Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30535781›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2019

Ineffective Esophageal Motility Is Associated with Impaired Bolus Clearance but Does Not Correlate with Severity of Dysphagia.

Priyanka Chugh, Tyson Collazo, Brad Dworkin, Daniela Jodorkovsky

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. [Chicago Classification ver. 4.0: Diagnosis of Peristaltic Disorder].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Minor esophageal functional disorders: are they relevant?Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2020
    Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Priyanka ChughDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Westchester Medical Center, New York Medical College, 40 Sunshine Cottage Road, Skyline 2N-D08, Valhalla, NY, 10595, USA. priyankachughmd@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-6696-7367
Tyson CollazoDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, Stony Brook School of Medicine, 101 Nicolls Road, Stony Brook, NY, 11794, USA.
Brad DworkinDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Westchester Medical Center, New York Medical College, 40 Sunshine Cottage Road, Skyline 2N-D08, Valhalla, NY, 10595, USA.
Daniela JodorkovskyDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Avenue, Suite 862, New York, NY, 10032, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIneffective esophageal motility (IEM) is defined as a distal contractile integral < 450 mmHg/s/cm in at least 50% of ten liquid swallows on high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM). Whether this latest definition correlates with degree of symptoms has not been studied.

methodsPatients presenting for HREM prospectively rated their symptoms using the Eckardt score. Topography plots were retrospectively reviewed and classified according to the latest Chicago Classification. Patients with non-obstructive dysphagia and an Eckardt score of at least 1 were included. Patients with major motility disorders were excluded. Scores between patients with IEM (group A) and patients with normal classification (group B) were compared using two-tailed t-tests. Spearman's correlation coefficient was calculated to determine correlation between symptoms and percent bolus clearance.

resultsA total of 241 patients were screened; 33 patients met criteria for group A and 44 patients for group B. There was no difference between the two groups in mean symptom severity for dysphagia (1.63 vs. 1.61, P = 0.89), chest pain (0.67 vs. 0.75, P = 0.64), regurgitation (1.06 vs. 0.85, P = 0.32), or weight loss (0.85 vs. 0.49, P = 0.11). The percent bolus clearance was significantly lower in group A (46.5% vs. 76.7%, P > 0.01). There was a moderate inverse correlation between dysphagia and percent bolus clearance (R = - 0.37) in group A, but none in group B (R = 0.09).

conclusionThe classification of IEM did not discriminate from normal studies for symptom severity in our cohort. However, patients with IEM did have an inverse correlation between dysphagia score and bolus clearance, but those without IEM did not. Adding impedance information to the motor pattern classification should be considered in the symptom assessment in minor motility disorders.

Indexed as

DeglutitionGastrointestinal MotilityDeglutition DisordersEsophagusFemaleHumansMaleManometryMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsPressureRetrospective StudiesSelf ReportSeverity of Illness IndexDysphagiaHigh-resolution esophageal manometryImpedance manometryIneffective esophageal motility

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.