食管运动障碍-芝加哥分类v4.0是否简化了我们的管理?

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Francis Edeani, Benson Massey
{"title":"食管运动障碍-芝加哥分类v4.0是否简化了我们的管理?","authors":"Francis Edeani,&nbsp;Benson Massey","doi":"10.1097/MOO.0000000000000936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Review purpose: </strong>Addressing dysphagia is vital due to its prevalence and impact on healthcare expenditure. While high resolution manometry (HRM) effectively evaluates esophageal dysphagia, its role in oropharyngeal dysphagia and upper esophageal sphincter (UES) dysfunction remains debated. The fourth iteration of the Chicago classification (CC) offers an algorithmic approach for diagnosing abnormal motor patterns via HRM. This review assesses the CC's impact on dysphagia management.</p><p><strong>Recent insights: </strong>The Chicago classification version 4.0 emphasizes auxiliary and provocative techniques when the algorithm falls short of a conclusive diagnosis. It introduces stricter criteria for previously ambiguous conditions like ineffective motility and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction. This version also introduces the concept of conclusive and inconclusive classifications based on symptoms, provocation maneuvers, and supportive testing minimizing ambiguity.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The Chicago classification v4.0 remains a useful tool for the diagnosis of well characterized esophageal motility disorders. However, major limitations include reliance on HRM and a focus on distal esophagus contractile characteristics without considering proximal esophagus or upper esophageal sphincter, both of which can sometimes be the only evident abnormality in patients with dysphagia. Despite efforts to reduce ambiguity, diagnostic challenges persist. These limitations can be addressed in future updates.</p>","PeriodicalId":55195,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"374-381"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Esophageal motility disorder - has Chicago classification v4.0 simplified our management?\",\"authors\":\"Francis Edeani,&nbsp;Benson Massey\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MOO.0000000000000936\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Review purpose: </strong>Addressing dysphagia is vital due to its prevalence and impact on healthcare expenditure. While high resolution manometry (HRM) effectively evaluates esophageal dysphagia, its role in oropharyngeal dysphagia and upper esophageal sphincter (UES) dysfunction remains debated. The fourth iteration of the Chicago classification (CC) offers an algorithmic approach for diagnosing abnormal motor patterns via HRM. This review assesses the CC's impact on dysphagia management.</p><p><strong>Recent insights: </strong>The Chicago classification version 4.0 emphasizes auxiliary and provocative techniques when the algorithm falls short of a conclusive diagnosis. It introduces stricter criteria for previously ambiguous conditions like ineffective motility and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction. This version also introduces the concept of conclusive and inconclusive classifications based on symptoms, provocation maneuvers, and supportive testing minimizing ambiguity.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The Chicago classification v4.0 remains a useful tool for the diagnosis of well characterized esophageal motility disorders. However, major limitations include reliance on HRM and a focus on distal esophagus contractile characteristics without considering proximal esophagus or upper esophageal sphincter, both of which can sometimes be the only evident abnormality in patients with dysphagia. Despite efforts to reduce ambiguity, diagnostic challenges persist. These limitations can be addressed in future updates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55195,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"374-381\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MOO.0000000000000936\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MOO.0000000000000936","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述目的:由于吞咽困难的普遍性和对医疗支出的影响,解决吞咽困难至关重要。虽然高分辨率测压法(HRM)能有效评估食管吞咽困难,但其在口咽吞咽困难和上食管括约肌(UES)功能障碍中的作用仍存在争议。芝加哥分类(CC)的第四次迭代提供了一种通过HRM诊断异常运动模式的算法方法。本综述评估了CC对吞咽困难管理的影响。最近的见解:芝加哥分类4.0版强调在算法无法得出结论性诊断时使用辅助和挑衅性技术。它为以前不明确的情况引入了更严格的标准,如运动无效和食管胃交界处流出道梗阻。该版本还引入了基于症状、挑衅策略和支持性测试的结论性和非结论性分类的概念,以最大限度地减少歧义。综述:Chicago分类v4.0仍然是诊断特征明确的食管运动障碍的有用工具。然而,主要的局限性包括对HRM的依赖和对食管远端收缩特性的关注,而不考虑食管近端或食管上括约肌,这两者有时可能是吞咽困难患者唯一明显的异常。尽管努力减少歧义,但诊断挑战依然存在。这些限制可以在未来的更新中解决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Esophageal motility disorder - has Chicago classification v4.0 simplified our management?

Review purpose: Addressing dysphagia is vital due to its prevalence and impact on healthcare expenditure. While high resolution manometry (HRM) effectively evaluates esophageal dysphagia, its role in oropharyngeal dysphagia and upper esophageal sphincter (UES) dysfunction remains debated. The fourth iteration of the Chicago classification (CC) offers an algorithmic approach for diagnosing abnormal motor patterns via HRM. This review assesses the CC's impact on dysphagia management.

Recent insights: The Chicago classification version 4.0 emphasizes auxiliary and provocative techniques when the algorithm falls short of a conclusive diagnosis. It introduces stricter criteria for previously ambiguous conditions like ineffective motility and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction. This version also introduces the concept of conclusive and inconclusive classifications based on symptoms, provocation maneuvers, and supportive testing minimizing ambiguity.

Summary: The Chicago classification v4.0 remains a useful tool for the diagnosis of well characterized esophageal motility disorders. However, major limitations include reliance on HRM and a focus on distal esophagus contractile characteristics without considering proximal esophagus or upper esophageal sphincter, both of which can sometimes be the only evident abnormality in patients with dysphagia. Despite efforts to reduce ambiguity, diagnostic challenges persist. These limitations can be addressed in future updates.

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
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
96
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery is a bimonthly publication offering a unique and wide ranging perspective on the key developments in the field. Each issue features hand-picked review articles from our team of expert editors. With eleven disciplines published across the year – including maxillofacial surgery, head and neck oncology and speech therapy and rehabilitation – every issue also contains annotated references detailing the merits of the most important papers.
×
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