Clinical Trials Directory

Trials / Unknown

UnknownNCT05913011

Prevalence of IEM Among Upper GIT Symptoms

Prevalence of Ineffective Esophageal Motility Among Upper Gastrointestinal Symptoms

Status
Unknown
Phase
Study type
Observational
Enrollment
50 (estimated)
Sponsor
Assiut University · Academic / Other
Sex
All
Age
18 Years
Healthy volunteers

Summary

* detect the prevalence of IEM among upper git symptom . * clarify the role of HRM in diagnosis of refractory upper GIT symptoms.

Detailed description

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is characterized by both failed peristalsis and frequent swallows with breaks in the middle/distal peristaltic wave and it may result in symptoms reflecting poor esophageal emptying. As such, IEM may play a role in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and nonobstructive dysphagia.1 The definition of IEM has evolved after the introduction of high-resolution manometry (HRM), esophageal pressur topography (EPT), and the Chicago Classification of esophageal motility, that-in its second version-defined IEM as weak peristalsis, small (2-5 cm) and large (over 5 cm) peristaltic defects, or frequent (\>30%) failed peristalsis. 2 More recently however, the updated third version of the Chicago Classification eliminated small and large breaks from the list of criteria and defined ineffective swallows by a DCI \< 45 mmHg.s.cm with ≥50% ineffective swallows constituting IEM, thus eliminating the distinction between failed swallows and weak swallows.3 IEM, as well as fragmented peristalsis, is considered as minor disorders of peristalsis and their clinical significance remains debatable. IEM is the most common abnormality observed in routine esophageal manometry, with an estimated prevalence of 20%-30% reported a prevalence of 51% in patients with esophageal dysphagia. Before 2008 a threshold of 30% was used, but a threshold of 50% correlates better with dysphagia and heartburn. High-resolution manometry (HRM) provides an improved and more detailed information on esophageal motility when compared to conventional manometry, and today is considered the best test for diagnosis of motility disorders.

Conditions

Timeline

Start date
2023-08-01
Primary completion
2024-08-01
Completion
2024-09-01
First posted
2023-06-22
Last updated
2023-06-22

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT05913011. Inclusion in this directory is not an endorsement.