Normal esophageal high-resolution manometry and impedance values in the supine and sitting positions in the population of Northern China.

The aim of this study was to investigate the normal high-resolution manometry and impedance (HRiM) values in the supine and sitting positions in the population of Northern China, and to investigate the influence of different body positions and bolus consistency on esophageal HRiM findings. In this study, healthy volunteers in the supine position underwent esophageal HRiM examination of 10 swallows of 5 mL normal saline solution and 10 swallows of 5 mL synthetic gel of known viscosity, and in the sitting position of an additional five swallows of a synthetic gel of known viscosity. Total bolus transit time (TBTT), complete bolus transit rate (CBTR), distal contractile integral (DCI), distal esophageal amplitude (DEA), and integrated relaxation pressure (IRP) were measured. Sixty-two healthy volunteers were examined in the supine position and 45 of these performed additional swallows of the viscous gel in the sitting position. In the supine position, normal values for swallowing the liquid and viscous boli were as follows: TBTT 6.9 ± 0.9 and 8.0 ± 1.2 s (P < 0.001), CBTR 90.3 ± 14.0 and 77.9 ± 20.3% (P < 0.001), DCI 1891.5 ± 1131.9 and 1967.8 ± 1140.1 mmHg.s.cm (P = 0.227), DEA 95.3 ± 35.4 and 98.7 ± 37.5 mmHg (P = 0.148), and IRP 10.4 ± 4.9 and 9.0 ± 4.2 mmHg (P < 0.001), respectively. For swallows of the viscous boli in the sitting position, TBTT, DCI, DEA, and IRP were significantly decreased, while CBTR was unchanged (P = 0.075). Normal HRiM values of the population of Northern China were established. Esophageal transit times of viscous boli were significantly slower, more often incomplete and produced less normal peristalsis in the supine position than swallows of liquid boli. Independent reference values for different manometric systems, body positions, and population need to be established before clinical application.

[1]  A. Bredenoord,et al.  Normal values for solid‐state esophageal high‐resolution manometry in a European population; an overview of all current metrics , 2014, Neurogastroenterology and motility : the official journal of the European Gastrointestinal Motility Society.

[2]  Minhu Chen,et al.  Normative data of high‐resolution impedance manometry in the Chinese population , 2013, Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology.

[3]  P. Siersema,et al.  Normal values for esophageal high‐resolution manometry , 2013, Neurogastroenterology and motility : the official journal of the European Gastrointestinal Motility Society.

[4]  J. Pandolfino,et al.  The effect of a sitting vs supine posture on normative esophageal pressure topography metrics and Chicago Classification diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders , 2012, Neurogastroenterology and motility : the official journal of the European Gastrointestinal Motility Society.

[5]  E. Savarino,et al.  Functional aspects of distal oesophageal spasm: the role of onset velocity and contraction amplitude on bolus transit. , 2012, Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver.

[6]  M. Fox,et al.  Chicago classification criteria of esophageal motility disorders defined in high resolution esophageal pressure topography 1 , 2012, Neurogastroenterology and motility : the official journal of the European Gastrointestinal Motility Society.

[7]  A. Bredenoord,et al.  Clinical Applications of Esophageal Impedance Monitoring and High-Resolution Manometry , 2012, Current Gastroenterology Reports.

[8]  M. Fox,et al.  Normative values and inter‐observer agreement for liquid and solid bolus swallows in upright and supine positions as assessed by esophageal high‐resolution manometry , 2011, Neurogastroenterology and motility : the official journal of the European Gastrointestinal Motility Society.

[9]  Zhiyue Lin,et al.  Weak Peristalsis in Esophageal Pressure Topography: Classification and Association With Dysphagia , 2011, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[10]  S. Roman,et al.  Does body position modify the results of oesophageal high resolution manometry? , 2010, Neurogastroenterology and motility : the official journal of the European Gastrointestinal Motility Society.

[11]  J. Pandolfino,et al.  Esophageal Pressure Topography Criteria Indicative of Incomplete Bolus Clearance: A Study Using High-Resolution Impedance Manometry , 2009, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[12]  J. Pandolfino,et al.  New technologies in the gastrointestinal clinic and research: impedance and high-resolution manometry. , 2009, World journal of gastroenterology.

[13]  J. Pandolfino,et al.  Esophageal Motility Disorders in Terms of Pressure Topography: The Chicago Classification , 2008, Journal of clinical gastroenterology.

[14]  D. Castell,et al.  Influence of Bolus Consistency and Position on Esophageal High-Resolution Manometry Findings , 2008, Digestive Diseases and Sciences.

[15]  A. Hila,et al.  Normal values for manometry performed with swallows of viscous test material , 2008, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology.

[16]  J. Pandolfino,et al.  Impaired deglutitive EGJ relaxation in clinical esophageal manometry: a quantitative analysis of 400 patients and 75 controls. , 2007, American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology.

[17]  N. Nguyen,et al.  Assessment of oesophageal motor function using combined perfusion manometry and multi‐channel intra‐luminal impedance measurement in normal subjects , 2005, Neurogastroenterology and motility : the official journal of the European Gastrointestinal Motility Society.

[18]  J. Peters,et al.  Esophageal function testing with combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry: multicenter study in healthy volunteers. , 2003, Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association.