Yamasaki Takahisa, Tomita Toshihiko, Mori Sumire, Takimoto Mayu, Tamura Akio, Hara Ken, Kondo Takashi, Kono Tomoaki, Tozawa Katsuyuki, Ohda Yoshio, Oshima Tadayuki, Fukui Hirokazu, Watari Jiro, Miwa Hiroto
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, Japan.
J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2018 Jul 30;24(3):403-409. doi: 10.5056/jnm17147.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: High-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM) is considered to be the gold standard for the diagnosis of achalasia. However, the Japan Esophageal Society recommends that esophagography is also accurate in either diagnosing or excluding the disorder. Accordingly, we compared the efficacy of esophagography and HREM in diagnosing achalasia patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms.
HREM was performed in 126 patients with dysphagia. The final diagnosis of achalasia was done using HREM. Demographic data, symptoms, quality of life (QOL) were also obtained. We assessed the patients who were not able to be diagnosed by esophagography and compared the diagnostic values for esophagography with HREM-based achalasia diagnosis as the gold standard.
A total of 48 cases of patients with achalasia, including 21 men and 27 women (mean age, 48.4 ± 19.6 years), were included in the study. Two patients were excluded. Of the remaining 46 patients, 36 (78.3%) patients were diagnosed as having achalasia by esophagography. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of esophagography were 78.3%, 88.0%, and 83.0%, respectively. Patients with type III achalasia had significantly lower physical QOL score than those with type I or II achalasia. Although the mental QOL score in patients with type III achalasia tended to decrease compared with that in patients with type I and II achalasia, the difference was not statistically significant.
Diagnosing esophageal achalasia by using esophagography alone has limited yield. Therefore, HREM should be used in patients with dysphagia and in whom achalasia cannot be diagnosed using EGD or esophagography.
背景/目的:高分辨率食管测压(HREM)被认为是诊断贲门失弛缓症的金标准。然而,日本食管学会建议食管造影在诊断或排除该疾病方面也具有准确性。因此,我们比较了食管造影和HREM在诊断有上消化道症状的贲门失弛缓症患者中的疗效。
对126例吞咽困难患者进行HREM检查。使用HREM做出贲门失弛缓症的最终诊断。还获取了人口统计学数据、症状、生活质量(QOL)。我们评估了那些无法通过食管造影诊断的患者,并将食管造影的诊断价值与以HREM为基础的贲门失弛缓症诊断(作为金标准)进行比较。
本研究共纳入48例贲门失弛缓症患者,包括21例男性和27例女性(平均年龄48.4±19.6岁)。排除2例患者。在其余46例患者中,36例(78.3%)通过食管造影被诊断为贲门失弛缓症。食管造影的诊断敏感性、特异性和准确性分别为78.3%、88.0%和83.0%。III型贲门失弛缓症患者的身体生活质量评分显著低于I型或II型贲门失弛缓症患者。尽管III型贲门失弛缓症患者的心理生活质量评分与I型和II型贲门失弛缓症患者相比有下降趋势,但差异无统计学意义。
仅使用食管造影诊断食管贲门失弛缓症的阳性率有限。因此,对于吞咽困难且无法通过内镜检查或食管造影诊断为贲门失弛缓症的患者,应使用HREM。