THE PREVALENCE OF ESOPHAGEAL MOTILITY DISORDERS BASED ON CHICAGO 4.0 CLASSIFICATION IN PATIENTS WITH UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL SYMPTOMS

Việt Hằng Đào, Thị Minh Huế Lưu, Duy Thắng Nguyễn

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objective: Describe the distribution of motility disorders (MDs) according to the Chicago 4.0 classification on high resolution manometry (HRM) in patients with upper gastrointestinal (UGI) symptoms. Subjects and methods: Our study used retrospective data on patients who had UGI symptoms and underwent HRM at Hoang Long Clinic - Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology between September 2020 and February 2023. MDs are diagnosed based on the Chicago 4.0 criteria. Results: 2219 patients met the criteria, 4.1% had a diagnosis of GERD based on endoscopy results and 24-hour esophageal impedance pH measurement. Among patients presented with UGI symptoms, 42.2% had MDs, of which IEM was the most common (36.1%), achalasia had a low prevalence (2.3%). The prevalence of IEM tended to be higher in the GERD group than in the group with upper gastrointestinal symptoms (46.2% vs 36.1%). The prevalence of achalasia and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction were 3.8% and 3.5% in patients with dysphagia and those with typical symptoms of GERD. Conclusion: Motility disorders are common in patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms, of which IEM is the most common disorder.

Article Details

References

1. Lin, S., H. Li, and X. Fang, Esophageal Motor Dysfunctions in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Therapeutic Perspectives. J Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2019. 25(4): p. 499-507.
2. Katz, P.O., et al., ACG Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease. Am J Gastroenterol, 2022. 117(1): p. 27-56.
3. Yadlapati, R., et al., Esophageal motility disorders on high-resolution manometry: Chicago classification version 4.0(©). Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2021. 33(1): p. e14058.
4. Low, E.X.S., et al., A Comparison between Chicago Classification Versions 3.0 and 4.0 and Their Impact on Manometric Diagnoses in Esophageal High-Resolution Manometry Cases. Diagnostics (Basel), 2024. 14(3).
5. Pandolfino, J.E. and A.J. Gawron, Achalasia: a systematic review. Jama, 2015. 313(18): p. 1841-52.
6. Oude Nijhuis, R.A.B., et al., European guidelines on achalasia: United European Gastroenterology and European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility recommendations. United European Gastroenterol J, 2020. 8(1): p. 13-33.
7. Khoudari, G., et al., 463 The Prevalence and Epidemiology of Achalasia in the USA: A Population-Based Study. Official journal of the American College of Gastroenterology | ACG, 2019. 114.
8. Gorti, H., et al., Distal esophageal spasm: Update on diagnosis and management in the era of high-resolution manometry. World J Clin Cases, 2020. 8(6): p. 1026-1032.
9. Beveridge, C. and K. Lynch, Diagnosis and Management of Esophagogastric Junction Outflow Obstruction. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y), 2020. 16(3): p. 131-138.