Dataset Information

Motility Patterns Following Esophageal Pharmacologic Provocation With Amyl Nitrite or Cholecystokinin During High-Resolution Manometry Distinguish Idiopathic vs Opioid-Induced Type 3 Achalasia.

ABSTRACT:

Background & aims

In some patients, the type 3 achalasia (A3) motor pattern may be an effect of chronic use of high-dose opioids. No motor findings have been identified to differentiate opioid-induced A3 (OA3) from idiopathic A3 (IA3). We investigated whether OA3 could be distinguished from IA3 on the basis of differences in esophageal motor responses to amyl nitrite, cholecystokinin, or atropine.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study of patients who received pharmacologic provocation during esophageal high-resolution manometry from 2007 through 2017 at a tertiary referral center. We identified 26 patients with IA3 (9 women; mean age, 68 ± 13 years) and 24 patients with OA3 (15 women; mean age, 59 ± 10 years). We compared pressure topography metrics during deglutition and after administration of amyl nitrite, cholecystokinin, or atropine between patients with OA3 vs IA3.

Results

Amyl nitrite induced a similar relaxation response in both groups, but the rebound contraction of the lower esophageal sphincter during amyl nitrite recovery, and the paradoxical esophageal contraction during the first phase of cholecystokinin response, were both significantly attenuated in patients with OA3. The second phase of cholecystokinin response in patients with OA3 was 100% relaxation, when present, in contrast to only 26% of patients with IA3. There was no significant difference between groups in inhibition of lower esophageal sphincter tone or esophageal body contractility by cholinergic receptor blockade.

Conclusions

Nearly half of patients with an A3 pattern of dysmotility are chronic, daily users of opioids with manometry patterns indistinguishable from those of patients with IA3. Patients with OA3 differ from patients with IA3 in responses to amyl nitrite and cholecystokinin. These findings might be used to identify patients with dysmotility resulting from opioid use.

SUBMITTER: Babaei A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7015768 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND & AIMS:Esophageal retention is typically evaluated by timed-barium esophagram in patients treated for achalasia. Esophageal bolus clearance can also be evaluated using high-resolution impedance manometry. We evaluated the associations of conventional and novel high-resolution impedance manometry metrics, esophagram, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in achalasia. METHODS:We performed a prospective study of 70 patients with achalasia (age, 20-81 y; 30 women) treated by pneumatic dilation or myotomy who underwent follow-up evaluations from April 2013 through December 2015 (median, 12 mo after treatment; range, 3-183 mo). Patients were assessed using timed-barium esophagrams, high-resolution impedance manometry, and PROs, determined from Eckardt scores (the primary outcome) and the brief esophageal dysphagia questionnaire. Barium column height was measured from esophagrams taken 5 minutes after ingestion of barium (200 mL). Impedance-manometry was analyzed for bolus transit (dichotomized) and with a customized MATLAB program (The MathWorks, Inc, Natick, MA) to calculate the esophageal impedance integral (EII) ratio. RESULTS:Optimal cut points to identify a good PRO (defined as Eckardt score of ?3) were esophagram barium column height of 3 cm (identified patients with a good PRO with 63% sensitivity and 75% specificity) and an EII ratio of 0.41 (identified patients with a good PRO with 83% sensitivity and 75% specificity). Complete bolus transit identified patients with a good PRO with 28% sensitivity and 75% specificity. Of the 25 patients who met these cut points for both esophagram barium column height and EII ratio, 23 (92%) had a good PRO. Of the 17 patients who met neither cut point, 14 (82%) had a poor PRO (Eckardt score above 3). CONCLUSIONS:In a prospective study of 70 patients with achalasia, we found EII ratio identified patients with good PROs with higher levels of sensitivity (same specificity) than timed-barium esophagram or impedance-manometry bolus transit assessments. The EII ratio should be added to achalasia outcome evaluations that involve high-resolution impedance manometry as an independent measure and to complement timed-barium esophagram.