Diagnostic differences in high-resolution esophageal motility in a large Mexican cohort based on geographic distribution.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Diseases of the Esophagus Pub Date : 2024-10-02 DOI:10.1093/dote/doae049
Genaro Vázquez-Elizondo, José María Remes-Troche, Miguel Ángel Valdovinos-Díaz, Enrique Coss-Adame, Edgardo Suárez Morán, Sami R Achem
{"title":"Diagnostic differences in high-resolution esophageal motility in a large Mexican cohort based on geographic distribution.","authors":"Genaro Vázquez-Elizondo, José María Remes-Troche, Miguel Ángel Valdovinos-Díaz, Enrique Coss-Adame, Edgardo Suárez Morán, Sami R Achem","doi":"10.1093/dote/doae049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>High-resolution esophageal manometry [HRM] has become the gold standard for the evaluation of esophageal motility disorders. It is unclear whether there are HRM differences in diagnostic outcome based on regional or geographic distribution. The diagnostic outcome of HRM in a diverse geographical population of Mexico was compared and determined if there is variability in diagnostic results among referral centers. Consecutive patients referred for HRM during 2016-2020 were included. Four major referral centers in Mexico participated in the study: northeastern, southeastern, and central (Mexico City, two centers). All studies were interpreted by experienced investigators using Chicago Classification 3 and the same technology. A total of 2293 consecutive patients were included. More abnormal studies were found in the center (61.3%) versus south (45.8%) or north (45.2%) P < 0.001. Higher prevalence of achalasia was noted in the south (21.5%) versus center (12.4%) versus north (9.5%) P < 0.001. Hypercontractile disorders were more common in the north (11.0%) versus the south (5.2%) or the center (3.6%) P.001. A higher frequency of weak peristalsis occurred in the center (76.8%) versus the north (74.2%) or the south (69.2%) P < 0.033. Gastroesophageal junction obstruction was diagnosed in (7.2%) in the center versus the (5.3%) in the north and (4.2%) in the south p.141 (ns). This is the first study to address the diagnostic outcome of HRM in diverse geographical regions of Mexico. We identified several significant diagnostic differences across geographical centers. Our study provides the basis for further analysis of the causes contributing to these differences.</p>","PeriodicalId":54277,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Esophagus","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diseases of the Esophagus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doae049","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

High-resolution esophageal manometry [HRM] has become the gold standard for the evaluation of esophageal motility disorders. It is unclear whether there are HRM differences in diagnostic outcome based on regional or geographic distribution. The diagnostic outcome of HRM in a diverse geographical population of Mexico was compared and determined if there is variability in diagnostic results among referral centers. Consecutive patients referred for HRM during 2016-2020 were included. Four major referral centers in Mexico participated in the study: northeastern, southeastern, and central (Mexico City, two centers). All studies were interpreted by experienced investigators using Chicago Classification 3 and the same technology. A total of 2293 consecutive patients were included. More abnormal studies were found in the center (61.3%) versus south (45.8%) or north (45.2%) P < 0.001. Higher prevalence of achalasia was noted in the south (21.5%) versus center (12.4%) versus north (9.5%) P < 0.001. Hypercontractile disorders were more common in the north (11.0%) versus the south (5.2%) or the center (3.6%) P.001. A higher frequency of weak peristalsis occurred in the center (76.8%) versus the north (74.2%) or the south (69.2%) P < 0.033. Gastroesophageal junction obstruction was diagnosed in (7.2%) in the center versus the (5.3%) in the north and (4.2%) in the south p.141 (ns). This is the first study to address the diagnostic outcome of HRM in diverse geographical regions of Mexico. We identified several significant diagnostic differences across geographical centers. Our study provides the basis for further analysis of the causes contributing to these differences.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于地理分布的大型墨西哥队列中高分辨率食管运动的诊断差异。
高分辨率食管测压[HRM]已成为评估食管运动障碍的黄金标准。目前还不清楚高分辨率食管测压术的诊断结果是否因地区或地理分布而存在差异。我们对墨西哥不同地域人群的 HRM 诊断结果进行了比较,以确定各转诊中心的诊断结果是否存在差异。研究纳入了 2016-2020 年间转诊的连续 HRM 患者。墨西哥的四个主要转诊中心参与了研究:东北部、东南部和中部(墨西哥城,两个中心)。所有研究均由经验丰富的研究人员使用芝加哥分类 3 和相同的技术进行解读。共纳入了 2293 名连续患者。中部(61.3%)与南部(45.8%)或北部(45.2%)相比,发现了更多的异常研究。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Diseases of the Esophagus
Diseases of the Esophagus Medicine-Gastroenterology
自引率
7.70%
发文量
568
期刊介绍: Diseases of the Esophagus covers all aspects of the esophagus - etiology, investigation and diagnosis, and both medical and surgical treatment.
期刊最新文献
Prognostic factors for paraconduit hernia in adult patients post-esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review. Robotic-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAILE): a comparative analysis of a single unit, consecutive series of Open, Hybrid, and Robotic approaches. Balancing innovation and risks in esophageal surgery: lessons from the hybrid Ivor-Lewis technique. ISDE guidelines on the management of cT2N0 esophageal cancer. Association of body composition, tumor-specific assessment, and patient demographics at diagnosis with 90-day and overall survival in esophageal cancer patients in a global population.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1