Background The Chicago Classification (CC) of esophageal motility disorders, utilizing an algorithmic scheme to analyze clinical high-resolution manometry (HRM) studies, has gained acceptance worldwide. Purpose This 2014 update, CC v3.0, developed by the International HRM Working Group, incorporated the extensive clinical experience and interval publications since the prior (2011) version. Key results CC v3.0 utilizes a hierarchical approach, sequentially prioritizing: 1) disorders of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow (achalasia subtypes I–III and EGJ outflow obstruction), 2) major disorders of peristalsis (absent contractility, distal esophageal spasm, hypercontractile esophagus), and 3) minor disorders of peristalsis characterized by impaired bolus transit. EGJ morphology, characterized by the degree of overlap between the lower esophageal sphincter and the crural diaphragm and baseline EGJ contractility are also part of CC v3.0. Compared to the previous CC version, the key metrics of interpretation, the integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), the distal contractile integral (DCI), and the distal latency (DL) remain unchanged, albeit with much more emphasis on DCI for defining both hypo- and hypercontractility. New in CC v3.0 are: 1) the evaluation of the EGJ at rest defined in terms of morphology and contractility, 2) ‘fragmented’ contractions (large breaks in the 20-mmHg isobaric contour), 3) ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), and 4) several minor adjustments in nomenclature and defining criteria. Absent in CC v3.0 are contractile front velocity (CFV) and small breaks in the 20-mmHg isobaric contour as defining characteristics. Conclusion CC v3.0 is an updated analysis scheme for clinical esophageal HRM recordings developed by the International HRM Working Group.
Clinical history, questionnaire data and response to antisecretory therapy are insufficient to make a conclusive diagnosis of GERD in isolation, but are of value in determining need for further investigation. Conclusive evidence for reflux on oesophageal testing include advanced grade erosive oesophagitis (LA grades C and D), long-segment Barrett’s mucosa or peptic strictures on endoscopy or distal oesophageal acid exposure time (AET) >6% on ambulatory pH or pH-impedance monitoring. A normal endoscopy does not exclude GERD, but provides supportive evidence refuting GERD in conjunction with distal AET <4% and <40 reflux episodes on pH-impedance monitoring off proton pump inhibitors. Reflux-symptom association on ambulatory reflux monitoring provides supportive evidence for reflux triggered symptoms, and may predict a better treatment outcome when present. When endoscopy and pH or pH-impedance monitoring are inconclusive, adjunctive evidence from biopsy findings (histopathology scores, dilated intercellular spaces), motor evaluation (hypotensive lower oesophageal sphincter, hiatus hernia and oesophageal body hypomotility on high-resolution manometry) and novel impedance metrics (baseline impedance, postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index) can add confidence for a GERD diagnosis; however, diagnosis cannot be based on these findings alone. An assessment of anatomy, motor function, reflux burden and symptomatic phenotype will therefore help direct management. Future GERD management strategies should focus on defining individual patient phenotypes based on the level of refluxate exposure, mechanism of reflux, efficacy of clearance, underlying anatomy of the oesophagogastric junction and psychometrics defining symptomatic presentations.
Background The Chicago Classification of esophageal motility was developed to facilitate the interpretation of clinical high resolution esophageal pressure topography (EPT) studies, concurrent with the widespread adoption of this technology into clinical practice. The Chicago Classification has been, and will continue to be, an evolutionary process, molded first by published evidence pertinent to the clinical interpretation of high resolution manometry (HRM) studies and secondarily by group experience when suitable evidence is lacking. Methods This publication summarizes the state of our knowledge as of the most recent meeting of the International High Resolution Manometry Working Group in Ascona, Switzerland in April 2011. The prior iteration of the Chicago Classification was updated through a process of literature analysis and discussion. Key Results The major changes in this document from the prior iteration are largely attributable to research studies published since the prior iteration, in many cases research conducted in response to prior deliberations of the International High Resolution Manometry Working Group. The classification now includes criteria for subtyping achalasia, EGJ outflow obstruction, motility disorders not observed in normal subjects (Distal esophageal spasm, Hypercontractile esophagus, and Absent peristalsis), and statistically defined peristaltic abnormalities (Weak peristalsis, Frequent failed peristalsis, Rapid contractions with normal latency, and Hypertensive peristalsis). Conclusions & Inferences The Chicago Classification is an algorithmic scheme for diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders from clinical EPT studies. Moving forward, we anticipate continuing this process with increased emphasis placed on natural history studies and outcome data based on the classification.
Chicago Classification v4.0 (CCv4.0) is the updated classification scheme for esophageal motility disorders using metrics from high‐resolution manometry (HRM). Fifty‐two diverse international experts separated into seven working subgroups utilized formal validated methodologies over two‐years to develop CCv4.0. Key updates in CCv.4.0 consist of a more rigorous and expansive HRM protocol that incorporates supine and upright test positions as well as provocative testing, a refined definition of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow obstruction (EGJOO), more stringent diagnostic criteria for ineffective esophageal motility and description of baseline EGJ metrics. Further, the CCv4.0 sought to define motility disorder diagnoses as conclusive and inconclusive based on associated symptoms, and findings on provocative testing as well as supportive testing with barium esophagram with tablet and/or functional lumen imaging probe. These changes attempt to minimize ambiguity in prior iterations of Chicago Classification and provide more standardized and rigorous criteria for patterns of disorders of peristalsis and obstruction at the EGJ.
The consensus group determined that grade C or D esophagitis, peptic stricture, histology proven Barrett's mucosa >1 cm, and esophageal acid exposure greater >6% are sufficient to define pathological GERD. Further testing should be considered when none of these criteria are fulfilled.
Since publication of Chicago Classification version 3.0 in 2015, the clinical and research applications of high‐resolution manometry (HRM) have expanded. In order to update the Chicago Classification, an International HRM Working Group consisting of 52 diverse experts worked for two years and utilized formally validated methodologies. Compared with the prior iteration, there are four key modifications in Chicago Classification version 4.0 (CCv4.0). First, further manometric and non‐manometric evaluation is required to arrive at a conclusive, actionable diagnosis of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow obstruction (EGJOO). Second, EGJOO, distal esophageal spasm, and hypercontractile esophagus are three manometric patterns that must be accompanied by obstructive esophageal symptoms of dysphagia and/or non‐cardiac chest pain to be considered clinically relevant. Third, the standardized manometric protocol should ideally include supine and upright positions as well as additional manometric maneuvers such as the multiple rapid swallows and rapid drink challenge. Solid test swallows, postprandial testing, and pharmacologic provocation can also be considered for particular conditions. Finally, the definition of ineffective esophageal motility is more stringent and now encompasses fragmented peristalsis. Hence, CCv4.0 no longer distinguishes between major versus minor motility disorders but simply separates disorders of EGJ outflow from disorders of peristalsis.
High-resolution manometry capable of pressure monitoring from the pharynx to the stomach together with pressure topography plotting represents an unquestionable evolution in oesophageal manometry. However, with this advanced technology come challenges and one of those is devising the optimal scheme to apply high-resolution oesophageal pressure topography (HROPT) to the clinical evaluation of patients. The first iteration of the Chicago classification was based on a systematic analysis of motility patterns in 75 control subjects and 400 consecutive patients. This review summarizes the analysis process as it has evolved. Individual swallows are analysed in a stepwise fashion for the morphology of the oesophagogastric junction (OGJ), the extent of OGJ relaxation, the propagation velocity of peristalsis, the vigour of the peristaltic contraction, and abnormalities of intrabolus pressure utilizing metrics that have now been customized to HROPT. These results are then synthesized into a comprehensive diagnosis that, although based on conventional manometry criteria, is also customized to HROPT measures. The resultant classification objectifies the identification of three unique subtypes of achalasia. Additionally, it provides enhanced detail in the description of distal oesophageal spasm, nutcracker oesophagus subtypes, and OGJ obstruction. It is our expectation that modification of this classification scheme will continue to occur and this should further clarify the utility of pressure topography plotting in assessing oesophageal motility disorders.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.