Pandolfino, John E.

Summary Achalasia is a motility condition defined by failure of relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter and loss of peristalsis in the distal esophagus. Per-oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a technique to reduce lower esophageal sphincter pressure. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between POEM and the clinical outcomes. We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis (CRD420251052240). Literature search was done on PubMed and Embase (up to 8 June 2025). Original studies involving achalasia patients who underwent esophageal POEM with impedance planimetry using 8-cm balloon at 30 or 40 mL filling volumes with 325 catheter only (not the 322-N catheter) were included. The outcomes of interest were the clinical response groups (responders’ Eckardt score [ES] < 3 and non-responders’ ES > 3), reflux esophagitis, cross-sectional area (CSA), distensibility index (DI), and diameter. Nineteen studies with 1215 patients were included. The responders (ES < 3) showed a statistically significantly greater increase in DI due to POEM (post-op minus pre-op) (mean difference [MD] = 1.92 mm2/mmHg [0.32, 3.53], P = 0.02) as well as a higher postoperative DI (MD = 1.87 mm2/mmHg [0.04, 3.70], P = 0.05) (40 mL). Reflux esophagitis group had statistically significantly higher CSA and diameter values (CSA MD = 15.68 mm2 [6.91, 24.24], P = 0.0005) (diameter MD = 0.96 mm [0.58, 1.33], P < 0.00001) but no statistically significant difference for DI as compared to the non-reflux esophagitis group (DI MD = 0.19 mm2/mmHg [−0.51, 0.89], P = 0.59). In achalasia patients undergoing esophageal POEM, a greater interval increase in the DI as well as a higher post-procedural DI absolute value predicts a favorable clinical response. Higher postoperative CSA and diameter were linked to reflux esophagitis.

AbstractBackgroundDespite the established efficacy of achalasia treatments on symptomatic outcomes, there are limited data evaluating the treatment effect on esophageal dilatation. This study aimed to assess the effect achalasia treatment on esophageal dilatation and the effect of esophageal width reduction (“recoil”) on clinical outcomes.MethodsPatients with type I or type II achalasia that completed high‐resolution manometry (HRM), functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP), and timed barium esophagram (TBE) pre and post treatment were included. Esophageal width was measured using TBE. Focused subgroup analysis was performed on patients with normal posttreatment EGJ opening on FLIP. Good clinical outcomes were defined as barium column height of <5 cm at 5 min and Eckardt Score ≤3.Key ResultsSixty‐nine patients (41% type I and 59% type II) were included. Esophageal width decreased from pre to post treatment mean (SD) 4.2 (1.3) cm–2.8 (1.2) cm; p < 0.01. In the normal post treatment EGJ opening subgroup, esophageal width was less in patients with good TBE outcome compared to poor outcome mean (SD) 2.2 (0.7) cm versus 3.2 (1.4) cm (p < 0.01), but did not differ in good versus poor symptomatic outcome groups. Esophageal width recoil >25% posttreatment was associated with a greater rate of good TBE outcome (71% vs. 50%, p = 0.04) and good symptomatic outcome (88% vs. 50%; p = 0.04).Conclusions and InferencesEsophageal recoil was associated with good achalasia treatment outcome in patients without posttreatment EGJ obstruction. This suggests that mechanical properties of the esophageal wall, likely associated with tissue remodeling, play a role in clinical outcomes following achalasia treatment.

Goals: Develop quality indicators for ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). Background: IEM is identified in up to 20% of patients undergoing esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) based on the Chicago Classification. The clinical significance of this pattern is not established and management remains challenging. Study: Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methods, we employed a modified-Delphi approach for quality indicator statement development. Quality indicators were proposed based on prior literature. Experts independently and blindly scored proposed quality statements on importance, scientific acceptability, usability, and feasibility in a 3-round iterative process. Results: All 10 of the invited esophageal experts in the management of esophageal diseases invited to participate rated 12 proposed quality indicator statements. In round 1, 7 quality indicators were rated with mixed agreement, on the majority of categories. Statements were modified based on panel suggestion, modified further following round 2’s virtual discussion, and in round 3 voting identified 2 quality indicators with comprehensive agreement, 4 with partial agreement, and 1 without any agreement. The panel agreed on the concept of determining if IEM is clinically relevant to the patient’s presentation and managing gastroesophageal reflux disease rather than the IEM pattern; they disagreed in all 4 domains on the use of promotility agents in IEM; and had mixed agreement on the value of a finding of IEM during anti-reflux surgical planning. Conclusion: Using a robust methodology, 2 IEM quality indicators were identified. These quality indicators can track performance when physicians identify this manometric pattern on HRM. This study further highlights the challenges met with IEM and the need for additional research to better understand the clinical importance of this manometric pattern.

AbstractBackgroundDiagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) can be challenging given varying symptom presentations, and complex multifactorial pathophysiology. The gold standard for GERD diagnosis is esophageal acid exposure time (AET) measured by pH‐metry. A variety of additional diagnostic tools are available. The goal of this consensus was to assess the individual merits of GERD diagnostic tools based on current evidence, and provide consensus recommendations following discussion and voting by experts.MethodsThis consensus was developed by 15 experts from nine countries, based on a systematic search of the literature, using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) methodology to assess the quality and strength of the evidence, and provide recommendations regarding the diagnostic utility of different GERD diagnosis tools, using AET as the reference standard.Key ResultsA proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trial is appropriate for patients with heartburn and no alarm symptoms, but nor for patients with regurgitation, chest pain, or extraesophageal presentations. Severe erosive esophagitis and abnormal reflux monitoring off PPI are clearly indicative of GERD. Esophagram, esophageal biopsies, laryngoscopy, and pharyngeal pH monitoring are not recommended to diagnose GERD. Patients with PPI‐refractory symptoms and normal endoscopy require reflux monitoring by pH or pH‐impedance to confirm or exclude GERD, and identify treatment failure mechanisms. GERD confounders need to be considered in some patients, pH‐impedance can identify supragrastric belching, impedance‐manometry can diagnose rumination.ConclusionsErosive esophagitis on endoscopy and abnormal pH or pH‐impedance monitoring are the most appropriate methods to establish a diagnosis of GERD. Other tools may add useful complementary information.

AbstractBackground and AimsSome achalasia patients exhibit esophageal contractile activity on follow‐up after treatment, yet its importance remains unclear. We aimed to identify factors associated with presence of contractility after treatment and to assess its impact on timed barium esophagram (TBE) and clinical outcomes.MethodsPatients with type I or II achalasia on baseline high‐resolution manometry (HRM) who completed HRM, TBE, and functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) after treatment were retrospectively identified. Contractility was defined on post‐treatment HRM as presence of at least 1 supine swallow with DCI ≥100 mmHg s cm.Key ResultsOne hundred twenty‐two patients were included (mean age 48 ± 17 years, 50% female). At follow‐up evaluation after treatment (54% peroral endoscopic myotomy, 24% pneumatic dilation, 22% laparoscopic Heller myotomy), 61 (50%) patients had contractility on HRM. Patients with contractility (compared to those without) more frequently had type II achalasia (84% vs 57%, p = 0.001) and a post‐treatment normal EGJ opening classification on FLIP (69% vs 49%; p < 0.001). In the subgroup of patients with post‐treatment integrated relaxation pressure <15 mmHg and normal EGJ opening on FLIP (n = 53), those with contractility had a lower median column height on TBE at 1 min (4 vs 7 cm, p = 0.002) and 5 min (0 vs 5 cm, p = 0.001). In patients with “abnormal” EGJ metrics, patients with contractility showed lower symptom scores (median Eckardt score 2 vs 3, p = 0.03).Conclusions & InferencesOccurring more frequently in type II achalasia, and if adequate EGJ opening is achieved after treatment, esophageal contractility may contribute to improved esophageal emptying and improved symptoms in non‐spastic achalasia. Preservation of esophageal body muscle could improve outcomes in these patients.

AbstractBackground and AimsThe distal contractile integral (DCI) quantifies the contractile vigor of primary peristalsis on high‐resolution manometry (HRM), whereas no such metric exists for secondary peristalsis on functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) panometry. This study aimed to evaluate novel FLIP metrics of contraction power and displaced volume in asymptomatic controls and a patient cohort.MethodsThirty‐five asymptomatic controls and adult patients (with normal esophagogastric junction outflow/opening and without spasm) who completed HRM and FLIP panometry were included. The patient group also completed timed barium esophagram (TBE). Contraction power (estimate of esophageal work over time) and displaced volume (estimate of contraction‐associated fluid flow) were computed from FLIP. HRM was analyzed per Chicago Classification v4.0.Key ResultsIn controls, median (5th–95th percentile) contraction power was 27 mW (10–44) and displaced volume was 43 mL (17–66). 95 patients were included: 72% with normal motility on HRM, 17% with ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), and 12% with absent contractility. Among patients, DCI was significantly correlated with both contraction power (rho = 0.499) and displaced volume (rho = 0.342); p values < 0.001. Both contraction power and displaced volume were greater in patients with normal motility versus IEM or absent contractility, complete versus incomplete bolus transit, and normal versus abnormal retention on TBE; p values < 0.02.ConclusionsFLIP panometry metrics of contraction power and displaced volume appeared to effectively quantify peristaltic vigor. These novel metrics may enhance evaluation of esophageal motility with FLIP panometry and provide a reliable surrogate to DCI on HRM.

AbstractBackgroundPrimary and secondary peristalsis facilitate esophageal bolus transport; however, their relative impact for bolus clearance remains unclear. We aimed to compare primary peristalsis and contractile reserve on high‐resolution manometry (HRM) and secondary peristalsis on functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) Panometry with emptying on timed barium esophagogram (TBE) and incorporate findings into a comprehensive model of esophageal function.MethodsAdult patients who completed HRM with multiple rapid swallows (MRS), FLIP, and TBE for esophageal motility evaluation and without abnormal esophagogastric junction outflow/opening or spasm were included. An abnormal TBE was defined as a 1‐min column height >5 cm. Primary peristalsis and contractile reserve after MRS were combined into an HRM–MRS model. Secondary peristalsis was combined with primary peristalsis assessment to describe a complementary neuromyogenic model.Key ResultsOf 89 included patients, differences in rates of abnormal TBEs were observed with primary peristalsis classification (normal: 14.3%; ineffective esophageal motility: 20.0%; absent peristalsis: 54.5%; p = 0.009), contractile reserve (present: 12.5%; absent: 29.3%; p = 0.05), and secondary peristalsis (normal: 9.7%; borderline: 17.6%; impaired/disordered: 28.6%; absent contractile response: 50%; p = 0.039). Logistic regression analysis (akaike information criteria, area under the receiver operating curve) demonstrated that the neuromyogenic model (80.8, 0.83) had a stronger relationship predicting abnormal TBE compared to primary peristalsis (81.5, 0.82), contractile reserve (86.8, 0.75), or secondary peristalsis (89.0, 0.78).Conclusions and InferencesPrimary peristalsis, contractile reserve, and secondary peristalsis were associated with abnormal esophageal retention as measured by TBE. Added benefit was observed when applying comprehensive models to incorporate primary and secondary peristalsis supporting their complementary application.

INTRODUCTION: High-resolution manometry (HRM) and functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) are primary and/or complementary diagnostic tools for the evaluation of esophageal motility. We aimed to assess the interrater agreement and accuracy of HRM and FLIP interpretations. METHODS: Esophageal motility specialists from multiple institutions completed the interpretation of 40 consecutive HRM and 40 FLIP studies. Interrater agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for continuous variables and Fleiss' κ statistics for nominal variables. Accuracies of rater interpretation were assessed using the consensus of 3 experienced raters as the reference standard. RESULTS: Fifteen raters completed the HRM and FLIP studies. An excellent interrater agreement was seen in supine median integral relaxation pressure (ICC 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.95–0.98), and a good agreement was seen with the assessment of esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow, peristalsis, and assignment of a Chicago Classification version 4.0 diagnosis using HRM (κ = 0.71, 0.75, and 0.70, respectively). An excellent interrater agreement for EGJ distensibility index and maximum diameter (0.91 [0.90–0.94], 0.92 [0.89–0.95]) was seen, and a moderate-to-good agreement was seen in the assignment of EGJ opening classification, contractile response pattern, and motility classification (κ = 0.68, 0.56, and 0.59, respectively) on FLIP. Rater accuracy for Chicago Classification version 4.0 diagnosis on HRM was 82% (95% confidence interval 78%–84%) and for motility diagnosis on FLIP Panometry was 78% (95% confidence interval 72%–81%). DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates high levels of interrater agreement and accuracy in the interpretation of HRM and FLIP metrics and moderate-to-high levels for motility classification in FLIP, supporting the use of these approaches for primary or complementary evaluation of esophageal motility disorders.

AbstractBackgroundThe functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) evaluates esophagogastric junction (EGJ) opening and esophageal contractility. Both post hoc and real‐time analyses are possible, but reproducibility and reliability of analysis remain undefined. This study assesses inter‐ and intra‐rater agreement of normative FLIP measurements among novice and experienced users.MethodsEight motility experts from different institutions independently evaluated de‐identified video recordings from 27 asymptomatic healthy subjects using FLIP. Interpretation methods simulating a post‐procedure and a live procedure setting were tested. Novice FLIP users (n = 3) received training prior to post‐procedure interpretation. Experienced FLIP users (n = 5) interpreted using both methods. Users recorded maximum EGJ and distal esophageal body diameter, distensive pressure, and EGJ distensibility index (EGJ‐DI), at balloon fill volumes of 50‐, 60‐, and 70 ml, as well as repetitive antegrade contractions (RACs). Inter‐ and intra‐rater agreements of diameters, distensive pressure and EGJ‐DI were assessed by intra‐class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC). Percentage agreement evaluated inter‐ and intra‐rater reliability for RACs.Key ResultsNovice and experienced users acquired normative FLIP metrics. Good‐to‐excellent inter‐ and intra‐rater reliability were achieved for all variables at 60 ml balloon fill volumes. Median parameters at 60 ml balloon fill volume were as follows: EGJ‐DI 5.5 mm2/mmHg, maximum EGJ diameter 18.6 mm, distensive pressure at maximum EGJ diameter 48.1 mmHg, and distal esophageal body diameter 19.5 mm.Conclusions and InferencesNormative FLIP parameters can be reliably extracted from FLIP videos using both real‐time and post hoc analyses, with high reliability between experienced and novice users.

SummaryBackgroundAchalasia is a debilitating major motor disorder of the oesophagus. Hypervigilance and symptom‐specific anxiety substantially impact dysphagia symptom reporting, and quality of life is a critical patient outcome. Earlier achalasia symptom scales did not consider these constructs in their psychometric development.AimTo develop a new symptom measure, the Achalasia Patient‐Reported Outcomes (APRO) QuestionnaireMethodsFour gastroenterologists with achalasia expertise generated preliminary items. Patients reviewed items via cognitive interviews. Patients undergoing high‐resolution manometry completed the APRO with Oesophageal Hypervigilance and Anxiety Scale, Northwestern Oesophageal Quality of Life Scale, and three measures of reflux and dysphagia. Full APRO psychometric assessment (reliability, validity, factor structure) was done. Cluster analysis evaluated APRO + symptom‐anxiety/hypervigilance patient phenotypes.ResultsWe included 961 patients with normal motility and 296 with achalasia. The APRO yielded three subscales: dysphagia, reflux, chest pain with two items for weight change and diet modifications. Reliability and validity were excellent. Twenty‐five percent of achalasia patients may have high levels of anxiety/hypervigilance despite low symptoms, while 8% may report severe symptoms with low anxiety/hypervigilance. The APRO significantly predicted quality of life, but less cognitive‐affective processes.ConclusionsThe APRO is a reliable and valid measure of achalasia symptoms that addresses the limitations of existing questionnaires. Symptom anxiety and hypervigilance moderate the relationship between APRO and quality of life; 33% of patients with achalasia exhibit concerning patterns in symptom severity, anxiety and hypervigilance that may contribute to poorer outcomes.