Do children with dysphagia and normal esophageal motility according to Chicago Classification always have "normal" esophageal motility?

Abstract

Background: Internationally adopted Chicago Classification (CC) criteria based on adult normative data have been used to diagnose children with esophageal motility disorders undergoing high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM). The aim of this study was to compare HREM parameters of children without dysphagia and children with dysphagia and normal findings according to CC.

Methods: HREM metrics of 41 children (13.2 (9-18) years; 20 female) without dysphagia and 41 children (13.7 (8-18) years; 30 female) with dysphagia and normal diagnosis according to CC were compared. Analyzed data included resting and integrated relaxation pressures (IRP) of upper (UES) and lower (LES) esophageal sphincters, esophageal peristaltic contractile integrals, transition zone (TZ) gaps, distal latency (DL), and manometric esophageal length to height ratio (MELH). 95%ile normative cutoffs were calculated from the cohort without dysphagia.

Key results: Proximal contractile integral (PCI), UES and LES mean resting and IRP were not significantly different between the cohorts (p > 0.3). On the contrary, distal contractile integral (DCI), TZ gap and MELH were notably different with p = 0.0002, p = 0.027, and p = 0.033 respectively. According to 95%ile normative cutoffs of DCI, TZ gap and MELH, in cohort with dysphagia 27%, 15%, and 22% of patients respectively were not normal.

Conclusion & inferences: First study ever to compare HREM parameters of children without dysphagia to children with dysphagia. Considerable proportion of children with dysphagia may be underdiagnosed according to the adult criteria. This emphasizes the need for universally accepted child-specific diagnostic protocols and norms.