Normal Values in Esophageal High-Resolution Manometry Performed Using 36-Channel Water-Perfused Catheter or Solid-State Catheter.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Serhat Bor, Anahita Sadeghı, Sezgi Kıpcak, Ali Senkaya
{"title":"Normal Values in Esophageal High-Resolution Manometry Performed Using 36-Channel Water-Perfused Catheter or Solid-State Catheter.","authors":"Serhat Bor, Anahita Sadeghı, Sezgi Kıpcak, Ali Senkaya","doi":"10.5152/tjg.2025.24582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>Manometric measurements are crucial for diagnosing esophageal motility disorders. High-resolution manometry (HRM) studies mainly use 2 catheter systems: solid state (SS) and water perfused (WP), each with distinct advantages. This study aimed to establish normal values for esophageal manometry using both 36-channel WP and SS catheters in healthy volunteers.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study, conducted between January 2017 and September 2018, included 44 healthy volunteers with no upper gastrointestinal symptoms or history of gastrointestinal surgery (except inguinal hernia repair or appendectomy). Participants gave written informed consent, abstained from medications and alcohol, and underwent normal endoscopy. They then had 2 consecutive esophageal manometry sessions, 1 day apart, using a 36-channel SS-HRM catheter and a 36-channel WP-HRM catheter. All tracings were analyzed using the Chicago classification version 3.0.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four participants were excluded due to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Of the remaining 40 (age 37.4 ± 7.6, 62.5% male), all underwent WP-HRM, and 34 underwent SS-HRM. In SS-HRM, 74 of 386 swallows were <450 mm Hg·s·cm; in WP-HRM, 151 of 441 swallows were <<450 mm Hg·s·cm. Thus, 4 of 34 volunteers (11.8%) in SS-HRM and 12 of 40 (30%) in WP-HRM had ≥50% swallows with DCI <450 mm Hg·s·cm. Median IRP4 was 17 (7-27) mm Hg in SS-HRM vs. 6 (0-18) mm Hg in WP-HRM. The 5th-95th percentile DCI was 183-2962 mm Hg·s·cm in SS-HRM vs. 65.5-1711.5 mm Hg·s·cm in WP-HRM.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study compares normal values and differences in WP-HRM and SS-HRM among healthy Turkish volunteers, demonstrating differing diagnostic criteria and providing valuable reference data for future studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":51205,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/tjg.2025.24582","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/aims: Manometric measurements are crucial for diagnosing esophageal motility disorders. High-resolution manometry (HRM) studies mainly use 2 catheter systems: solid state (SS) and water perfused (WP), each with distinct advantages. This study aimed to establish normal values for esophageal manometry using both 36-channel WP and SS catheters in healthy volunteers.

Materials and methods: This study, conducted between January 2017 and September 2018, included 44 healthy volunteers with no upper gastrointestinal symptoms or history of gastrointestinal surgery (except inguinal hernia repair or appendectomy). Participants gave written informed consent, abstained from medications and alcohol, and underwent normal endoscopy. They then had 2 consecutive esophageal manometry sessions, 1 day apart, using a 36-channel SS-HRM catheter and a 36-channel WP-HRM catheter. All tracings were analyzed using the Chicago classification version 3.0.

Results: Four participants were excluded due to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Of the remaining 40 (age 37.4 ± 7.6, 62.5% male), all underwent WP-HRM, and 34 underwent SS-HRM. In SS-HRM, 74 of 386 swallows were <450 mm Hg·s·cm; in WP-HRM, 151 of 441 swallows were <<450 mm Hg·s·cm. Thus, 4 of 34 volunteers (11.8%) in SS-HRM and 12 of 40 (30%) in WP-HRM had ≥50% swallows with DCI <450 mm Hg·s·cm. Median IRP4 was 17 (7-27) mm Hg in SS-HRM vs. 6 (0-18) mm Hg in WP-HRM. The 5th-95th percentile DCI was 183-2962 mm Hg·s·cm in SS-HRM vs. 65.5-1711.5 mm Hg·s·cm in WP-HRM.

Conclusion: This study compares normal values and differences in WP-HRM and SS-HRM among healthy Turkish volunteers, demonstrating differing diagnostic criteria and providing valuable reference data for future studies.

36通道水灌注导管与固体导管在食管高分辨率测压中的正常值。
背景/目的:压力测量是诊断食管运动障碍的关键。高分辨率测压(HRM)研究主要使用两种导管系统:固态(SS)和水灌注(WP),各有其独特的优势。本研究旨在建立健康志愿者使用36通道WP和SS导管测量食管压力的正常值。材料和方法:本研究于2017年1月至2018年9月进行,纳入44名健康志愿者,无上胃肠道症状或胃肠道手术史(腹股沟疝修补术或阑尾切除术除外)。参与者给予书面知情同意,戒除药物和酒精,并接受正常的内窥镜检查。然后使用36通道SS-HRM导管和36通道WP-HRM导管进行连续两次食管测压,间隔1天。使用Chicago分类3.0版本对所有跟踪进行分析。结果:4名受试者因胃食管反流病(GERD)被排除。其余40例(37.4±7.6岁,男性62.5%)均行WP-HRM, 34例行SS-HRM。结论:本研究比较了健康的土耳其志愿者中WP-HRM和SS-HRM的正常值和差异,展示了不同的诊断标准,为今后的研究提供了有价值的参考数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology
Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology (Turk J Gastroenterol) is the double-blind peer-reviewed, open access, international publication organ of the Turkish Society of Gastroenterology. The journal is a bimonthly publication, published on January, March, May, July, September, November and its publication language is English. The Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology aims to publish international at the highest clinical and scientific level on original issues of gastroenterology and hepatology. The journal publishes original papers, review articles, case reports and letters to the editor on clinical and experimental gastroenterology and hepatology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信