Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38453746›Full record

ArticleDysphagia2024

Risk Factors Associated with Unsuccessful High-Resolution Manometry.

Vishesh V Patel, David E Reed, David M Rodrigues

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Dysphagia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

3 authors.

Vishesh V PatelDepartment of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
David E ReedDepartment of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
David M RodriguesDepartment of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada. davidmario.rodrigues@kingstonhsc.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-resolution manometry (HRM) is used to evaluate the esophageal motor function. Unfortunately, there are times when testing cannot be performed accurately. Our study aimed to quantify the occurrence of failed HRM and identify the associated risk factors. HRM tests were retrospectively collected between September 2021 and August 2022. HRM reports that could not be interpreted based on standard HRM protocol as per Chicago guidelines were classified as failed tests. Information reviewed included testing indications, patient demographics, previous medical/symptom history, and follow-up testing for failed HRM. We then compared patients with successful vs. unsuccessful HRM based on our pre-specified factors. 152 HRM tests were performed, of which 28 tests (18%) were unsuccessful. Factors associated with failed manometry included a history of nausea/vomiting, dyspepsia, and achalasia. Patients who were unable to tolerate the probe during testing were more likely to have a history of dyspepsia (OR 20.3, p = < 0.001) and/or nausea/vomiting (OR 13.8, p = < 0.001). A history of achalasia was found to have an odds ratio of 13.2 when examining failure because of curling of the manometry catheter (p = 0.012). All seven patients who had repeat HRM with endoscopic placement were successful in obtaining diagnostic information. There are two groups that have risk factors for unsuccessful HRM testing. A history of nausea/vomiting and dyspepsia symptoms were associated with being unable to tolerate the manometry probe. The second group comprises patients with a history of achalasia in whom probe curling is more common. Future research targeting these risk factors may minimize diagnostic and treatment delays.

Indexed as

Esophageal AchalasiaManometryAdultAgedDeglutition DisordersDyspepsiaEsophageal Motility DisordersEsophagusFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNauseaRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsVomitingAchalasiaDyspepsiaManometryNausea and Vomiting

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.