BACKGROUND: Several patients in gastroenterology practice present with esophageal symptoms, and in case of normal endoscopy with biopsies, high-resolution manometry (HRM) is often the next step. Our aim was to develop a European consensus on the clinical application of esophageal HRM, to offer the clinician guidance in selecting patients for HRM and using its results to optimize clinical outcome. METHODS: A Delphi consensus was initiated with 38 multidisciplinary experts from 16 European countries who conducted a literature summary and voting process on 71 statements. Quality of evidence was evaluated using grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Consensus (defined as >80% agreement) was reached for 33 statements. RESULTS: The process generated guidance on when to consider esophageal HRM, how to perform it, and how to generate the report. The Delphi process also identified several areas of uncertainty, such as the choice of catheters, the duration of fasting and the position in which HRM is performed, but recommended to perform at least 10 5-ml swallows in supine position for each study. Postprandial combined HRM impedance is considered useful for diagnosing rumination. There is a large lack of consensus on treatment implications of HRM findings, which is probably the single area requiring future targeted research. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: A multinational and multidisciplinary group of European experts summarized the current state of consensus on technical aspects, indications, performance, analysis, diagnosis, and therapeutic implications of esophageal HRM.
European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) recommendations for the use of high-resolution manometry of the esophagus
Savarino E.;
2021
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several patients in gastroenterology practice present with esophageal symptoms, and in case of normal endoscopy with biopsies, high-resolution manometry (HRM) is often the next step. Our aim was to develop a European consensus on the clinical application of esophageal HRM, to offer the clinician guidance in selecting patients for HRM and using its results to optimize clinical outcome. METHODS: A Delphi consensus was initiated with 38 multidisciplinary experts from 16 European countries who conducted a literature summary and voting process on 71 statements. Quality of evidence was evaluated using grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Consensus (defined as >80% agreement) was reached for 33 statements. RESULTS: The process generated guidance on when to consider esophageal HRM, how to perform it, and how to generate the report. The Delphi process also identified several areas of uncertainty, such as the choice of catheters, the duration of fasting and the position in which HRM is performed, but recommended to perform at least 10 5-ml swallows in supine position for each study. Postprandial combined HRM impedance is considered useful for diagnosing rumination. There is a large lack of consensus on treatment implications of HRM findings, which is probably the single area requiring future targeted research. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: A multinational and multidisciplinary group of European experts summarized the current state of consensus on technical aspects, indications, performance, analysis, diagnosis, and therapeutic implications of esophageal HRM.
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
