Background and Aims High-resolution manometry (HRM) is used to measure anal pressures in clinical practice but normal values have not been available. While rectal evacuation is assessed by the rectoanal gradient during simulated evacuation, there is substantial overlap between healthy people and defecatory disorders, and the effects of age are unknown. We evaluated the effects of age on anorectal pressures and rectal balloon expulsion in healthy women. Design Anorectal pressures (HRM), rectal sensation, and balloon expulsion time (BET) were evaluated in 62 asymptomatic women ranging in age from 21 to 80 years (median age 44 years) without risk factors for anorectal trauma. Thirty women were aged less than 50 years. Results Age is associated with lower (r = − 0.47, p < 0.01) anal resting [63[5] (≥50 y), 88[3] (<50 y)] but not squeeze pressures; higher rectal pressure and rectoanal gradient during simulated evacuation (r = 0.3, p < 0.05); and a shorter (r = −0.4, p < 0.01) rectal BET [17[9]s (≥50 y) vs 31[10]s (<50 y)]. Only 5 women had a prolonged (> 60 s) rectal BET but 52 had higher anal than rectal pressures (ie, negative gradient) during simulated evacuation. The gradient was more negative in younger (−41[6] mm Hg) than older (−12[6] mm Hg) women and negatively (r = −0.51, p <0.0001) correlated with rectal BET but only explained 16% of the variation in rectal BET. Conclusions These observations provide normal values for anorectal pressures by HRM. Increasing age is associated with lower anal resting pressure, a more positive rectoanal gradient during simulated evacuation, and a shorter BET in asymptomatic women. While the rectoanal gradient is negatively correlated with rectal BET, this gradient is negative even in a majority of asymptomatic women, undermining the utility of a negative gradient for diagnosing defecatory disorders by HRM.

The majority of patients with EGJOO and HE appear to have a benign clinical course similar to controls in the absence of specific treatment. However, the combination of abnormal IRP and DCI in both HE and EGJOO appears to discriminate an important subset of patients who may benefit from treatment. Further refinement of manometric criteria may therefore provide more useful clinical definitions of EGJOO and HE.

No abstract

Symptomatic oesophageal narrowing identified by barium oesophagography is common and under-recognised at endoscopy in patients with oesophageal eosinophilia.

EDS is likely under-recognized. A distinct endoscopic feature of EDS is "sloughing" strips of mucosa with parakeratosis and intraepithelial splitting being sine qua non histologic findings. The use of psychoactive agents (particularly a SSRI or SNRI) was prevalent at endoscopic diagnosis, although the clinical relevance of this is uncertain. EDS appears to be a benign, incidental finding without complications.

Background & Aims-Colonic motor disturbances in chronic constipation (CC) are heterogeneous and incompletely understood; the relationship between colonic transit and motor activity is unclear. We sought to characterize the phenotypic variability in chronic constipation.

Almost 6% of patients with proven AIP had a diagnosis of IBD, compared to a prevalence of approximately 0.4%-0.5% in the general population, potentially implying a 12-15-fold increase in risk. Patients with both AIP and IBD may have increased extent and severity of IBD. The finding of IgG4-positive cells on colon biopsy suggests that IBD may represent an extrapancreatic manifestation of AIP.

Background Enhanced characterization of esophageal peristaltic and sphincter function provided by esophageal pressure topography (EPT) offers a potential diagnostic advantage over conventional line tracings (CLT). However, high-resolution manometry (HRM) and EPT require increased equipment costs over conventional systems and evidence demonstrating a significant diagnostic advantage of EPT over CLT is limited. Our aim was to investigate whether the inter-rater agreement and/or accuracy of esophageal motility diagnosis differed between EPT and CLT. Methods Forty previously-completed patient HRM studies were selected for analysis using a customized software program developed to perform blinded independent interpretation in either EPT or CLT (six pressure sensors) format. Six experienced gastroenterologists with a clinical focus in esophageal disease (attendings) and six gastroenterology trainees with minimal manometry experience (fellows) from three academic centers interpreted each of the 40 studies using both EPT and CLT formats. Rater diagnoses were assessed for inter-rater agreement and diagnostic accuracy, both for exact diagnosis and for correct identification of a major esophageal motility disorder. Results The total group agreement was moderate (κ = 0.57; 95% CI 0.56–0.59) for EPT and fair (κ = 0.32; 0.30–0.33) for CLT. Inter-rater agreement between attendings was good (κ = 0.68; 0.65–0.71) for EPT and moderate (κ = 0.46; 0.43–0.50) for CLT. Inter-rater agreement between fellows was moderate (κ = 0.48; 0.45–0.50) for EPT and poor to fair (κ = 0.20; 0.17–0.24) for CLT. Among all raters, the odds of an incorrect exact esophageal motility diagnosis were 3.3 times higher with CLT assessment than with EPT (OR 3.3; 95% CI 2.4–4.5; p<0.0001) and the odds of incorrect identification of a major motility disorder were 3.4 times higher with CLT than EPT (OR 3.4; 2.4–5.0; p<0.0001). Conclusions Superior inter-rater agreement and diagnostic accuracy of esophageal motility diagnoses was demonstrated with analysis using EPT over CLT among our selected raters. Based on these findings, EPT may be the preferred assessment modality of esophageal motility.