Effect of hiatal hernia and esophagogastric junction morphology on esophageal motility: Evidence from high-resolution manometry studies.
esophageal hypomotility
esophageal motility disorders
esophagogastric junction
gastroesophageal reflux
hiatal hernia
high resolution manometry
ineffective peristalsis
Journal
Neurogastroenterology and motility
ISSN: 1365-2982
Titre abrégé: Neurogastroenterol Motil
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9432572
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 Sep 2024
30 Sep 2024
Historique:
revised:
01
09
2024
received:
19
04
2024
accepted:
15
09
2024
medline:
30
9
2024
pubmed:
30
9
2024
entrez:
30
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
High-resolution Manometry (HRM) is the most sensitive and specific test available for clinical assessment of hiatal hernia (HH), a common condition defined as the separation between the Lower Esophageal Sphincter (LES) and crural diaphragm (CD). While the link between HH and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) is established, the potential association of HH with esophageal dysmotility, independently from GERD, is uncertain. This study aimed to analyze if HH, with or without GERD, can associate with esophageal motility disorders. Consecutive patients without previous esophageal surgery who underwent HRM between 2018 and 2022 were enrolled. All patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD underwent impedance-pH testing off-therapy. HH was defined as a separation >1 cm between LES and CD, and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) morphology was classified as: Type I, when there was no separation between LES and CD; Type II, in case of minimal separation (>1 and <3 cm); Type III, when ≥3 cm of separation was present. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected at baseline, including Age, Gender, Alcohol-, Coffee- and Smoke-habits, GERD diagnosis and symptoms' duration. Two cohorts of patients, with and without HH, were retrospectively individuated, and their association with Ineffective Peristalsis, Hypercontractile Esophagus and Outflow Obstruction was analyzed with univariate and multivariate Logistic regressions using the statistical software R. 848 consecutive patients were enrolled, and 295 cases of HH (34.8%), subdivided into 199 (23.5%) Type II- and 96 (11.3%) Type III-EGJ patients, were identified. Ineffective peristalsis was diagnosed in 162 (19.1%) subjects, Hypercontractile esophagus in 32 (3.8%), and Outflow Obstruction in 91 (10.7%), while GERD was present in 375 (44.2%) patients. HH was significantly associated with Ineffective Peristalsis (p < 0.001) and GERD (p < 0.001). Furthermore, HH resulted to be a risk factor for Ineffective peristalsis (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.4-2.8, p < 0.001) both when the analysis was conducted in all the 848 subjects, independently from GERD, and when it was carried out in patients without GERD (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.02-5.3, p = 0.04). The risk for Ineffective Peristalsis increased 1.3 times for every centimeter of HH. No statistically significant association was found between HH and Outflow obstruction or Hypercontractile Esophagus. An increasing separation between the LES and CD may lead to a gradual and significant elevation in the risk of Ineffective Peristalsis. Interestingly, this association with HH is true in patients with and in those without GERD, suggesting that the anatomical alteration seems to play a major role in motility change.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
High-resolution Manometry (HRM) is the most sensitive and specific test available for clinical assessment of hiatal hernia (HH), a common condition defined as the separation between the Lower Esophageal Sphincter (LES) and crural diaphragm (CD). While the link between HH and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) is established, the potential association of HH with esophageal dysmotility, independently from GERD, is uncertain. This study aimed to analyze if HH, with or without GERD, can associate with esophageal motility disorders.
METHODS
METHODS
Consecutive patients without previous esophageal surgery who underwent HRM between 2018 and 2022 were enrolled. All patients with symptoms suggestive of GERD underwent impedance-pH testing off-therapy. HH was defined as a separation >1 cm between LES and CD, and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) morphology was classified as: Type I, when there was no separation between LES and CD; Type II, in case of minimal separation (>1 and <3 cm); Type III, when ≥3 cm of separation was present. Demographic and clinical characteristics were collected at baseline, including Age, Gender, Alcohol-, Coffee- and Smoke-habits, GERD diagnosis and symptoms' duration. Two cohorts of patients, with and without HH, were retrospectively individuated, and their association with Ineffective Peristalsis, Hypercontractile Esophagus and Outflow Obstruction was analyzed with univariate and multivariate Logistic regressions using the statistical software R.
KEY RESULTS
RESULTS
848 consecutive patients were enrolled, and 295 cases of HH (34.8%), subdivided into 199 (23.5%) Type II- and 96 (11.3%) Type III-EGJ patients, were identified. Ineffective peristalsis was diagnosed in 162 (19.1%) subjects, Hypercontractile esophagus in 32 (3.8%), and Outflow Obstruction in 91 (10.7%), while GERD was present in 375 (44.2%) patients. HH was significantly associated with Ineffective Peristalsis (p < 0.001) and GERD (p < 0.001). Furthermore, HH resulted to be a risk factor for Ineffective peristalsis (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.4-2.8, p < 0.001) both when the analysis was conducted in all the 848 subjects, independently from GERD, and when it was carried out in patients without GERD (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.02-5.3, p = 0.04). The risk for Ineffective Peristalsis increased 1.3 times for every centimeter of HH. No statistically significant association was found between HH and Outflow obstruction or Hypercontractile Esophagus.
CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES
CONCLUSIONS
An increasing separation between the LES and CD may lead to a gradual and significant elevation in the risk of Ineffective Peristalsis. Interestingly, this association with HH is true in patients with and in those without GERD, suggesting that the anatomical alteration seems to play a major role in motility change.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e14929Informations de copyright
© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Dunn CP, Patel TA, Bildzukewicz NA, Henning JR, Lipham JC. Which hiatal hernia's need to be fixed? Large, small or none? Annals of Laparoscopic and Endoscopic Surgery. 2020;5:1–12. doi:10.21037/ales.2020.04.02
Sugano K, Spechler SJ, El‐Omar EM, et al. Kyoto international consensus report on anatomy, pathophysiology and clinical significance of the gastro‐oesophageal junction. Gut. 2022;71(8):1488‐1514. doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2022-327281
Kahrilas PJ, Kim HC, Pandolfino JE. Approaches to the diagnosis and grading of hiatal hernia. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2008;22:601‐616. doi:10.1016/j.bpg.2007.12.007
Gordon C, Kang JY, Neild PJ, Maxwell JD. The role of the hiatus hernia in gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004;20(7):719‐732. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2004.02149.x
Hansdotter I, Björ O, Andreasson A, et al. Hill classification is superior to the axial length of a hiatal hernia for assessment of the mechanical anti‐reflux barrier at the gastroesophageal junction. Endosc Int Open. 2016;4(3):E311‐E317. doi:10.1055/s-0042-101021
Hill LD, Kozarek RA, Kraemer SJ, et al. The gastroesophageal flap valve: in vitro and in vivo observations. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;44(5):541‐547. doi:10.1016/s0016-5107(96)70006-8
Pandolfino JE, Kim H, Ghosh SK, Clarke JO, Zhang Q, Kahrilas PJ. High‐resolution manometry of the EGJ: an analysis of crural diaphragm function in GERD. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102(5):1056‐1063. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01138.x
Tolone S, Savarino E, Zaninotto G, et al. High‐resolution manometry is superior to endoscopy and radiology in assessing and grading sliding hiatal hernia: a comparison with surgical in vivo evaluation. United European Gastroenterol J. 2018;6(7):981‐989. doi:10.1177/2050640618769160
Mittal RK, Lange RC, McCallum RW. Identification and mechanism of delayed esophageal acid clearance in subjects with hiatus hernia. Gastroenterology. 1987;92(1):130‐135. doi:10.1016/0016-5085(87)90849-3
Tolone S, de Cassan C, de Bortoli N, et al. Esophagogastric junction morphology is associated with a positive impedance‐pH monitoring in patients with GERD. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2015;27(8):1175‐1182. doi:10.1111/nmo.12606
Kahrilas PJ, Lin S, Chen J, Manka M. The effect of hiatus hernia on gastro‐oesophageal junction pressure. Gut. 1999;44(4):476‐482. doi:10.1136/gut.44.4.476
Roman S, Kahrilas PJ, Kia L, Luger D, Soper N, Pandolfino JE. Effects of large hiatal hernias on esophageal peristalsis. Arch Surg. 2012;147(4):352‐357. doi:10.1001/archsurg.2012.17
Yadlapati R, Kahrilas PJ, Fox MR, et al. Esophageal motility disorders on high‐resolution manometry: Chicago classification version 4.0©. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2021;33(1):e14058. doi:10.1111/nmo.14058
Savarino E, Frazzoni M, Marabotto E, et al. A SIGE‐SINGEM‐AIGO technical review on the clinical use of esophageal reflux monitoring. Dig Liver Dis. 2020;52(9):966‐980. doi:10.1016/j.dld.2020.04.031
Savarino E, de Bortoli N, Zentilin P, et al. Alginate controls heartburn in patients with erosive and nonerosive reflux disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18(32):4371‐4378. doi:10.3748/wjg.v18.i32.4371
Savarino E, de Bortoli N, Bellini M, et al. Practice guidelines on the use of esophageal manometry ‐ a GISMAD‐SIGE‐AIGO medical position statement. Dig Liver Dis. 2016;48(10):1124‐1135. doi:10.1016/j.dld.2016.06.021
Savarino E, Zentilin P, Tutuian R, et al. The role of nonacid reflux in NERD: lessons learned from impedance‐pH monitoring in 150 patients off therapy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103(11):2685‐2693. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.02119.x
Gyawali CP, Yadlapati R, Fass R, et al. Updates to the modern diagnosis of GERD: Lyon consensus 2.0. Gut. 2024;73(2):361‐371. Published 2024 Jan 5. doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2023-330616
Visaggi P, Mariani L, Svizzero FB, et al. Clinical use of mean nocturnal baseline impedance and post‐reflux swallow‐induced peristaltic wave index for the diagnosis of gastro‐esophageal reflux disease. Esophagus. 2022;19(4):525‐534. doi:10.1007/s10388-022-00933-6
Frazzoni M, Savarino E, de Bortoli N, et al. Analyses of the post‐reflux swallow‐induced peristaltic wave index and nocturnal baseline impedance parameters increase the diagnostic yield of impedance‐pH monitoring of patients with reflux disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14(1):40‐46. doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2015.06.026
Philpott H, Sweis R. Hiatus hernia as a cause of dysphagia. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2017;19(8):40. doi:10.1007/s11894-017-0580-y
Pandolfino JE, Kwiatek MA, Ho K, Scherer JR, Kahrilas PJ. Unique features of esophagogastric junction pressure topography in hiatus hernia patients with dysphagia. Surgery. 2010;147(1):57‐64. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2009.05.011
Beaumont H, Bennink RJ, de Jong J, Boeckxstaens GE. The position of the acid pocket as a major risk factor for acidic reflux in healthy subjects and patients with GORD. Gut. 2010;59(4):441‐451. doi:10.1136/gut.2009.178061
Martinucci I, de Bortoli N, Giacchino M, et al. Esophageal motility abnormalities in gastroesophageal reflux disease. World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther. 2014;5(2):86‐96. doi:10.4292/wjgpt.v5.i2.86
Pomenti S, Nathanson J, Phipps M, et al. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy findings that do no not explain dysphagia are associated with underutilization of high‐resolution manometry. Dis Esophagus. 2024;37: 1‐9. doi:10.1093/dote/doae028
Savarino E, Gemignani L, Pohl D, et al. Oesophageal motility and bolus transit abnormalities increase in parallel with the severity of gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011;34(4):476‐486. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04742.x
Conrado LM, Gurski RR, da Rosa AR, Simic AP, Callegari‐Jacques SM. Is there an association between hiatal hernia and ineffective esophageal motility in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease? J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;15(10):1756‐1761. doi:10.1007/s11605-011-1619-2
Addo A, George P, Zahiri HR, Park A. Patients with ineffective esophageal motility benefit from laparoscopic antireflux surgery. Surg Endosc. 2021;35(8):4459‐4468. doi:10.1007/s00464-020-07951-4
Xu JY, Xie XP, Song GQ, Hou XH. Healing of severe reflux esophagitis with PPI does not improve esophageal dysmotility. Dis Esophagus. 2007;20(4):346‐352. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2050.2007.00681.x
Wilson LJ, Ma W, Hirschowitz BI. Association of obesity with hiatal hernia and esophagitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94(10):2840‐2844. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.1999.01426.x
Che F, Nguyen B, Cohen A, Nguyen NT. Prevalence of hiatal hernia in the morbidly obese. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2013;9(6):920‐924. doi:10.1016/j.soard.2013.03.013
Savarino E, Zentilin P, Marabotto E, et al. Overweight is a risk factor for both erosive and non‐erosive reflux disease. Dig Liver Dis. 2011;43(12):940‐945. doi:10.1016/j.dld.2011.07.014
Stene‐Larsen G, Weberg R, Frøyshov Larsen I, Bjørtuft O, Hoel B, Berstad A. Relationship of overweight to hiatus hernia and reflux oesophagitis. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1988;23(4):427‐432. doi:10.3109/00365528809093890
Barak N, Ehrenpreis ED, Harrison JR, Sitrin MD. Gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease in obesity: pathophysiological and therapeutic considerations. Obes Rev. 2002;3(1):9‐15. doi:10.1046/j.1467-789x.2002.00049.x
Thalheimer A, Bueter M. Excess body weight and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Visc Med. 2021;37(4):267‐272. doi:10.1159/000516050
Becher A, Dent J. Systematic review: ageing and gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease symptoms, oesophageal function and reflux oesophagitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011;33(4):442‐454. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2010.04542.x
Kang JY, Ho KY. Different prevalences of reflux oesophagitis and hiatus hernia among dyspeptic patients in England and Singapore. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1999;11(8):845‐850. doi:10.1097/00042737-199908000-00006
Carlson DA, Kahrilas PJ, Lin Z, et al. Evaluation of esophageal motility utilizing the functional lumen imaging probe. Am J Gastroenterol. 2016;111(12):1726‐1735. doi:10.1038/ajg.2016.454
Gyawali CP, Sifrim D, Carlson DA, et al. Ineffective esophageal motility: concepts, future directions, and conclusions from the Stanford 2018 symposium. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2019;31(9):e13584. doi:10.1111/nmo.13584
Hiestand M, Abdel Jalil A, Castell DO. Manometric subtypes of ineffective esophageal motility. Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2017;8(3):e78. Published 2017 Mar 9. doi:10.1038/ctg.2017.4