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.

A multidisciplinary team approach is essential for assessment and management because combined medical and oral problems are the most frequent cause of pediatric feeding problems. A significant relationship was found between the type of feeding problem and age. Infants born preterm and/or with a birthweight below the tenth percentile for gestational age are at greater risk for developing feeding disorders.

No abstract

Swallowing disorders (dysphagia) have been recognized by the WHO as a medical disability associated with increased morbidity, mortality and costs of care. With increasing survival rates and ageing of the population, swallowing disorders and their role in causing pulmonary and nutritional pathologies are becoming exceedingly important. Over the past two decades, the study of oropharyngeal dysphagia has been approached from various disciplines with considerable progress in understanding its pathophysiology. This Review describes the most frequent manifestations of oropharyngeal dysphagia and the clinical as well as instrumental techniques that are available to diagnose patients with dysphagia. However, the clinical value of these diagnostic tests and their sensitivity to predict outcomes is limited. Despite considerable clinical research efforts, conventional diagnostic methods for oropharyngeal dysphagia have limited proven accuracy in predicting aspiration and respiratory disease. We contend that incorporation of measurable objective assessments into clinical diagnosis is needed and might be key in developing novel therapeutic strategies.