Browsing by Author "Marin, Ingrid"
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Breaks in peristaltic integrity predict abnormal esophageal bolus clearance better than contraction vigor or residual pressure at the esophagogastric junction(2021) Rogers, Benjamin D.; Cisternas, Daniel; Rengarajan, Arvind; Marin, Ingrid; Abrahao Jr, Luiz; Hani,Albis; Lequizamo, Ana M.; Remes-Troche, José M.; Perez de la Serna, Julio; Ruiz de Leon, Antonio; Zerbib, Frank; Serra, Jordi; Gyawali, C. PrakashBackground: High- resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) evaluates esophagealperistalsis and bolus transit. We used esophageal impedance integral (EII), the ratio between bolus presence before and after an expected peristaltic wave, to evaluate predictors of bolus transit. Methods: From HRIM studies performed on 61 healthy volunteers (median age 27 years, 48%F), standard metrics were extracted from each of 10 supine water swallows: distal contractile integral (DCI, mmHg cm s), integrated relaxation pressure(IRP, mmHg), and breaks in peristaltic integrity (cm, using 20 mmHg isobaric contour). Pressure and impedance coordinates for each swallow were exported into a dedi -cated, python- based program for EII calculation (EII ratio ≥ 0.3 = abnormal bolus clear -ance). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess predictors of abnormal bolus clearance. Key Results: Of 591 swallows, 80.9% were intact, 10.5% were weak, and 8.6% failed. Visual analysis overestimated abnormal bolus clearance compared to EII ratio (p ≤ 0.01). Bolus clearance was complete (median EII ratio 0.0, IQR 0– 0.12) in 82.0% of intact swallows in contrast to 53.3% of weak swallows (EII ratio 0.29, IQR 0.0– 0.57), and 19.6% of failed swallows (EII ratio 0.5, IQR 0.34– 0.73, p < 0.001). EII correlated best with break length (ρ = 0.52, p < 0.001), compared to IRP (ρ: −0.17) or DCI (ρ: −0.42). On ROC analysis, breaks predicted abnormal bolus transit better than DCI or IRP (AUC 0.79 vs. 0.25 vs. 0.44, p ≤ 0.03 for each). On logistic regression, breaks remained independently predictive of abnormal bolus transit (p < 0.001). Conclusions & Inferences: Breaks in peristaltic integrity predict abnormal bolus clear-ance better than DCI or IRP in healthy asymptomatic subjects.Item Fair reliability of eckardt scores in achalasia and non-achalasia patients: Psychometric properties of the eckardt spanish version in a multicentric study(2020) Cisternas, Daniel; Monrroy, Hugo; Riquelme, Arnoldo; Padilla, Oslando; Fuentes-López, Eduardo; Valle, Arturo; Mejia, Ricardo; Hani, Albis; Ardila-Hani, Andres F; Leguizamo, Ana Maria; Bilder, Claudio; Ditaranto, Andres; Remes-Troche, Jose Maria; Ruiz de León, Antonio; Pérez de la Serna, Julio; Marin, Ingrid; Serra, JordiBackground: Eckardt symptom score (ESS) is the most used tool for the evaluation of esophageal symptoms. Recent data suggest that it might have suboptimal reliability and validity. The aims of this study were as follows: (a) Develop and validate an international Spanish ESS version. (b) Perform psychometric ESS evaluation in patients with achalasia and non-achalasia patients. Methods: Eckardt symptom score translation was performed by Delphi process. ESS psychometric evaluation was done in two different samples of patients referred for manometry. First sample: 430 dysphagia non-achalasia patients. Second sample: 161 achalasia patients. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's α and Guttman coefficient (<0.5 = unacceptable. 0.5-0.7 = fair. >0.7 = acceptable). Key results: Our data show that in patients without and with achalasia, ESS behaves similarly. Both show a fair reliability with Cronbach's α of 0.57 and 0.65, respectively. Based on our results, we recommend interpretation of the Spanish ESS be done with caution. The psychometric quality of the ESS could not be improved by removal of any items based on the single-factor structure of the scale and no items meeting criteria for elimination. Conclusions and inferences: Eckardt symptom score Spanish translation was developed. ESS showed a fair reliability for the evaluation of patients with any causes of dysphagia. Our results highlight the need for development and psychometric validation of new dysphagia scoring tools.Item Ineffective esophageal motility and bolus clearance. A study with combined high-resolution manometry and impedance in asymptomatic controls and patients(2020) Zerbib, Frank; Marin, Ingrid; Cisternas, Daniel; Abrahao Jr, Luiz; Hani, Albis; Leguizamo, Ana M.; Remes-Troche, José M.; Perez de la Serna, Julio; Ruiz de Leon, Antonio; Serra, JordiBackground The definition and relevance of ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) remains debated. Our aim was to determine motility patterns and symptoms associated with IEM defined as impaired bolus clearance. Methods To define altered bolus clearance, normal range of swallows with complete bolus transit (CBT) on high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM) was determined in 44 asymptomatic controls. The results were then applied to a cohort of 81 patients with esophageal symptoms to determine the motility patterns which best predicted altered bolus clearance. Subsequently, in a cohort of 281 consecutive patients the identified motility patterns were compared with patients’ customary symptoms. Key Results In asymptomatic controls, the normal range of swallows with CBT was 50%-100%. In patients, altered bolus transit (<50% CBT) was only associated with 30% or more failed contractions (P < .001). Neither weak peristalsis nor absence of contraction reserve (CR) was associated with altered bolus clearance. The patterns which best predicted altered bolus clearance were failed contractions ≥30% (specificity 88.2% and sensitivity of 84.6%), and ≥70% ineffective (failed + weak) contractions (sensitivity 84.6% and specificity 80.9%). No motility pattern was correlated to symptom scores. Conclusions and Inferences Based on bolus clearance assessed by HRIM, ≥30% failed contractions and ≥70% ineffective contractions have the best sensitivity and specificity to predict altered bolus clearance. Weak contractions and absence of CR are not relevant with respect to bolus clearance.Item The Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire shows better discriminative capacity for clinical and manometric findings than the Eckardt score: Results from a multicenter study(2021) Cisternas, Daniel; Taft, Tiffany; Carlson, Dustin A.; Glasinovic, Esteban; Monrroy, Hugo; Rey, Paula; Hani, Albis; Ardila-Hani, Andrés; Leguizamo, Ana Maria; Bilder, Claudio; Ditaranto, Andres; Varela, Amanda; Agotegaray, Joaquin; Remes-Troche, Jose Maria; Ruiz de León, Antonio; Pérez de la Serna, Julio; Marin, Ingrid; Serra, JordiIntroduction: Grading dysphagia is crucial for clinical management of patients. The Eckardt score (ES) is the most commonly used for this purpose. We aimed to compare the ES with the recently developed Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire (BEDQ) in terms of their correlation and discriminative capacity for clinical and manometric findings and evaluate the effect of gastroesophageal reflux symptoms on both. Methods: Symptomatic patients referred for high-resolution manometry (HRM) were prospectively recruited from seven centers in Spain and Latin America. Clinical data and several scores (ES, BEDQ, GERDQ) were collected and contrasted to HRM findings. Standard statistical analysis was performed. Key results: 426 patients were recruited, 31.2% and 41.5% being referred exclusively for dysphagia and GERD symptoms, respectively. Both BEDQ and ES were independently associated with achalasia. Only BEDQ was independently associated with being referred for dysphagia and with relevant HRM findings. ROC curve analysis for achalasia diagnosis showed AUC of 0.809 for BEDQ and 0.765 for ES, with the main difference being higher BEDQ sensitivity (80.0% vs 70.8% for ES). GERDQ independently predicted ES but not BEDQ. In the absence of dysphagia (BEDQ = 0), GERD symptoms significantly determine ES. Conclusions and inferences: Our study suggests both the BEDQ and ES can complementarily describe symptomatic burden in achalasia. BEDQ has several advantages over the ES in the dysphagia evaluation, basically due to its higher sensitivity for manometric diagnosis and independence of GERD symptoms. ES should be used as an achalasia-specific metric, while BEDQ is a better symptom-generic evaluating tool.Item The Spanish version of the esophageal hypervigilance and anxiety score shows strong psychometric properties: Results of a large prospective multicenter study in Spain and Latin America(2021) Cisternas, Daniel; Taft, Tiffany; Carlson, Dustin A.; Glasinovic, Esteban; Monrroy, Hugo; Rey, Paula; Hani, Albis; Ardila-Hani, Andrés; Leguizamo, Ana Maria; Bilder, Claudio; Ditaranto, Andres; Varela, Amanda; Agotegaray, Joaquin; Remes-Troche, Jose Maria; Ruiz de León, Antonio; Pérez de la Serna, Julio; Marin, Ingrid; Serra, JordiBackground: Anxiety is a significant modulator of sensitivity along the GI tract. The recently described Esophageal Hypervigilance and Anxiety Score (EHAS) evaluates esophageal-specific anxiety. The aims of this study were as follows: 1. translate and validate an international Spanish version of EHAS. 2. Evaluate its psychometric properties in a large Hispano-American sample of symptomatic individuals. Methods: A Spanish EHAS version was developed by a Delphi process and reverse translation. Patients referred for high-resolution manometry (HRM) were recruited prospectively from seven Spanish and Latin American centers. Several scores were used: EHAS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Eckardt score (ES), Gastroesophageal Reflux Questionnaire (GERDQ), and the Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire (BEDQ). Standardized psychometric analyses were performed. Key results: A total of 443 patients were recruited. Spanish EHAS showed excellent reliability (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.94). Factor analysis confirmed the presence of two factors, corresponding to the visceral anxiety and hypervigilance subscales. Sufficient convergent validity was shown by moderate significant correlations between EHAS and other symptomatic scores. Patients with high EHAS scores had significantly more dysphagia. There was no difference in EHAS scores when compared normal vs abnormal or major manometric diagnosis. Conclusions and inferences: A widely usable Spanish EHAS version has been validated. We confirm its excellent psychometric properties in our patients, confirming the appropriateness of its use in different populations. Our findings support the appropriateness of evaluating esophageal anxiety across the whole manometric diagnosis spectrum.Item Validation and psychometric evaluation of the Spanish version of Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire (BEDQ): Results of a multicentric study(2020) Cisternas, Daniel; Taft, Tiffany; Carlson, Dustin A.; Glasinovic, Esteban; Monrroy, Hugo; Rey, Paula; Hani, Albis; Ardila-Hani, Andres; Leguizamo, Ana Maria; Bilder, Claudio; Ditaranto, Andres; Varela, Amanda; Agotegaray, Joaquin; Remes-Troche, Jose Maria; Ruiz de León, Antonio; Pérez de la Serna, Julio; Marin, Ingrid; Serra, JordiBackground: The recently developed Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire (BEDQ) evaluates esophageal obstructive symptoms. Its initial evaluation showed strong psychometric properties. The aims of this study were to (a) translate and validate an international Spanish version of BEDQ and (b) evaluate its psychometric properties in a large Hispano-American sample of symptomatic individuals. Methods: A Spanish BEDQ version was performed by Hispano-American experts using a Delphi process and reverse translation. Patients were prospectively recruited from seven centers in Spain and Latin America among individuals referred for high-resolution manometry (HRM). Patients completed several scores: Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale (HADS), Eckardt score (ES), Gastroesophageal Reflux Questionnaire (GERDQ), and the BEDQ. Standardized psychometric analyses were performed. Key results: A total of 426 patients were recruited. Spanish BEDQ showed excellent reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.91). Factor analysis confirmed its unidimensional character. Moderate significant correlations between BEDQ and other symptomatic scores were found, suggesting sufficient convergent validity. Patients with abnormal or obstructive HRM findings scored significantly higher when compared to normal or non-obstructive findings, respectively. Using a cutoff of 10, BEDQ showed a sensitivity of 65.38% and a specificity of 66.21% and an area under the curve of 0.71 for obstructive or major manometric diagnosis. Conclusions and inferences: A widely usable Spanish BEDQ version has been validated. We confirm its excellent psychometric properties in our patients, confirming the appropriateness of its use in different populations