Display options
Share it on

Ann Transl Med. 2021 May;9(10):906. doi: 10.21037/atm.2020.03.149.

Manometric pattern progression in esophageal achalasia in the era of high-resolution manometry.

Annals of translational medicine

Renato Salvador, Mario Costantini, Salvatore Tolone, Pietro Familiari, Ermenegildo Galliani, Bastianello Germanà, Edoardo Savarino, Stefano Merigliano, Michele Valmasoni

Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, School of Medicine, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
  2. Division of General, Mininvasive and Bariatric Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
  3. Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
  4. Gastroenterology Unit, San Martino Hospital, ULSS 1, Belluno, Italy.

PMID: 34164540 PMCID: PMC8184468 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2020.03.149

Abstract

Esophageal manometry represents the gold standard technique for the diagnosis of esophageal achalasia because it can detect both the lack of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxation and abnormal peristalsis. From the manometric standpoint, cases of achalasia can be segregated on the grounds of three clinically relevant patterns according to the Chicago Classification v3.0. It is currently unclear whether they represent distinct entities or are part of a disease continuum with the possibility of transition from a pattern to another one. The four cases described in the present report could provide further insights on this topic because the manometric pattern changed from type III to type II in all patients-without any invasive treatment. The cases described here support the hypothesis that the different manometric patterns of achalasia represent different stages in the evolution of the same disease, type III being the early stage, type II an intermediate stage, and type I probably the end stage of achalasia.

2021 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Achalasia; Padova theory; manometric pattern

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm.2020.03.149). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

  1. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2015 Feb;27(2):160-74 - PubMed
  2. Am J Gastroenterol. 1980 Apr;73(4):325-8 - PubMed
  3. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Feb;12(2):A25-6 - PubMed
  4. ACG Case Rep J. 2016 Dec 21;3(4):e183 - PubMed
  5. Dig Dis Sci. 1990 Sep;35(9):1162-6 - PubMed
  6. Surg Endosc. 2017 Sep;31(9):3510-3518 - PubMed
  7. Can J Surg. 1972 May;15(3):190-201 - PubMed
  8. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016 Jan;20(1):125-31; discussion 131 - PubMed
  9. Dig Liver Dis. 2018 Apr;50(4):342-347 - PubMed
  10. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005 Jun;100(6):1404-14 - PubMed
  11. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2012 Mar;24 Suppl 1:27-31 - PubMed
  12. Gastroenterology. 2008 Nov;135(5):1526-33 - PubMed
  13. Gastroenterology. 1979 Mar;76(3):450-7 - PubMed
  14. Gastroenterology. 2008 Jan;134(1):16-8 - PubMed
  15. Dis Esophagus. 2009;22(7):611-5 - PubMed
  16. J Clin Gastroenterol. 1991 Oct;13(5):554-8 - PubMed
  17. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011 Mar;15(3):423-8 - PubMed
  18. J Am Coll Surg. 2009 Jan;208(1):151-62 - PubMed

Publication Types