Delta-integrated relaxation pressures as a new high-resolution manometry metric to predict the positive outcome of laparoscopic Heller-Dor in patients with achalasia

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.gassur.2024.101928
Andrea Costantini , Matteo Pittacolo , Giulia Nezi , Giovanni Capovilla , Mario Costantini , Arianna Vittori , Matteo Santangelo , Luca Provenzano , Loredana Nicoletti , Francesca Forattini , Lucia Moletta , Michele Valmasoni , Edoardo V. Savarino , Renato Salvador
{"title":"Delta-integrated relaxation pressures as a new high-resolution manometry metric to predict the positive outcome of laparoscopic Heller-Dor in patients with achalasia","authors":"Andrea Costantini ,&nbsp;Matteo Pittacolo ,&nbsp;Giulia Nezi ,&nbsp;Giovanni Capovilla ,&nbsp;Mario Costantini ,&nbsp;Arianna Vittori ,&nbsp;Matteo Santangelo ,&nbsp;Luca Provenzano ,&nbsp;Loredana Nicoletti ,&nbsp;Francesca Forattini ,&nbsp;Lucia Moletta ,&nbsp;Michele Valmasoni ,&nbsp;Edoardo V. Savarino ,&nbsp;Renato Salvador","doi":"10.1016/j.gassur.2024.101928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>There is no consensus on the definition of failure after treatment in patients with achalasia. The Eckardt score is used to define clinical outcomes. However, objective metrics are lacking. This study aimed to identify whether any high-resolution manometry (HRM) parameters may be useful in predicting a positive outcome after laparoscopic Heller-Dor (LHD).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Patients who underwent LHD between 2012 and 2022 were enrolled. The patients were divided according to the outcome: the success group (SG) and the failure group (FG). In addition to the common HRM parameters, we measured the difference between pre- and postoperative integrated relaxation pressures (∆-IRPs). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of each HRM parameter.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of note, 336 patients (92.3%) were classified in the SG, and 28 patients (7.7%) were classified in the FG. No difference was found in terms of manometric types, symptom duration, and history of previous treatments. Preoperative lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure and IRP were higher in the SG than in the FG (41 vs 35 mm Hg [<em>P</em> =.03] and 33 vs 26 mm Hg [<em>P</em> =.002], respectively). The postoperative LES metrics were similar between the 2 groups, except for the ∆-IRP that was higher in the SG (23 mm Hg [IQR, 15–31]) than in the FG (14 mm Hg [IQR, 9–17]) (<em>P</em> =.0002). In the univariate analysis, age, LES preoperative pressure, IRP, and ∆-IRP were factors able to predict a positive clinical outcome. In the multivariate analysis, the ∆-IRP was the only parameter independently related to clinical success (odds ratio, 0.94; 5%–95% CI, 0.89–0.99). The ROC curve for the ∆-IRP showed an area under the curve of 0.71, with a threshold value set at 16.5 mm Hg (sensibility of 71% and specificity of 70%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Our data showed that the ∆-IRP with a threshold of 16.5 mm Hg could represent a new objective tool for predicting the long-term positive outcome of LHD in patients with esophageal achalasia.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15893,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery","volume":"29 2","pages":"Article 101928"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1091255X24007650","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

There is no consensus on the definition of failure after treatment in patients with achalasia. The Eckardt score is used to define clinical outcomes. However, objective metrics are lacking. This study aimed to identify whether any high-resolution manometry (HRM) parameters may be useful in predicting a positive outcome after laparoscopic Heller-Dor (LHD).

Methods

Patients who underwent LHD between 2012 and 2022 were enrolled. The patients were divided according to the outcome: the success group (SG) and the failure group (FG). In addition to the common HRM parameters, we measured the difference between pre- and postoperative integrated relaxation pressures (∆-IRPs). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of each HRM parameter.

Results

Of note, 336 patients (92.3%) were classified in the SG, and 28 patients (7.7%) were classified in the FG. No difference was found in terms of manometric types, symptom duration, and history of previous treatments. Preoperative lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure and IRP were higher in the SG than in the FG (41 vs 35 mm Hg [P =.03] and 33 vs 26 mm Hg [P =.002], respectively). The postoperative LES metrics were similar between the 2 groups, except for the ∆-IRP that was higher in the SG (23 mm Hg [IQR, 15–31]) than in the FG (14 mm Hg [IQR, 9–17]) (P =.0002). In the univariate analysis, age, LES preoperative pressure, IRP, and ∆-IRP were factors able to predict a positive clinical outcome. In the multivariate analysis, the ∆-IRP was the only parameter independently related to clinical success (odds ratio, 0.94; 5%–95% CI, 0.89–0.99). The ROC curve for the ∆-IRP showed an area under the curve of 0.71, with a threshold value set at 16.5 mm Hg (sensibility of 71% and specificity of 70%).

Conclusion

Our data showed that the ∆-IRP with a threshold of 16.5 mm Hg could represent a new objective tool for predicting the long-term positive outcome of LHD in patients with esophageal achalasia.
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
δ-irp作为一种新的高分辨率测压指标,可预测贲门失弛缓症患者腹腔镜heller-dor术的疗效。
对贲门失弛缓症患者治疗后失败的定义尚无共识。Eckardt评分(ES)用于定义临床结果,但缺乏客观指标。本研究的目的是确定是否有任何高分辨率测压(HRM)参数可能有助于预测腹腔镜Heller-Dor (LHD)后的阳性结果。方法:纳入2012-2022年间接受LHD的患者。根据治疗结果分为成功组(SG)和失败组(FG)。除了常见的HRM参数外,我们还测量了术前和术后综合松弛压力(∆- irp)之间的差异。应用ROC曲线分析来评估每个HRM参数的准确性。结果:336例患者(92.3%)分为SG组,28例(7.7%)分为FG组。两组在测压类型、症状持续时间和既往治疗史方面均无差异;术前食管下括约肌(LES)压力和IRP在SG组高于FG组(41 vs 35mmHg, p=0.03和33 vs 26mmHg, p=0.002)。两组术后LES指标相似,但SG组(23mmHg, IQR:15-31)的∆-IRP高于FG组(14mmHg, IQR:9-17, p=0.0002)。在单变量分析中,年龄、LES术前压力、IRP和∆-IRP是能够预测阳性临床结果的因素。在多变量分析中,∆-IRP是唯一与临床成功独立相关的参数(p)结论:我们的数据表明,阈值为16.5mmHg的∆-IRP可以作为预测食管贲门失弛缓症患者LHD长期阳性结果的一种新的客观工具。
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
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
3.10%
发文量
319
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery is a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal that updates the surgeon on the latest developments in gastrointestinal surgery. The journal includes original articles on surgery of the digestive tract; gastrointestinal images; "How I Do It" articles, subject reviews, book reports, editorial columns, the SSAT Presidential Address, articles by a guest orator, symposia, letters, results of conferences and more. This is the official publication of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. The journal functions as an outstanding forum for continuing education in surgery and diseases of the gastrointestinal tract.
期刊最新文献
Colonic metastasis of primary lung adenocarcinoma. The First International Experience with Histotripsy: A Safety Analysis of 230 Cases. Recurrence Patterns and Prediction of Survival After Recurrence for Gallbladder Cancer. Perforated peptic ulcer: close or patch a century-old controversy. Calcified Pancreatic Cyst in a Woman Without History of Pancreatitis.
×
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:481959085
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