Jung, Kee Wook

Abstract Chicago Classification v4.0 (CCv4.0) is the updated classification scheme for esophageal motility disorders using metrics from high‐resolution manometry (HRM). Fifty‐two diverse international experts separated into seven working subgroups utilized formal validated methodologies over two‐years to develop CCv4.0. Key updates in CCv.4.0 consist of a more rigorous and expansive HRM protocol that incorporates supine and upright test positions as well as provocative testing, a refined definition of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow obstruction (EGJOO), more stringent diagnostic criteria for ineffective esophageal motility and description of baseline EGJ metrics. Further, the CCv4.0 sought to define motility disorder diagnoses as conclusive and inconclusive based on associated symptoms, and findings on provocative testing as well as supportive testing with barium esophagram with tablet and/or functional lumen imaging probe. These changes attempt to minimize ambiguity in prior iterations of Chicago Classification and provide more standardized and rigorous criteria for patterns of disorders of peristalsis and obstruction at the EGJ.

Abstract Background This manuscript summarizes consensus reached by the International Anorectal Physiology Working Group (IAPWG) for the performance, terminology used, and interpretation of anorectal function testing including anorectal manometry (focused on high‐resolution manometry), the rectal sensory test, and the balloon expulsion test. Based on these measurements, a classification system for disorders of anorectal function is proposed. Methods Twenty‐nine working group members (clinicians/academics in the field of gastroenterology, coloproctology, and gastrointestinal physiology) were invited to six face‐to‐face and three remote meetings to derive consensus between 2014 and 2018. Key recommendations The IAPWG protocol for the performance of anorectal function testing recommends a standardized sequence of maneuvers to test rectoanal reflexes, anal tone and contractility, rectoanal coordination, and rectal sensation. Major findings not seen in healthy controls defined by the classification are as follows: rectoanal areflexia, anal hypotension and hypocontractility, rectal hyposensitivity, and hypersensitivity. Minor and inconclusive findings that can be present in health and require additional information prior to diagnosis include anal hypertension and dyssynergia. Conclusions and Inferences This framework introduces the IAPWG protocol and the London classification for disorders of anorectal function based on objective physiological measurement. The use of a common language to describe results of diagnostic tests, standard operating procedures, and a consensus classification system is designed to bring much‐needed standardization to these techniques.

AbstractBackgroundHigh‐resolution manometry using the Chicago classification, which utilizes parameters including integrated relaxation pressure (IRP), distal contractile integral (DCI), and contractile front velocity (CFV), shows better diagnostic ability than previous conventional criteria. However, the current normal cut‐off values for the Chicago classification are based on individuals aged 19–48 years and do not include older people. Here, we aimed to assess the normal values for the Chicago classification in individuals aged 20–67 years and compare the parameters across age groups.MethodsFifty‐four asymptomatic healthy individuals (27 male and 27 female; age range. 20–67 years) were prospectively enrolled. To evaluate the effect of age and sex on manometric profiles, we attempted to enroll equal numbers of male and female subjects for each decade. Manometry was performed in both the supine and sitting positions.Key ResultsThe distal latency (DL) was significantly shorter with increasing age in both measurement positions. Furthermore, IRP was significantly higher with increasing age in both positions. Spearman's ranked correlation coefficient analysis indicated that DCI and IRP in both positions were positively correlated with age.Conclusions & InferencesAge affects the key parameters currently used in the Chicago classification, including IRP, DCI, and DL. Larger prospective studies with older subjects are needed to determine the age‐related normal values for the Chicago classification system.