ArticleDiseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus2026
Utilization trends for esophageal motility testing in the United States.
Article in Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Esophageal manometry is the cornerstone diagnostic test for esophageal motility disorders, yet national utilization patterns over time are poorly defined. The Functional Lumen Imaging Probe (FLIP) has emerged as a complementary modality, but its uptake relative to manometry remains unclear. We aimed to describe population-level utilization trends, patient characteristics, and clinical indications for esophageal manometry and FLIP in the United States. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using MarketScan Commercial Claims (<65 years; 2000-2023) and a 20% Medicare fee-for-service sample (≥65 years; 2007-2017). Manometry and FLIP were identified using Current Procedural Terminology 91010 and 91040 (available starting in 2016), respectively. Annual utilization rates per 100,000 enrollees were calculated. Clinical indications, downstream therapeutic interventions and additional diagnostic testing were identified using ICD-9/10 diagnosis codes. In the most recent years available, 4410 MarketScan and 3513 Medicare patients underwent manometry; FLIP use was lower (851 MarketScan; 48 Medicare). Manometry utilization increased substantially in Medicare, reaching 120 per 100,000 in 2017, while remaining stable in MarketScan (43 per 100,000 in 2023). FLIP use was lower than manometry, increased gradually in MarketScan but remained minimal in Medicare. Gastroesophageal reflux and dysphagia were the most common indications for manometry. Downstream therapeutic interventions were uncommon, whereas additional diagnostic testing and repeat motility assessments were frequent. Esophageal motility testing is increasingly used in U.S. practice, particularly among older adults. FLIP use remains less frequent than manometry. These findings provide essential context for understanding diagnostic strategies and optimizing high-value motility testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.