Advertisement

Can the marshmallow esophagram replace high-resolution manometry as an appropriate screening for esophageal motility prior to anti-reflux surgery?

Published:October 17, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2022.10.036

      Highlights

      • There is not a current standardized approach to evaluate candidacy for anti-reflux surgery.
      • Marshmallow swallow study (MSS) is a minimally invasive way to evaluate candidacy for anti-reflux procedures.
      • MSS follows trends of high resolution manometry (HRM) results.

      Abstract

      Backgound

      The purpose of our study was to evaluate the use of minimally invasive Marshmallow Swallow Study (MSS) as a preoperative screening technique for patients and correlate marshmallow results with High Resolution Manometry (HRM) results and post-operative dysphagia following antireflux surgery. Methods: A retrospective electronic chart review of data on 61 adult patients undergoing MSS was completed. Patients were included if they completed the MSS as well as: HRM and/or antireflux surgery. Results: Sixty-one patients completed MSS. Of the 37 patients that completed HRM, 27 had abnormal results. 23 of these 27 patients who had abnormal results also failed MSS. The NPV for a failure on the MSS and abnormal HRM results is 0.767(p-value = 0.360). The PPV for a pass on the MSS and no post-operative dysphagia is 0.833 (p-value = 0.656). Conclusions: MSS is an effective screening tool for ruling out major esophageal motility disorders and can prevent need for invasive HRM.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to The American Journal of Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Vakil N.
        • van Zanten S.V.
        • Kahrilas P.
        • Dent J.
        • Jones R.
        • Global Consensus Group
        The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2006; 101 (quiz 1943): 1900-1920https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00630.x
        • El-Serag H.B.
        • Sweet S.
        • Winchester C.C.
        • Dent J.
        Update on the epidemiology of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review.
        Gut. 2014; 63: 871-880https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2012-304269
        • Patti M.G.
        • Corpo M.D.
        • Schlottmann F.
        Foregut Surgery: Achalasia, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Obesity.
        Springer Nature, 2019
        • Katz P.O.
        • Gerson L.B.
        • Vela M.F.
        Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of gastroesophageal reflux disease.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2013; 108 (quiz 329): 308-328https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2012.444
        • Yodice M.
        • Mignucci A.
        • Shah V.
        • Ashley C.
        • Tadros M.
        Preoperative physiological esophageal assessment for anti-reflux surgery: a guide for surgeons on high-resolution manometry and pH testing.
        World J Gastroenterol. 2021; 27: 1751-1769https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v27.i16.1751
        • Yadlapati R.
        • Pandolfino J.E.
        • Fox M.R.
        • Bredenoord A.J.
        • Kahrilas P.J.
        What is new in Chicago Classification version 4.0?.
        Neuro Gastroenterol Motil. 2021; 33e14053https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.14053
        • Alicuben E.T.
        • Bildzukewicz N.
        • Samakar K.
        • et al.
        Routine esophageal manometry is not useful in patients with normal videoesophagram.
        Surg Endosc. 2019; 33: 1650-1653https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6456-x
        • Fibbe C.
        • Layer P.
        • Keller J.
        • Strate U.
        • Emmermann A.
        • Zornig C.
        Esophageal motility in reflux disease before and after fundoplication: a prospective, randomized, clinical, and manometric study.
        Gastroenterology. 2001; 121: 5-14https://doi.org/10.1053/gast.2001.25486
      1. Esophageal manometry: MedlinePlus medical encyclopedia image.
        https://medlineplus.gov/ency/imagepages/8776.htm
        Date accessed: February 11, 2022
        • Roman S.
        • Kahrilas P.
        • Boris L.
        • Bidari K.
        • Luger D.
        • Pandolfino J.
        High resolution manometry studies are frequently imperfect but usually still interpretable.
        Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011; 9: 1050-1055https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2011.08.007
      2. Marshmallow-Bagel-Espohagram.pdf.
        • Chen J.H.
        Ineffective esophageal motility and the vagus: current challenges and future prospects.
        Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2016; 9: 291-299https://doi.org/10.2147/CEG.S111820
        • Greenan G.
        • Rogers B.D.
        • Sifrim D.
        • Gyawali C.P.
        Solid bolus swallows during high-resolution manometry complement multiple rapid swallows in predicting symptoms following antireflux surgery.
        Neuro Gastroenterol Motil. 2022; (00)e14336
        • Martin-Harris B.
        • Canon C.L.
        • Bonilha H.S.
        • Murray J.
        • Davidson K.
        • Lefton-Greif M.A.
        Best practices in modified barium swallow studies.
        Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2020; 29: 1078-1093https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_AJSLP-19-00189