“…We also suggested several explanations for the results that were not in accordance with those of previous studies reporting the advantages of HRM over conventional manometry in diagnostic accuracy. 9,17 First, according to the Chicago classification version 3.0, the number of disease entities with the HRPT format was greater than that in the CLT format (9 vs 6) in the present study. Second, providing the manometry data as captured images from 10 significant swallows with calculated essential metrics, including IRP, DCI, DL, and CFV for the HRPT format and baseline and residual LES pressures, onset velocity and distal contractile amplitude for the CLT format may have facilitated the interpretation of the manometry data, especially in the CLT format.…”