Rapid Communication
Copyright ©2008 The WJG Press and Baishideng. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Jun 21, 2008; 14(23): 3719-3724
Published online Jun 21, 2008. doi: 10.3748/wjg.14.3719
Ineffective oesophageal motility: Manometric subsets exhibit different symptom profiles
Horst Gunter Haack, Ross David Hansen, Allison Malcolm, John Edward Kellow
Horst Gunter Haack, Ross David Hansen, Allison Malcolm, John Edward Kellow, Department of Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Investigation Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, University of Sydney, Australia
Author contributions: Haack HG performed research and data analysis; Hansen RD performed conceptual, data and statistical analysis and wrote the paper; Malcolm A discussed the conceptual aspects and the data analysis; Kellow JE designed conceptual aspects, discussed data and statistical analysis and wrote the paper.
Correspondence to: John E Kellow, MD, Department of Gastroenterology, Royal North Shore Hospital, St. Leonards, NSW 2065, Australia. johnk@med.usyd.edu.au
Telephone: +61-2-99267355
Fax: +61-2-94363719
Received: November 7, 2007
Revised: May 19, 2008
Accepted: May 26, 2008
Published online: June 21, 2008
Abstract

AIM: To compare the demographic and clinical features of different manometric subsets of ineffective oesophageal motility (IOM; defined as ≥ 30% wet swallows with distal contractile amplitude < 30 mmHg), and to determine whether the prevalence of gastro-oesophageal reflux differs between IOM subsets.

METHODS: Clinical characteristics of manometric subsets were determined in 100 IOM patients (73 female, median age 58 years) and compared to those of 100 age-and gender-matched patient controls with oesophageal symptoms, but normal manometry. Supine oesophageal manometry was performed with an eight-channel DentSleeve water-perfused catheter, and an ambulatory pH study assessed gastro-oesophageal reflux.

RESULTS: Patients in the IOM subset featuring a majority of low-amplitude simultaneous contractions (LASC) experienced less heartburn (prevalence 26%), but more dysphagia (57%) than those in the IOM subset featuring low-amplitude propagated contractions (LAP; heartburn 70%, dysphagia 24%; both P≤ 0.01). LASC patients also experienced less heartburn and more dysphagia than patient controls (heartburn 68%, dysphagia 11%; both P < 0.001). The prevalence of heartburn and dysphagia in IOM patients featuring a majority of non-transmitted sequences (NT) was 54% (P = 0.04 vs LASC) and 36% (P < 0.01 vs controls), respectively. No differences in age and gender distribution, chest pain prevalence, acid exposure time (AET) and symptom/reflux association existed between IOM subsets, or between subsets and controls.

CONCLUSION: IOM patients with LASC exhibit a different symptom profile to those with LAP, but do not differ in gastro-oesophageal reflux prevalence. These findings raise the possibility of different pathophysiological mechanisms in IOM subsets, which warrants further investigation.

Keywords: Age, Dysphagia, Heartburn, Ineffective oesophageal motility, Oesophageal manometry, Simultaneous contractions