Fox M R, Pandolfino J E, Sweis R, Sauter M, Abreu Y Abreu A T, Anggiansah A, Bogte A, Bredenoord A J, Dengler W, Elvevi A, Fruehauf H, Gellersen S, Ghosh S, Gyawali C P, Heinrich H, Hemmink M, Jafari J, Kaufman E, Kessing K, Kwiatek M, Lubomyr B, Banasiuk M, Mion F, Pérez-de-la-Serna J, Remes-Troche J M, Rohof W, Roman S, Ruiz-de-León A, Tutuian R, Uscinowicz M, Valdovinos M A, Vardar R, Velosa M, Waśko-Czopnik D, Weijenborg P, Wilshire C, Wright J, Zerbib F, Menne D
iDigest: Zürich Center for Reflux and Swallowing Disorders, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
NIHR Nottingham Digestive Disease Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospital.
Dis Esophagus. 2015 Nov-Dec;28(8):711-9. doi: 10.1111/dote.12278. Epub 2014 Sep 3.
High-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM) is a recent development used in the evaluation of esophageal function. Our aim was to assess the inter-observer agreement for diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders using this technology. Practitioners registered on the HRM Working Group website were invited to review and classify (i) 147 individual water swallows and (ii) 40 diagnostic studies comprising 10 swallows using a drop-down menu that followed the Chicago Classification system. Data were presented using a standardized format with pressure contours without a summary of HRM metrics. The sequence of swallows was fixed for each user but randomized between users to avoid sequence bias. Participants were blinded to other entries. (i) Individual swallows were assessed by 18 practitioners (13 institutions). Consensus agreement (≤ 2/18 dissenters) was present for most cases of normal peristalsis and achalasia but not for cases of peristaltic dysmotility. (ii) Diagnostic studies were assessed by 36 practitioners (28 institutions). Overall inter-observer agreement was 'moderate' (kappa 0.51) being 'substantial' (kappa > 0.7) for achalasia type I/II and no lower than 'fair-moderate' (kappa >0.34) for any diagnosis. Overall agreement was somewhat higher among those that had performed >400 studies (n = 9; kappa 0.55) and 'substantial' among experts involved in development of the Chicago Classification system (n = 4; kappa 0.66). This prospective, randomized, and blinded study reports an acceptable level of inter-observer agreement for HRM diagnoses across the full spectrum of esophageal motility disorders for a large group of clinicians working in a range of medical institutions. Suboptimal agreement for diagnosis of peristaltic motility disorders highlights contribution of objective HRM metrics.
高分辨率食管测压(HRM)是近年来用于评估食管功能的一项技术。我们的目的是评估使用该技术诊断食管动力障碍时观察者间的一致性。邀请在HRM工作组网站注册的从业者使用遵循芝加哥分类系统的下拉菜单对(i)147次单次吞水试验和(ii)40项诊断性研究(每项研究包含10次吞咽)进行回顾和分类。数据以标准化格式呈现,带有压力轮廓,但未总结HRM指标。每位用户的吞咽顺序是固定的,但不同用户之间是随机的,以避免顺序偏差。参与者对其他条目不知情。(i)18位从业者(来自13个机构)评估了单次吞咽试验。大多数正常蠕动和贲门失弛缓症病例达成了共识性一致(≤2/18不同意),但蠕动功能障碍病例未达成。(ii)36位从业者(来自28个机构)评估了诊断性研究。观察者间总体一致性为“中等”(kappa值为0.51),I/II型贲门失弛缓症为“高度”(kappa>0.7),任何诊断的一致性均不低于“中低等”(kappa>0.34)。在进行>400项研究的人员中(n = 9;kappa值为0.55)总体一致性略高,在参与芝加哥分类系统制定的专家中(n = 4;kappa值为0.66)为“高度”。这项前瞻性、随机、盲法研究报告了一大群在一系列医疗机构工作的临床医生在整个食管动力障碍范围内对HRM诊断的观察者间一致性达到了可接受水平。蠕动性动力障碍诊断的一致性欠佳凸显了客观HRM指标的作用。