Lev Dorfman, Sherief Mansi, Khalil El-Chammas, Chunyan Liu, Ajay Kaul
{"title":"Interpretation of Impedance Data on High-resolution Impedance Manometry Studies-A Worldwide Survey.","authors":"Lev Dorfman, Sherief Mansi, Khalil El-Chammas, Chunyan Liu, Ajay Kaul","doi":"10.5056/jnm23057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>Esophageal manometry is the gold standard for esophageal motility evaluation. High-resolution esophageal manometry with impedance (HRIM) allows concurrent assessment of bolus transit and manometry. Inconsistencies between concomitant impedance and manometry data pose a clinical dilemma and has not yet been addressed. We aim to assess interpretation trends of HRIM data among gastroenterologists worldwide.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study using an anonymous survey was conducted among gastroenterologists worldwide. Statistical analysis was performed to compare responses between providers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We received responses from 107 gastroenterologists (26 countries). Most were adult providers (69, 64.5%), and most (77, 72.0%) had > 5 years of experience. Impedance was found to be helpful by 83 (77.6%) participants, but over 30% reported inconsistencies between impedance and manometry data. With incomplete bolus clearance and normal manometry 41 (38.7%) recommended observation, 41 (38.7%) recommended 24-hours pH-impedance, and 16 (15.1%) recommended prokinetics. With abnormal manometry and complete bolus clearance, 60 (57.1%) recommended observation while 18 (17.1%) recommended 24-hours pH impedance and 15 (14.3%) recommended prokinetics. A significant difference was found between providers from different continents in treating cases with discrepancy between impedance and manometry findings (<i>P</i> < 0.001). No significant differences were seen in responses between adult versus pediatric providers and between providers with different years of experience.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is no consensus on interpreting HRIM data. Providers' approaches to studies with inconsistencies between manometry and impedance data vary. There is an unmet need for guidelines on interpreting impedance data in HRIM studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":16543,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10774806/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5056/jnm23057","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background/aims: Esophageal manometry is the gold standard for esophageal motility evaluation. High-resolution esophageal manometry with impedance (HRIM) allows concurrent assessment of bolus transit and manometry. Inconsistencies between concomitant impedance and manometry data pose a clinical dilemma and has not yet been addressed. We aim to assess interpretation trends of HRIM data among gastroenterologists worldwide.
Methods: A cross-sectional study using an anonymous survey was conducted among gastroenterologists worldwide. Statistical analysis was performed to compare responses between providers.
Results: We received responses from 107 gastroenterologists (26 countries). Most were adult providers (69, 64.5%), and most (77, 72.0%) had > 5 years of experience. Impedance was found to be helpful by 83 (77.6%) participants, but over 30% reported inconsistencies between impedance and manometry data. With incomplete bolus clearance and normal manometry 41 (38.7%) recommended observation, 41 (38.7%) recommended 24-hours pH-impedance, and 16 (15.1%) recommended prokinetics. With abnormal manometry and complete bolus clearance, 60 (57.1%) recommended observation while 18 (17.1%) recommended 24-hours pH impedance and 15 (14.3%) recommended prokinetics. A significant difference was found between providers from different continents in treating cases with discrepancy between impedance and manometry findings (P < 0.001). No significant differences were seen in responses between adult versus pediatric providers and between providers with different years of experience.
Conclusions: There is no consensus on interpreting HRIM data. Providers' approaches to studies with inconsistencies between manometry and impedance data vary. There is an unmet need for guidelines on interpreting impedance data in HRIM studies.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (J Neurogastroenterol Motil) is a joint official journal of the Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, the Thai Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society, the Japanese Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, the Indian Motility and Functional Disease Association, the Chinese Society of Gastrointestinal Motility, the South East Asia Gastro-Neuro Motility Association, the Taiwan Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society and the Asian Neurogastroenterology and Motility Association, launched in January 2010 after the title change from the Korean Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, published from 1994 to 2009.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
