Background The functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP), measures esophagogastric junction (EGJ) distensibility (cross sectional area/luminal pressure) during volume-controlled distension. The aim of this study was to apply this tool to the assessment of the EGJ in untreated and treated achalasia patients and to compare EGJ distensibility with other diagnostic tools utilized in managing achalasia. Methods Findings from FLIP, high-resolution manometry (HRM), timed barium esophagram, and symptom assessment by Eckardt Score (ES) were compared in 54 achalasia patients (23 untreated, 31 treated). Twenty healthy volunteers underwent FLIP as a comparator group. The EGJ distensibility index (EGJ-DI) was defined at the ‘waist’ of the FLIP bag during volumetric distension, expressed in mm2/mmHg. The ES was used to gauge treatment outcome: good response < 3 or poor response ≥ 3. Key Results Of the 31 treated patients, 17 had good and 14 poor treatment response. The EGJ-DI was significantly different among groups, greatest in the control subjects and least in the untreated patients; patients with good treatment response had significantly greater EGJ-DI than untreated or patients with poor response. The correlations between EGJ-DI and ES and integrated relaxation pressure on HRM were significant. Conclusion The FLIP provided a useful measure of EGJ distensibility in achalasia patients that correlated with symptom severity. The measurement of EGJ distensibility was complementary to existing tests suggesting a potentially important role in the clinical management of achalasia.

Background & Aims We compared findings from timed barium esophagrams (TBEs) and esophageal pressure topography (EPT) studies among achalasia subtypes and in relation to symptom severity. Method We analyzed data from 50 patients with achalasia (31 male, 20–79 years old) who underwent high-resolution manometry (HRM), had TBE following a 200ml barium swallow, and completed questionnaires that determine Eckardt Scores (ES). Twenty-five were not treated and 25 were treated (11 by pneumatic dilation, 14 by myotomy). Non-parametric testing was used to assess differences among groups of treated patients (10 had type-1 achalasia and 15 had type-2 achalasia), and the Pearson correlation was used to assess their relationship. Results There were no significant differences in TBE measurements between patient groups. Of the 25 patients who received treatment, 10 had a manometric pattern consistent with persistent achalasia after treatment (6 with type 1 and 4 with type 2 achalasia), whereas 15 appeared to have resolved the achalasia pattern (peristalsis was absent in 8 and weak in 7). The height of the barium column at 5 minutes and ES were significantly reduced in patients that had resolved their achalasia pattern, based on HRM. The integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) and the TBE column height correlated at 5 minutes (r=0.422; p<0.05). Discussion Patients that resolve their achalasia pattern, based on HRM, demonstrated improved emptying based on TBE measurements and improved symptom scores. There was no significant difference between patients with type-1 or 2 achalasia in TBEs. These findings indicate that normalization of the IRP on HRM is a clinically relevant objective of treatment for achalasia.

Background Recent studies have shown that Gaviscon Double Action Liquid (a combination alginate-antacid) administered postprandially co-localizes with the acid pocket, the ‘reservoir’ for postprandial acid reflux. Aim This study compared the effectiveness of Gaviscon Double Action Liquid to an equivalent strength antacid without alginate in controlling postprandial acid reflux in GERD patients. Methods 14 GERD patients undertook two 3.5-hour high-resolution manometry/pH-impedance studies during which they ate a standardized meal. In a double-blinded randomized crossover design they then took Gaviscon or CVS brand antacid, each with ~18 mmol/l acid neutralizing capacity. The primary outcome was distal esophageal acid exposure; secondary outcomes were number of reflux events, proximal extent of reflux, nadir pH of the refluxate, mechanism of reflux, and reflux symptoms scored with a validated instrument. Results 10 patients completed the study. Gaviscon studies had significantly less distal esophageal acid exposure and greater nadir refluxate pH in the 30–150 minute postprandial period than antacid studies. There were no differences in the number of reflux events (acid or weakly acidic) or the number of proximal reflux events (15–17 cm above the LES) with either study medication. Conclusions Gaviscon Double Action Liquid was more effective than an antacid without alginate in controlling postprandial esophageal acid exposure. However, the number and spatial distribution of reflux events within the esophagus were similar. This suggests that Gaviscon main effectiveness related to its co-localization with and displacement/neutralization of the post-prandial acid pocket, rather than preventing reflux.

No abstract