The Chicago Classification v4.0 (CCv4.0) is the updated classification scheme for esophageal motility disorders using metrics from high-resolution manometry (HRM). A key feature of CCv.4.0 is the more rigorous and expansive protocol that incorporates single wet swallows acquired in different positions (supine, upright) and provocative testing, including multiple rapid swallows and rapid drink challenge. Additionally, solid bolus swallows, solid test meal, and/or pharmacologic provocation can be used to identify clinically relevant motility disorders and other conditions (eg, rumination) that occur during and after meals. The acquisition and analysis for performing these tests and the evidence supporting their inclusion in the Chicago Classification protocol is detailed in this technical review. Provocative tests are designed to increase the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of HRM studies for disorders of esophageal motility. These changes attempt to minimize ambiguity in prior iterations of Chicago Classification, decrease the proportion of HRM studies that deliver inconclusive diagnoses and increase the number of patients with a clinically relevant diagnosis that can direct effective therapy. Another aim in establishing a standard manometry protocol for motility laboratories around the world is to facilitate procedural consistency, improve diagnostic reliability, and promote collaborative research.

Chicago classification version 4.0© technical review: Update on standard high-resolution manometry protocol for the assessment of esophageal motility.

Background Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is an increasingly common cause of dysphagia in both children and adults, as well as one of the most prevalent oesophageal diseases with a significant impact on physical health and quality of life. We have provided a single comprehensive guideline for both paediatric and adult gastroenterologists on current best practice for the evaluation and management of EoE. Methods The Oesophageal Section of the British Society of Gastroenterology was commissioned by the Clinical Standards Service Committee to develop these guidelines. The Guideline Development Group included adult and paediatric gastroenterologists, surgeons, dietitians, allergists, pathologists and patient representatives. The Population, Intervention, Comparator and Outcomes process was used to generate questions for a systematic review of the evidence. Published evidence was reviewed and updated to June 2021. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to assess the evidence and make recommendations. Two rounds of voting were held to assess the level of agreement and the strength of recommendations, with 80% consensus required for acceptance. Results Fifty-seven statements on EoE presentation, diagnosis, investigation, management and complications were produced with further statements created on areas for future research. Conclusions These comprehensive adult and paediatric guidelines of the British Society of Gastroenterology and British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition are based on evidence and expert consensus from a multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals, including patient advocates and patient support groups, to help clinicians with the management patients with EoE and its complications.

/pdf/british-society-of-gastroenterology-bsg-and-british-society-2rvaykhm.pdf

British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (BSPGHAN) joint consensus guidelines on the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic oesophagitis in children and adults

Background and aims This study aimed to systematically evaluate a classification scheme of secondary peristalsis using functional luminal imaging probe (FLIP) panometry through comparison with primary peristalsis on high-resolution manometry (HRM). Methods 706 adult patients that completed FLIP and HRM for primary esophageal motility evaluation and 35 asymptomatic volunteers ("controls") were included. Secondary peristalsis, that is, contractile responses (CRs), was classified on FLIP panometry by the presence and pattern of contractility as normal (NCR), borderline (BCR), impaired/disordered (IDCR), absent (ACR), or spastic-reactive (SRCR). Primary peristalsis on HRM was assessed according to the Chicago Classification. Results All 35 of the controls had antegrade contractions on FLIP panometry with either NCR (89%) or BCR (11%). The average percentages of normal swallows on HRM varied across contractile response patterns from 84% in NCR, 68% in BCR, 39% in IDCR, to 11% in ACR, as did the percentage of failed swallows on HRM: 4% in NCR, 12% in BCR, 36% in IDCR, and 79% in ACR. SRCR on FLIP panometry was observed in 18/57 (32%) patients with type III achalasia, 4/15 (27%) with distal esophageal spasm, and 7/15 (47%) with hypercontractile esophagus on HRM. Conclusions The FLIP panometry contractile response patterns reflect a pathophysiologic transition from normal to abnormal esophageal peristaltic function with shared features with primary peristaltic function/dysfunction on HRM. Thus, these patterns of the contractile response to distension can facilitate the evaluation of esophageal motility using FLIP panometry.

Validation of secondary peristalsis classification using FLIP panometry in 741 subjects undergoing manometry

http://www.gastrojournal.org/article/S0016508522001974/pdf

Esophageal Motility Disorders: Current Approach to Diagnostics and Therapeutics.

Esophageal hypomotility disorders manifest with abnormal esophageal body contraction vigor, breaks in peristaltic integrity, or failure of peristalsis in the context of normal lower esophageal sphincter relaxation on esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM). The Chicago Classification version 4.0 recognizes two hypomotility disorders, ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) and absent contractility, while fragmented peristalsis has been incorporated into the IEM definition. Updated criteria for ineffective swallows consist of weak esophageal body contraction vigor measured using distal contractile integral (DCI, 100-450 mmHg·cm·s), transition zone defects >5 cm measured using a 20 mmHg isobaric contour, or failure of peristalsis (DCI < 100 mmHg·cm·s). More than 70% ineffective swallows and/or ≥50% failed swallows are required for a conclusive diagnosis of IEM. When the diagnosis is inconclusive (50%-70% ineffective swallows), supplementary evidence from multiple rapid swallows (absence of contraction reserve), barium radiography (abnormal bolus clearance), or HRM with impedance (abnormal bolus clearance) could support a diagnosis of IEM. Absent contractility requires 100% failed peristalsis, consistent with previous versions of the classification. Consideration needs to be given for the possibility of achalasia in absent contractility with dysphagia despite normal IRP, and alternate complementary tests (including timed upright barium esophagram and functional lumen imaging probe) are recommended to confirm or refute the presence of achalasia. Future research to quantify esophageal bolus retention on stationary HRM with impedance and to understand contraction vigor thresholds that predict bolus clearance will provide further refinement to diagnostic criteria for esophageal hypomotility disorders in future iterations of the Chicago Classification.

Chicago Classification update (V4.0): Technical review on diagnostic criteria for ineffective esophageal motility and absent contractility.

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.

/pdf/esophageal-motility-disorders-on-high-resolution-manometry-aekmrg7lzj.pdf

Arash Babaei

Papers

Esophageal motility disorders on high-resolution manometry: Chicago classification version 4.0©