Performing High-resolution Impedance Manometry After Endoscopy With Conscious Sedation Has Negligible Effects on Esophageal Motility Results
- Author:
Hui SU
1
;
Dustin A CARLSON
;
Erica DONNAN
;
Wenjun KOU
;
Jacqueline PRESCOTT
;
Alex DECORREVONT
;
Francesca SHILATI
;
Melina MASIHI
;
John E PANDOLFINO
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- From:Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2020;26(3):352-361
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Background/Aims:High-resolution manometry (HRM) performed without sedation is the standard procedure. However, some patients cannot tolerate transnasal placement of the manometry catheter. We aim to assess the practice of performing manometry after endoscopy with conscious sedation by evaluating its impact on esophageal motility findings.
Methods:Twelve asymptomatic adult volunteers and 7 adult patients completed high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) approximately 1 hour after conscious sedation with midazolam and fentanyl (post-sedation) and again on a different day with no-sedation. The nosedation HRIM involved 2 series of swallows separated in time by 20 minutes (no-sedation-1 and no-sedation-2) for the volunteers; patients completed only 1 series of swallows for no-sedation HRM.
Results:A motility diagnosis of normal motility was observed in all 12 volunteers post-sedation. Two volunteers had a diagnosis of borderline ineffective esophageal motility, one during the no-sedation-1 period and the other during the no-sedation-2 period; all of the other no-sedation HRIM studies yielded a normal motility diagnosis. Six of seven patients had the same diagnosis in both no-sedation and post-sedation HRM, including 1 distal esophageal spasm, 3 achalasia (2 type II and 1 type III), and 2 esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction. Only one patient’s HRM classification changed from ineffective esophageal motility at no-sedation to normal esophageal motility at post-sedation.
Conclusions:Performing HRIM after endoscopy with conscious sedation had minimal clinical impact on the motility diagnosis or motility parameters. Thus, this approach may be a viable alternative for patients who cannot tolerate unsedated catheter placement.
