Tu1610 - Comparison Between the Effect of Swallow Interval on Striated and Smooth Muscle Esophagus Peristalsis

Edeani, Francis O.; Sanvanson, Patrick; Kovačić, Karlo; Lynch, Shaina M.; Mei, Ling; Crumb, Chris; Kern, Mark; Shaker, Reza

doi:10.1016/s0016-5085(18)33254-2

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our understanding and classification of esophageal motility disorders have progressed alongside technological and pathophysiological advancements. A classification scheme predating the Chicago classification was first proposed at the end of the 20th century with the aim of standardizing manometric criteria for the abnormal esophageal motility patterns observed during low resolution manometry [5,6 ▪ ]. The Chicago classification emerged in the 21st century to systematize abnormal patterns identified using HRM and pressure topography visualization.…”

Section: Evolution Of the Chicago Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…HRM protocol update: CC v4.0 standardizes data acquisition and interpretation. It prescribes 10 primary and 5 secondary swallows, supports up to three sets of rapid swallows for abnormal responses [6 ▪ ,7], introduces rapid drinking challenge, and recommends solid meal/test swallows and postprandial impedance testing. Patient symptom reproduction and abnormal motility findings suggest an association between findings and symptoms.…”

Section: Key Changes In Chicago Classification Version 40mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Esophageal motility disorder – has Chicago classification v4.0 simplified our management?

Edeani,

Massey

2023

Current Opinion in Otolaryngology &Amp; Head &Amp; Neck Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Review purpose Addressing dysphagia is vital due to its prevalence and impact on healthcare expenditure. While high resolution manometry (HRM) effectively evaluates esophageal dysphagia, its role in oropharyngeal dysphagia and upper esophageal sphincter (UES) dysfunction remains debated. The fourth iteration of the Chicago classification (CC) offers an algorithmic approach for diagnosing abnormal motor patterns via HRM. This review assesses the CC's impact on dysphagia management. Recent insights The Chicago classification version 4.0 emphasizes auxiliary and provocative techniques when the algorithm falls short of a conclusive diagnosis. It introduces stricter criteria for previously ambiguous conditions like ineffective motility and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction. This version also introduces the concept of conclusive and inconclusive classifications based on symptoms, provocation maneuvers, and supportive testing minimizing ambiguity. Summary The Chicago classification v4.0 remains a useful tool for the diagnosis of well characterized esophageal motility disorders. However, major limitations include reliance on HRM and a focus on distal esophagus contractile characteristics without considering proximal esophagus or upper esophageal sphincter, both of which can sometimes be the only evident abnormality in patients with dysphagia. Despite efforts to reduce ambiguity, diagnostic challenges persist. These limitations can be addressed in future updates

show abstract

Section: Evolution Of the Chicago Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Key Changes In Chicago Classification Version 40mentioning

confidence: 99%