorded. Percentage of agreement between IEM features and incomplete bolus clearance was calculated for each motility group. Ten patients had conclusive IEM, nine had inconclusive IEM, and 32 had normal motility. There was 70% agreement between IEM features and incomplete bolus clearance with conclusive IEM, 33% agreement with inconclusive IEM, and 9% agreement with normal motility. There was significantly more agreement in the conclusive and inconclusive IEM groups than in the normal motility group (P = 0.0003). Combinational follow-up testing with provocative maneuvers and impedance clearance may assist with risk stratification of IEM patients and assist in further management of inconclusive IEM. MRS and AVS can detect unique IEM features that may help with preoperative management of inconclusive IEM.

S395 Cannabis Interferes With Deglutitive Inhibition Assessed by Response to Multiple Rapid Swallows During High-Resolution Esophageal Manometry

S395 Cannabis Interferes With Deglutitive Inhibition Assessed by Response to Multiple Rapid Swallows During High-Resolution Esophageal Manometry

High-resolution manometry with additional maneuvers using the Starlet system: normative thresholds and diagnostic yields for relevant esophagogastric junction outflow disorders.

Chicago classification version 4.0 suggests additional maneuvers, such as upright testing, multiple rapid swallows (MRS), and the rapid drink challenge (RDC), for high-resolution manometry (HRM) to minimize ambiguity in the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders. The present study investigated normative thresholds for these new metrics using the Starlet system as well as their diagnostic yields for relevant esophagogastric outflow disorders (EGJOD). In study 1, 30 asymptomatic volunteers prospectively performed HRM including MRS and RDC in the supine/upright positions. We calculated normative thresholds for the new metrics, such as upright integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), upright intrabolus pressure (IBP), and IRP during RDC (RDC-IRP). In study 2, we retrospectively analyzed the HRM tracings of 82 patients who underwent HRM in both positions at our hospital to assess the diagnostic yields of HRM metrics. Based on the results of study 1, we adopted the following normative thresholds: upright IRP < 20mmHg, upright IBP < 21mmHg, and RDC-IRP < 16mmHg. In study 2, 45 patients with dysphagia or chest pain were included in the analysis to identify predictive factors for clinically relevant esophagogastric outflow disorders (true EGJOD). Supine/upright IRP, RDC-IRP, and pan-esophageal pressurization > 20mmHg during RDC (RDC-PEP) predicted true EGJOD with RDC-PEP with the highest sensitivity of 91.7%. HRM with additional maneuvers may facilitate the diagnosis of clinically relevant EGJOD.

Abnormal response after multiple rapid swallow provocation is not predictive of post-operative dysphagia following a tailored fundoplication approach.

The aim was to evaluate the clinical significance of multiple rapid swallows (MRS) during high-resolution manometry (HRM) prior to fundoplication. Despite pre-operative HRM, up to 38% of patients report post-fundoplication dysphagia. Suggestion that MRS improves prediction of dysphagia after fundoplication has not been investigated when using a tailored approach. We hypothesize response to MRS is predictive of dysphagia after tailored fundoplication. A retrospective cohort study was performed on patients undergoing HRM with MRS provocation 5/2019-7/2021 at a single institution. Patients who underwent subsequent index laparoscopic fundoplication, without peptic stricture or achalasia, were included. After performing standard 10-swallow HRM, MRS provocation was performed. Patient-reported dysphagia frequency scores were collected at initial consultation and post-operative follow-up. At least weekly symptoms were considered clinically significant. Normal MRS response was defined as adequate deglutitive inhibition and MRS contractile response. Fundoplications were tailored based on standard HRM values. HRM was performed in 1201 patients, 220 met inclusion criteria. Clinically significant pre-operative dysphagia was reported by 85 (38.6%). Patients undergoing partial fundoplication (n = 123, 55.9%) had lower mean distal contractile integer, distal esophageal contraction amplitude, and percent peristalsis (p < 0.005). Post-operatively, 120 (54.5%) were without dysphagia, 59 (26.8%) had improved dysphagia, 26 (11.8%) had unchanged dysphagia, and 15 (6.8%) reported new dysphagia. There was no statistical difference in early or late dysphagia outcome between tailored fundoplication groups (p = 0.69). On univariate and multivariate analysis, neither MRS response, nor standard HRM metrics were significantly associated with post-operative dysphagia. Younger age (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.986, p = 0.042) and the presence of pre-operative dysphagia (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.17-5.65, p = 0.015) were significant predictors of post-operative dysphagia. The risk of clinically significant dysphagia post-fundoplication is low when using a tailored approach based on standard HRM metrics. Additional data provided by MRS does not add to surgical decision-making using the investigated approach.

How provocative tests in addition to wet swallows during high-resolution manometry can direct clinical management.

Provocative tests have been advocated to address limitations of high-resolution manometry (HRM) with wet swallows. We describe the commonly used provocative manometric manoeuvres [rapid drink challenge (RDC), multiple rapid swallows (MRS), solid swallows and the solid test meal (STM)], compare their diagnostic yield and accuracy to wet swallows, and outline their role in directing clinical management. Provocative testing with RDC and STM identifies a proportion of achalasia cases missed by standard testing, and RDC can play a similar role to radiology in the evaluation of treatment response. In EGJOO, provocative testing with RDC and STM not only increase the diagnostic yield, but can also help differentiate between spurious cases and those representing true outflow obstruction likely to respond to achalasia-type therapies. MRS and STM can help determine the clinical relevance (or otherwise) of ineffective oesophageal motility, and in this setting, MRS may predict the likelihood of postfundoplication dysphagia. RDC and STM can help identify cases of postfundoplication dysphagia more likely to respond to dilatation. Provocative testing has been shown to increase diagnostic yield of HRM, clarify inconclusive diagnoses, allows corroboration of dysmotility with patient symptoms and helps direct clinical management.