Validation of secondary peristalsis classification using FLIP panometry in 741 subjects undergoing manometry

• Published in: Neurogastroenterology and motility Vol. 34; no. 1; pp. e14192 - n/a
• Main Authors: Carlson, Dustin A., Baumann, Alexandra J., Prescott, Jacqueline E., Donnan, Erica N., Yadlapati, Rena, Khan, Abraham, Gyawali, C Prakash, Kou, Wenjun, Kahrilas, Peter J., Pandolfino, John E.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.01.2022
• Subjects: Achalasia; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Classification; Contractility; Deglutition - physiology; Distension; dysphagia; endoscopy; Esophageal Motility Disorders - diagnosis; Esophageal Motility Disorders - physiopathology; Esophagogastric Junction - physiopathology; Esophagus; Esophagus - physiopathology; Female; Humans; impedance; Male; Manometry - methods; Middle Aged; Motility; Peristalsis; Peristalsis - physiology; Young Adult; dysphagia; endoscopy; impedance; achalasia
• ISSN: 1350-1925; 1365-2982; 1365-2982
• DOI: 10.1111/nmo.14192

Background and Aims This study aimed to systematically evaluate a classification scheme of secondary peristalsis using functional luminal imaging probe (FLIP) panometry through comparison with primary peristalsis on high‐resolution manometry (HRM). Methods 706 adult patients that completed FLIP and HRM for primary esophageal motility evaluation and 35 asymptomatic volunteers (“controls”) were included. Secondary peristalsis, that is, contractile responses (CRs), was classified on FLIP panometry by the presence and pattern of contractility as normal (NCR), borderline (BCR), impaired/disordered (IDCR), absent (ACR), or spastic‐reactive (SRCR). Primary peristalsis on HRM was assessed according to the Chicago Classification. Results All 35 of the controls had antegrade contractions on FLIP panometry with either NCR (89%) or BCR (11%). The average percentages of normal swallows on HRM varied across contractile response patterns from 84% in NCR, 68% in BCR, 39% in IDCR, to 11% in ACR, as did the percentage of failed swallows on HRM: 4% in NCR, 12% in BCR, 36% in IDCR, and 79% in ACR. SRCR on FLIP panometry was observed in 18/57 (32%) patients with type III achalasia, 4/15 (27%) with distal esophageal spasm, and 7/15 (47%) with hypercontractile esophagus on HRM. Conclusions The FLIP panometry contractile response patterns reflect a pathophysiologic transition from normal to abnormal esophageal peristaltic function with shared features with primary peristaltic function/dysfunction on HRM. Thus, these patterns of the contractile response to distension can facilitate the evaluation of esophageal motility using FLIP panometry. This study of 706 patients demonstrated that the patterns of the contractile response to distension (ie, secondary peristalsis) on FLIP panometry shared features with primary peristalsis assessed with high‐resolution manometry (HRM).