Upper esophageal sphincter abnormalities on high-resolution esophageal manometry and treatment response of type II achalasia

Table 6 Comparisons of high-resolution esophageal manometry results between pretreatment and posttreatment

HREM results	Pretreatment	Posttreatment	P value
UES restP (mmHg; mean ± SD)	68.08 ± 47.90	48.75 ± 27.30	0.674
UES RP (mmHg; mean ± SD)	11.18 ± 7.93	5.35 ± 4.77	0.036a
LES restP (mmHg; mean ± SD)	41.91± 9.20	26.18 ± 13.08	0.017a
LES IRP (mmHg; mean ± SD)	38.94 ± 10.28	16.71 ± 5.65	0.012a
Failed swallow [n (%)]	8 (100.00)	8 (100.00)	1.000
Panesophageal pressurization [n (%)]	8 (100.00)	3 (37.50)	0.038a
Early contraction [n (%)]	1 (12.50)	1 (12.50)	1.000
Rapid contraction [n (%)]	1 (12.50)	0 (0.00)	0.721
Small-break [n (%)]	0 (0.00)	1 (12.50)	0.721
Large-break [n (%)]	0 (0.00)	1 (12.50)	0.721

Level significance is indicated as follows:

^aP < 0.05. LES: Lower esophageal sphincter; UES: Upper esophageal sphincter; restP: Mean resting pressure; IRP: Integrated relaxation pressure; RP: Residual pressure; HREM: High-resolution esophageal manometry.