Study of etiology and esophageal motility characteristics of esophagogastric junction outlet obstruction patients

  • Kun WANG ,
  • Zhi-jie XU ,
  • Ying GE ,
  • Zhi-wei XIA ,
  • Li-ping DUAN
Expand
  • Department of Gastroenterology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China

Received date: 2020-02-11

  Online published: 2020-10-15

Abstract

Objective: To analyze the causes of the esophagogastric junction outlet obstruction (EGJOO) patients, to discuss the differences of the clinical manifestation and esophageal motility characteristics between the anatomic EGJOO (A-EGJOO) and functional EGJOO (F-EGJOO) subgroups, and to search the diagnostic values of the specific metrics for differentiating the subgroups of EGJOO patients. Methods: For the current retrospective study, all the patients who underwent the esophageal high resonance manometry test were retrospectively analyzed from Jan 2012 to Oct 2018 in Peking University Third Hospital. The EGJOO patients were enrolled in the following research. The clinical characteristics, such as symptoms and causes of the patients were studied. Then the patients were divided into two subgroups as A-EGJOO subgroup and F-EGJOO subgroup. The clinical symptoms and the main manometry metrics were compared between these two subgroups. The significant different metrics between the two groups were selected to draw receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the diagnostic values were analyzed in differentiating the A-EGJOO and F-EGJOO subgroups. Results: The most common symptom of EGJOO was chest pain or chest discomfort (30.63%), then the dysphagia (29.73%), and acid regurgitation/heartburn (27.03%). Non-erosive reflux disease (36.04%) was the most popular cause for EGJOO, then the reflux esophagitis (17.12%). Besides the intra-EGJOO and extra-EGJOO lesions, the connective tissue disease (6.31%) and central nervous diseases (2.70%) were found to be the etiology of EGJOO. The causes of the rest 19 EGJOO were unknown. A-EGJOO patients presented significantly higher intra bolus pressure (IBP) than that of F-EGJOO [6.80 (5.20, 9.20) mmHg vs. 5.10 (3.10, 7.60) mmHg, P=0.016]. The area under curve of IBP was 0.637. When IBP≥5.15 mmHg, the sensitivity was 78.60% and specificity 50.70% to differentiate A- or F-EGJOO. Conclusion: Chest pain or chest discomfort was the most common symptom in EGJOO patients. Besides the intraluminal structural disorders, the extra-luminal causes were found in EGJOO patients. A-EGJOO presented higher IBP than that of F-EGJOO patients. The cutoff value of IBP to differentiate A-EGJOO from EGJOO was 5.15 mmHg with sensitivity 78.06% and specificity 50.70%. However for the low area under curve, the diagnostic value of IBP was limited.

Cite this article

Kun WANG , Zhi-jie XU , Ying GE , Zhi-wei XIA , Li-ping DUAN . Study of etiology and esophageal motility characteristics of esophagogastric junction outlet obstruction patients[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2020 , 52(5) : 828 -835 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2020.05.006

References

[1] Kahrilas PJ, Bredenoord AJ, Fox M, et al. The Chicago classification of esophageal motility disorder, v3.0[J]. Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2015,27(2):160-174.
[2] Clayton SB, Patel R, Richter JE. Functional and anatomic eso-phagogastic junction outflow obstruction: Manometry, timed barium esophagram findings, and treatment outcomes[J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2016,14(6):907-911.
[3] Shin IS, Min YW, Rhee PL. Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction transformed to type Ⅱ achalasia[J]. J Neurogastorne-terol Motil, 2016,22(2):344-345.
[4] Ihara E, Muta K, Fukaura K, et al. Diagnosis and treatment strategy of Achalasia subtypes and esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction based on high-resolution manometry[J]. Digestion, 2017,95(1):29-35.
[5] Kim HP, Vance RB, Shaheen NJ, et al. The prevalence and diagnostic utility of endoscopic features of eosinophilic esophagitis: A meta-analysis[J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2012,10(9):988-996.
[6] Armstrong D, Bennett JR, Blum AL, et al. The endoscopic assessment of esophagitis: a progress report on observer agreement[J]. Gastroenterology, 1996,111(1):85-92.
[7] Zerbib F, Des Varannea SB, Roman S, et al. Normal values and day-to-day variability of 24-h-ambulatory oesophageal impedance pH monitoring in a Belgian-French cohort of healthy subjects[J]. Aliment Pha rmacol Ther, 2005,22(10):1011-1021.
[8] Samo S, Qayed E. Esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction: Where are we now in diagnosis and management?[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2019,25(4):411-417.
[9] Pérez-Fernández MT, Santander C, Marinero A, et al. Characte-rization and follow-up of esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction detected by high resolution manometry[J]. Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2016,28(1):116-126.
[10] Schupack D, Katzka DA, Geno DM, et al. The clinical significance of esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction and hypercontractile esophagus in high resolution esophageal manometry[J]. Neruogastroenterol Motil, 2017,29(10):1-9.
[11] Ong AML, Namasivayam V, Wang YT. Evaluation of symptomatic esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction[J]. J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2018,33(10):1745-1750.
[12] Gyawali CP, Kushnir VM. High-resolution manometric characte-ristics help differentiate types of distal esophageal obstruction in patients with peristalsis[J]. Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2011,23(6):502-508, e197.
[13] 王琨, 段丽萍, 夏志伟, 等. 基于高分辨食管压力测定及阻抗-pH监测的难治性烧心患者食管动力特点[J]. 中华医学杂志, 2014,94(34):2650-2655.
Outlines

/