刺激动作和阻抗清除在检测无效食管运动中的支持作用。

IF 1.4 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Gastroenterology Research Pub Date : 2022-10-01 Epub Date: 2022-10-19 DOI:10.14740/gr1552
Virali Shah, Alla Turshudzhyan, Alexandra Mignucci, Micheal Tadros
{"title":"刺激动作和阻抗清除在检测无效食管运动中的支持作用。","authors":"Virali Shah,&nbsp;Alla Turshudzhyan,&nbsp;Alexandra Mignucci,&nbsp;Micheal Tadros","doi":"10.14740/gr1552","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":12461,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterology Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e2/da/gr-15-225.PMC9635783.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Supportive Role of Provocative Maneuvers and Impedance Clearance in Detecting Ineffective Esophageal Motility.\",\"authors\":\"Virali Shah,&nbsp;Alla Turshudzhyan,&nbsp;Alexandra Mignucci,&nbsp;Micheal Tadros\",\"doi\":\"10.14740/gr1552\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gastroenterology Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e2/da/gr-15-225.PMC9635783.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gastroenterology Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14740/gr1552\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/10/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterology Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14740/gr1552","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:食道运动障碍是最常见的食道运动障碍之一。然而,IEM的定义已经发生了变化。芝加哥分类4.0 (CCv4.0)使IEM参数更加严格,诊断结论性IEM所需的无效湿咽(WS)大于70%。在无效的燕子中,50-70%被认为是“不确定的病例”。本研究旨在确定挑衅动作,包括多次快速燕子(MRS)和苹果粘性燕子(AVS),以及阻抗清除是否可以为基于CCv4.0的不确定IEM障碍提供支持性信息。方法:对100例患者的食管运动资料进行分析。所有患者均完成WS和至少一项额外的吞咽试验(MRS和/或AVS)。患者分为结论性IEM、非结论性IEM和运动正常。记录MRS/AVS检测到的IEM特征和不完全的丸清除。计算每个运动组IEM特征与不完全丸清除之间的一致性百分比。结果:结论性IEM 10例,不结论性IEM 9例,运动正常32例。IEM特征与不完全清除与结论性IEM的一致性为70%,与不结论性IEM的一致性为33%,与正常运动的一致性为9%。结论性和非结论性IEM组的一致性明显高于正常运动组(P = 0.0003)。结论:联合随访试验与刺激动作和阻抗清除可能有助于IEM患者的风险分层,并有助于进一步治疗不确定的IEM。MRS和AVS可以检测出独特的IEM特征,可能有助于术前管理不确定的IEM。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

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

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

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

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

Background: 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.

Methods: 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.

Results: 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).

Conclusions: 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.

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
Gastroenterology Research
Gastroenterology Research GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
×
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