ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The most recent Chicago Classification expanded the criteria for diagnosis of jackhammer esophagus (JHE) to include the distal contractile integral (DCI) of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). The clinical impact of the manometric inclusion of LES hypercontractility remains unclear. We aimed to analyze the clinical features and long-term outcomes of measured LES-dependent (LD-JHE) and LES-independent (LI-JHE) jackhammer esophagus. METHODS: Patients meeting diagnostic criteria for JHE were identified at two academic medical centers. High-resolution esophageal manometry data were re-analyzed with inclusion and exclusion of the LES DCI. LD-JHE was defined by falling outside JHE diagnostic criteria with exclusion of the LES. A telephone survey was conducted for follow-up utilizing the impact dysphagia (IDQ-10) questionnaire. KEY RESULTS: Eighty-one patients met study inclusion criteria, with 12 (14.8%) classified as LD-JHE. LD-JHE patients had a significantly lower mean DCI and fewer swallows with DCI >8000 mm Hg-s-cm. Basal LES pressure was higher in patients with dysphagia to solids than those with dysphagia to solids and liquids. Clinical and manometric parameters were otherwise similar between groups. Sixty-six patients had clinical or phone follow-up at a median of 46.6 months. Forty-one patients (62.1%) received therapies directed at JHE. There was no difference in symptom improvement for treated vs untreated patients or for JHE subtype. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: Our findings suggest that LD-JHE and LI-JHE are clinically indistinguishable and thus support existing diagnostic criteria. Furthermore, our long-term follow-up data suggest that JHE, irrespective of LES involvement, may improve without treatment. Further study is needed to clarify which patients merit therapeutic intervention.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Motility Disorders/diagnosis , Esophageal Sphincter, Lower/physiopathology , Adult , Esophageal Motility Disorders/classification , Female , Humans , Male , Manometry/methods , Middle Aged , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Split dose bowel preparations (SDP) have superior outcomes for colonoscopy as compared to evening before regimens. However, the association of the actual volume of the SDP to colonoscopy outcome measures has not been well studied. AIMS: Compare adenoma detection rate (ADR), sessile serrated polyp detection rate (SDR), mean bowel cleanse score, and predictors of inadequate exams between small volume SDP and large volume SDP. METHODS: We have conducted a retrospective study in patients undergoing colonoscopy with small volume SDP versus large volume SDP between July 2014 and December 2014. Basic demographics (age, gender and BMI) along with clinical co-morbidities were recorded. Quality of the bowel preparation, ADR and SDR was compared between these groups. Univariate and multivariable logistic regressions were used to assess the determinants of inadequate exams in each group. RESULTS: 1573 patients with split dose preparation were included in this retrospective study. 58.4% (920/1573) patients took small volume SDP. There was no difference in ADR (37.9 vs. 38.8%, p = 0.2); however, SDR was higher for small volume SDP compared to large volume SDP (11.9 vs. 7.9% p = 0.005). There was no difference in the rate of inadequate exams between the two groups (p = 0.7). A history of diabetes and constipation was associated with inadequate exams only in the small volume SDP. CONCLUSIONS: SDR was higher in small volume SDP. There was no difference in rate of inadequate exams between the two groups. A history of diabetes and constipation was associated with inadequate exams only in patients with the small volume SDP.
