{"title":"与高分辨率测压不成功相关的风险因素","authors":"Vishesh V Patel, David E Reed, David M Rodrigues","doi":"10.1007/s00455-024-10684-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>High-resolution manometry (HRM) is used to evaluate the esophageal motor function. Unfortunately, there are times when testing cannot be performed accurately. Our study aimed to quantify the occurrence of failed HRM and identify the associated risk factors. HRM tests were retrospectively collected between September 2021 and August 2022. HRM reports that could not be interpreted based on standard HRM protocol as per Chicago guidelines were classified as failed tests. Information reviewed included testing indications, patient demographics, previous medical/symptom history, and follow-up testing for failed HRM. We then compared patients with successful vs. unsuccessful HRM based on our pre-specified factors. 152 HRM tests were performed, of which 28 tests (18%) were unsuccessful. Factors associated with failed manometry included a history of nausea/vomiting, dyspepsia, and achalasia. Patients who were unable to tolerate the probe during testing were more likely to have a history of dyspepsia (OR 20.3, p = < 0.001) and/or nausea/vomiting (OR 13.8, p = < 0.001). A history of achalasia was found to have an odds ratio of 13.2 when examining failure because of curling of the manometry catheter (p = 0.012). All seven patients who had repeat HRM with endoscopic placement were successful in obtaining diagnostic information. There are two groups that have risk factors for unsuccessful HRM testing. A history of nausea/vomiting and dyspepsia symptoms were associated with being unable to tolerate the manometry probe. The second group comprises patients with a history of achalasia in whom probe curling is more common. Future research targeting these risk factors may minimize diagnostic and treatment delays.</p>","PeriodicalId":11508,"journal":{"name":"Dysphagia","volume":" ","pages":"1071-1077"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk Factors Associated with Unsuccessful High-Resolution Manometry.\",\"authors\":\"Vishesh V Patel, David E Reed, David M Rodrigues\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00455-024-10684-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>High-resolution manometry (HRM) is used to evaluate the esophageal motor function. Unfortunately, there are times when testing cannot be performed accurately. Our study aimed to quantify the occurrence of failed HRM and identify the associated risk factors. HRM tests were retrospectively collected between September 2021 and August 2022. HRM reports that could not be interpreted based on standard HRM protocol as per Chicago guidelines were classified as failed tests. Information reviewed included testing indications, patient demographics, previous medical/symptom history, and follow-up testing for failed HRM. We then compared patients with successful vs. unsuccessful HRM based on our pre-specified factors. 152 HRM tests were performed, of which 28 tests (18%) were unsuccessful. Factors associated with failed manometry included a history of nausea/vomiting, dyspepsia, and achalasia. Patients who were unable to tolerate the probe during testing were more likely to have a history of dyspepsia (OR 20.3, p = < 0.001) and/or nausea/vomiting (OR 13.8, p = < 0.001). A history of achalasia was found to have an odds ratio of 13.2 when examining failure because of curling of the manometry catheter (p = 0.012). All seven patients who had repeat HRM with endoscopic placement were successful in obtaining diagnostic information. There are two groups that have risk factors for unsuccessful HRM testing. A history of nausea/vomiting and dyspepsia symptoms were associated with being unable to tolerate the manometry probe. The second group comprises patients with a history of achalasia in whom probe curling is more common. Future research targeting these risk factors may minimize diagnostic and treatment delays.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dysphagia\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1071-1077\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dysphagia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-024-10684-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dysphagia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-024-10684-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Risk Factors Associated with Unsuccessful High-Resolution Manometry.
High-resolution manometry (HRM) is used to evaluate the esophageal motor function. Unfortunately, there are times when testing cannot be performed accurately. Our study aimed to quantify the occurrence of failed HRM and identify the associated risk factors. HRM tests were retrospectively collected between September 2021 and August 2022. HRM reports that could not be interpreted based on standard HRM protocol as per Chicago guidelines were classified as failed tests. Information reviewed included testing indications, patient demographics, previous medical/symptom history, and follow-up testing for failed HRM. We then compared patients with successful vs. unsuccessful HRM based on our pre-specified factors. 152 HRM tests were performed, of which 28 tests (18%) were unsuccessful. Factors associated with failed manometry included a history of nausea/vomiting, dyspepsia, and achalasia. Patients who were unable to tolerate the probe during testing were more likely to have a history of dyspepsia (OR 20.3, p = < 0.001) and/or nausea/vomiting (OR 13.8, p = < 0.001). A history of achalasia was found to have an odds ratio of 13.2 when examining failure because of curling of the manometry catheter (p = 0.012). All seven patients who had repeat HRM with endoscopic placement were successful in obtaining diagnostic information. There are two groups that have risk factors for unsuccessful HRM testing. A history of nausea/vomiting and dyspepsia symptoms were associated with being unable to tolerate the manometry probe. The second group comprises patients with a history of achalasia in whom probe curling is more common. Future research targeting these risk factors may minimize diagnostic and treatment delays.
期刊介绍:
Dysphagia aims to serve as a voice for the benefit of the patient. The journal is devoted exclusively to swallowing and its disorders. The purpose of the journal is to provide a source of information to the flourishing dysphagia community. Over the past years, the field of dysphagia has grown rapidly, and the community of dysphagia researchers have galvanized with ambition to represent dysphagia patients. In addition to covering a myriad of disciplines in medicine and speech pathology, the following topics are also covered, but are not limited to: bio-engineering, deglutition, esophageal motility, immunology, and neuro-gastroenterology. The journal aims to foster a growing need for further dysphagia investigation, to disseminate knowledge through research, and to stimulate communication among interested professionals. The journal publishes original papers, technical and instrumental notes, letters to the editor, and review articles.