用于预测异常栓剂滞留的四维阻抗测压容积指标

Panyavee Pitisuttithum, Eric Goudie, Isis K. Araujo, Sourav Halder, Dustin A. Carlson, John E. Pandolfino, Wenjun Kou
{"title":"用于预测异常栓剂滞留的四维阻抗测压容积指标","authors":"Panyavee Pitisuttithum, Eric Goudie, Isis K. Araujo, Sourav Halder, Dustin A. Carlson, John E. Pandolfino, Wenjun Kou","doi":"10.1111/nmo.14803","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundThe objective measurement for esophageal bolus volume and bolus clearance could classify abnormal high‐resolution manometry (HRM) beyond the current Chicago classification. We aimed to compare the novel four‐dimensional impedance manometry (4D HRM) volume metrics with timed barium esophagram (TBE).MethodsAdults with esophageal symptoms undergoing HRM and TBE were included. A custom‐built program for 4D HRM analysis measured esophageal luminal cross‐sectional area (CSA) from impedance and subsequently derived esophageal bolus volume and clearance. 4D HRM volume metrics included pre‐swallow residual volume, maximal volume, retention volume, and clearance ratio defined as 1.0—retention volume divided by the maximal volume. An abnormal TBE was defined as a column height &gt;5 cm at 1 min or 5 min.Key ResultsA total of 95 patients (normal motility: 33%; ineffective esophageal motility: 12%; absent contractility: 10%; esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction: 30%; type I achalasia: 5%; type II achalasia: 12%) were categorized into normal TBE (58%), abnormal TBE at 1 min (17%), and abnormal TBE at 5 min (25%). The AUROC demonstrated that, among all 4D HRM volume metrics, the clearance ratio had the best performance in predicting abnormal TBE at 5 min (AUROC, 95% confidence interval: 0.89, 0.82–0.96), and exhibited a strong negative correlation with TBE at 5 min (<jats:italic>r</jats:italic> = −0.65; <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001).Conclusions &amp; InferencesNovel 4D HRM volume metrics provide objective measurement of esophageal bolus volume and bolus clearance. The clearance ratio has a strong correlation with TBE and could potentially serve as a substitute for TBE to measure esophageal retention.","PeriodicalId":19104,"journal":{"name":"Neurogastroenterology & Motility","volume":"73 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Four‐dimensional impedance manometry volume metrics for predicting abnormal bolus retention\",\"authors\":\"Panyavee Pitisuttithum, Eric Goudie, Isis K. Araujo, Sourav Halder, Dustin A. Carlson, John E. Pandolfino, Wenjun Kou\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/nmo.14803\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BackgroundThe objective measurement for esophageal bolus volume and bolus clearance could classify abnormal high‐resolution manometry (HRM) beyond the current Chicago classification. We aimed to compare the novel four‐dimensional impedance manometry (4D HRM) volume metrics with timed barium esophagram (TBE).MethodsAdults with esophageal symptoms undergoing HRM and TBE were included. A custom‐built program for 4D HRM analysis measured esophageal luminal cross‐sectional area (CSA) from impedance and subsequently derived esophageal bolus volume and clearance. 4D HRM volume metrics included pre‐swallow residual volume, maximal volume, retention volume, and clearance ratio defined as 1.0—retention volume divided by the maximal volume. An abnormal TBE was defined as a column height &gt;5 cm at 1 min or 5 min.Key ResultsA total of 95 patients (normal motility: 33%; ineffective esophageal motility: 12%; absent contractility: 10%; esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction: 30%; type I achalasia: 5%; type II achalasia: 12%) were categorized into normal TBE (58%), abnormal TBE at 1 min (17%), and abnormal TBE at 5 min (25%). The AUROC demonstrated that, among all 4D HRM volume metrics, the clearance ratio had the best performance in predicting abnormal TBE at 5 min (AUROC, 95% confidence interval: 0.89, 0.82–0.96), and exhibited a strong negative correlation with TBE at 5 min (<jats:italic>r</jats:italic> = −0.65; <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001).Conclusions &amp; InferencesNovel 4D HRM volume metrics provide objective measurement of esophageal bolus volume and bolus clearance. The clearance ratio has a strong correlation with TBE and could potentially serve as a substitute for TBE to measure esophageal retention.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19104,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurogastroenterology & Motility\",\"volume\":\"73 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurogastroenterology & Motility\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.14803\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurogastroenterology & Motility","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.14803","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景对食管栓子容量和栓子清除率的客观测量可对异常高分辨率测压(HRM)进行分类,而不是目前的芝加哥分类法。我们旨在将新型四维阻抗测压(4D HRM)容量指标与定时食管钡剂造影(TBE)进行比较。用于 4D HRM 分析的定制程序通过阻抗测量食管管腔横截面积 (CSA),随后得出食管栓塞容量和清除率。4D HRM 容量指标包括吞咽前残余容量、最大容量、滞留容量和清除率,清除率定义为 1.0-滞留容量除以最大容量。主要结果共有 95 名患者(运动正常:33%;食管运动无效:12%;收缩力缺失:10%;食管胃交界处流出道梗阻:30%;I 型贲门失弛缓症:30%;食管胃交界处流出道梗阻:30%;I 型贲门失弛缓症:30%)进行了四维 HRM 容量指标分析:30%; I 型贲门失弛缓症:5%; II 型贲门失弛缓症:12%)分为正常 TBE(58%)、1 分钟异常 TBE(17%)和 5 分钟异常 TBE(25%)。AUROC 显示,在所有 4D HRM 容量指标中,清除率在预测 5 分钟时的异常 TBE 方面表现最佳(AUROC,95% 置信区间:0.89, 0.82-0.96),并且与 5 分钟时的 TBE 呈强负相关(r = -0.65;p <;0.001)。清除率与 TBE 有很强的相关性,有可能替代 TBE 来测量食管潴留。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Four‐dimensional impedance manometry volume metrics for predicting abnormal bolus retention
BackgroundThe objective measurement for esophageal bolus volume and bolus clearance could classify abnormal high‐resolution manometry (HRM) beyond the current Chicago classification. We aimed to compare the novel four‐dimensional impedance manometry (4D HRM) volume metrics with timed barium esophagram (TBE).MethodsAdults with esophageal symptoms undergoing HRM and TBE were included. A custom‐built program for 4D HRM analysis measured esophageal luminal cross‐sectional area (CSA) from impedance and subsequently derived esophageal bolus volume and clearance. 4D HRM volume metrics included pre‐swallow residual volume, maximal volume, retention volume, and clearance ratio defined as 1.0—retention volume divided by the maximal volume. An abnormal TBE was defined as a column height >5 cm at 1 min or 5 min.Key ResultsA total of 95 patients (normal motility: 33%; ineffective esophageal motility: 12%; absent contractility: 10%; esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction: 30%; type I achalasia: 5%; type II achalasia: 12%) were categorized into normal TBE (58%), abnormal TBE at 1 min (17%), and abnormal TBE at 5 min (25%). The AUROC demonstrated that, among all 4D HRM volume metrics, the clearance ratio had the best performance in predicting abnormal TBE at 5 min (AUROC, 95% confidence interval: 0.89, 0.82–0.96), and exhibited a strong negative correlation with TBE at 5 min (r = −0.65; p < 0.001).Conclusions & InferencesNovel 4D HRM volume metrics provide objective measurement of esophageal bolus volume and bolus clearance. The clearance ratio has a strong correlation with TBE and could potentially serve as a substitute for TBE to measure esophageal retention.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信