Authors: Fernando P P Vicentine Fernando A M Herbella Marco E Allaix Luciana C Silva Marco G Patti
Publish Date: 2013/10/16
Volume: 18, Issue: 2, Pages: 221-225
Abstract
Idiopathic achalasia IA and Chagas disease esophagopathy CDE share several similarities The comparison between IA and CDE is important to evaluate whether treatment options and their results can be accepted universally Highresolution manometry HRM has proved a better diagnostic tool compared to conventional manometry This study aims to evaluate HRM classifications for idiopathic achalasia in patients with CDEThe Chicago classification was distributed in IA as Chicago I 35 Chicago II 63 and Chicago III 2 and in CDE as Chicago I 52 Chicago II 48 and Chicago III 0 p = 01 01 and 05 respectively All patients had the classic Rochester type CDE patients had more pronounced degrees of esophageal dilatation p 0002 The degree of esophageal dilatation did not correlate with Chicago classification p = 008 In nine 9 patients the HRM pattern changed during the test from Chicago I to IIOur results show that a HRM classifications for IA can be applied in patients with CDE and b HRM classifications did not correlate with the degree of esophageal dilatation HRM classifications may reflect esophageal repletion and pressurization instead of muscular contraction The correlation between manometric findings and treatment outcomes for CDE needs to be answered in the near futureDr Nathaniel Soper Chicago IL USA The authors have applied the Chicago classification system of HRM described by Kahrilas and Pandolfino from Northwestern in 2008 to a group of patients with either IA or CDE They found ~5050 distribution of types I and II in CDE The CDE group had a more dilated esophagus than IA and there is no type III in CDE Because of the aganglionosis seen in CDE one would not expect to see type III
Keywords: