Search

Esophageal atresia (EA) with or without trachea-esophageal fistula is relatively common congenital malformation with most patients living into adulthood. As a result, care of the adult patient with EA is becoming more common. Although surgical repair has changed EA from a fatal to a livable condition, the residual effects of the anomaly may lead to a lifetime of complications. These include effects related to the underlying deformity such as atonicity of the esophageal segment, fistula recurrence, and esophageal cancer to complications of the surgery including anastomotic stricture, gastroesophageal reflux, and coping with an organ transposition. This review discusses the occurrence and management of these conditions in adulthood and the role of an effective transition from pediatric to adult care to optimize adult care treatment.

Botox injection during endoscopy is highly effective in patients with achalasia. However, treatment response is short in duration which poses a challenge in this chronic disease. There is limited data to suggest botox increases subsequent procedure technical difficulty or adverse events, and short term efficacy appears to be equal to other therapies. Therefore, botox is an appropriate therapy for those who require a bridge, like pregnant patients, or in high risk patients who are not candidates for myotomy. However, long term outcomes of treatment naïve patients undergoing definitive therapy may be better than previously treated patients, therefore, avoidance of botox is recommended when definitive therapy is possible. When the diagnosis of achalasia is in question, or if the presentation is not clear, botox could elucidate the treatment plan without major consequence on future therapies.

Achalasia is a rare chronic esophageal motility disorder characterized by incomplete relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter and abnormal peristalsis. This abnormal motor function leads to impaired bolus emptying and symptoms of dysphagia, regurgitation, chest pain, or heartburn. After an upper endoscopy to exclude structural causes of symptoms, the gold standard for diagnosis is high-resolution esophageal manometry. However, complementary diagnostic tools include barium esophagram and functional luminal impedance planimetry. Definitive treatments include pneumatic dilation, Heller myotomy with fundoplication, and peroral endoscopic myotomy.

Dietary interventions may alleviate symptoms related to functional gastrointestinal disorders, now termed disorders of gut-brain interaction. We reviewed which interventions have high-quality data to support their use in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), functional dyspepsia (FD), irritable bowel syndrome, and chronic idiopathic constipation.

Three manometric subtypes of achalasia were defined in the Chicago Classification approximately 10 years ago: type I (aperistalsis), type II (pan-pressurization), and type III (spastic). Since the widespread use of this classification scheme, the evolving prevalence of these subtypes has not been elucidated. We aim to determine the prevalence of each subtype a decade after the adoption of the Chicago Classification. This is a retrospective cohort analysis of patients diagnosed with achalasia on high-resolution manometry (HRM) at two major academic medical centers between 2015 and 2018. Patients were excluded if they had a diagnosis of another esophageal motility disorder, previously treated achalasia, or foregut surgery. Demographic data, manometric subtype, and esophageal dilatation grade on endoscopy were obtained. Prevalence of achalasia subtypes was compared with a published historical control population (2004–2007). Fischer’s exact and t tests were used for analysis. Of 147 patients in the contemporary cohort and 99 in the historical control cohort, the prevalence of type I achalasia was 8% versus 21%, type II 63% versus 50%, and type III 29% versus 29%, respectively (p = 0.01). The mean age in our population was 58 years compared to 57 years in the historical control, and the proportion of men 48% versus 47%, respectively (p = 0.78). Mean endoscopic dilatation grade in the contemporary cohort was 1.5 for type I patients, 0.9 for type II, and 0.4 for type III, compared with 1.5, 0.6, and 0.4, respectively. Overall mean dilatation grade was 0.8 in our cohort versus 0.7 in the historical control (p = 0.58). The prevalence of type II achalasia was significantly greater and prevalence of type I significantly less in our patient population compared to our predefined historical control. Other characteristics such as age and sex did not appear to contribute to these differences. Histopathological evidence has suggested that type II achalasia may be an earlier form of type I; thus, the increased prevalence of type II achalasia may be related to earlier detection of the disease. The adoption of HRM, widespread use of the Chicago Classification, and increased disease awareness in the past decade may be contributing to these changes in epidemiology.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a complex disorder. Symptoms of heartburn can help find the disorder of GERD. pH testing is the mainstay of evaluation of symptoms, including 24-h and longer pH studies to detect pathologic acid exposure. The use of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy for approved indications is helpful for both symptomatic relief and esophagitis healing in the majority of patients with abnormal acid exposure. PPI medications are safe in short- or long-term use. It is recommended not to maintain cirrhotic patients on PPI therapy without a meaningful indication. Dietary adjustment can provide benefit to some patients, but the data are mixed on how much benefit has been demonstrated from specific food avoidance. Reduction in weight improves reflux. Obesity has measurable effects on the esophageal acid exposure but fewer effects on the motility of the esophagus itself. Controlling weight and changing lifestyle can be helpful for improving GERD symptoms. For some patients in whom either the control of reflux with medications and lifestyle change is not sufficient or a hernia is contributing to symptom generation, surgical and endosurgical interventions can be considered to help manage reflux after a thorough workup with pH testing and manometry.

Background Marijuana use has been assessed in patients with chronic gastrointestinal disorders and may contribute to either symptoms or palliation. Use in those with celiac disease (CD) has not been assessed. Our aim was to evaluate patterns of marijuana use in a large population-based survey among patients with CD, people who avoid gluten (PWAG), and controls. Study We analyzed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2009 to 2014. χ tests and multivariable logistic regression were used to compare participants with CD and PWAG to controls regarding the use of marijuana. Results Among respondents who reported ever using marijuana (overall 59.1%), routine (at-least monthly) marijuana use was reported by 46% of controls versus 6% of participants with diagnosed CD (P=0.005) and 66% undiagnosed CD as identified on serology (P=0.098) and 51% of PWAG (P=0.536). Subjects with diagnosed CD had lower odds of routine marijuana use compared with controls (odds ratio, 0.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.73), whereas participants with undiagnosed CD had increased odds of routine use (odds ratio, 2.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-6.13), which remained elevated even after adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, health insurance status, alcohol, tobacco use, educational level, and poverty/income ratio. Conclusions In all groups, marijuana use was high. Although there were no differences among subjects with CD, PWAG, and controls who ever used marijuana, subjects with diagnosed CD appear to have decreased routine use of marijuana when compared with controls and PWAG. Those with undiagnosed CD have significantly higher rates of regular use. Future research should focus on the utilization of marijuana as it may contribute to further understanding of symptoms and treatments.

Background COVID-19 frequently presents with acute gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, but it is unclear how common these symptoms are after recovery. The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence and characteristics of GI symptoms after COVID-19. Methods The medical records of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 1 and June 30, 2020, were reviewed for the presence of GI symptoms at primary care follow-up 1 to 6 months later. The prevalence of new GI symptoms was estimated, and risk factors were assessed. Additionally, an anonymous survey was used to determine the prevalence of new GI symptoms among online support groups for COVID-19 survivors. Key results Among 147 patients without pre-existing GI conditions, the most common GI symptoms at the time of hospitalization for COVID-19 were diarrhea (23%), nausea/vomiting (21%), and abdominal pain (6.1%), and at a median follow-up time of 106 days, the most common GI symptoms were abdominal pain (7.5%), constipation (6.8%), diarrhea (4.1%), and vomiting (4.1%), with 16% reporting at least one GI symptom at follow-up (95% confidence interval 11 to 23%). Among 285 respondents to an online survey for self-identified COVID-19 survivors without pre-existing GI symptoms, 113 (40%) reported new GI symptoms after COVID-19 (95% CI 33.9 to 45.6%). Conclusion and inferences At a median of 106 days after discharge following hospitalization for COVID-19, 16% of unselected patients reported new GI symptoms at follow-up. 40% of patients from COVID survivor groups reported new GI symptoms. The ongoing GI effects of COVID-19 after recovery require further study.

Gastroparesis is common after lung transplantation and is associated with worse transplant outcomes, including the development of chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD). This study sought to identify the prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes associated with a new diagnosis of gastroparesis after lung transplantation.This was a single-center retrospective study of patients who underwent lung transplantation in 2008-2018. The primary outcome was a new diagnosis of gastroparesis within 3 years of transplant. Secondary outcomes included a new diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux and the association between gastroparesis and both post-transplant survival and CLAD-free survival. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare diagnosis of gastroparesis and gastroesophageal reflux, while multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze gastroparesis and post-transplant outcomes.Of 616 patients with no prior history of gastroparesis, 107 (17.4%) were diagnosed with delayed gastric emptying within 3 years of transplant. On multivariable logistic regression, black race (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.18-3.98, p = 0.013) was significantly associated with a new diagnosis of gastroparesis. Age, sex, history of diabetes, connective tissue disease, type of transplant, diagnosis group, renal function, and body mass index were not predictive of gastroparesis post-transplant. Gastroparesis was significantly associated with CLAD (HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.20-2.59, p = 0.004), but not with overall mortality (HR 1.16, p = 0.43).While gastroparesis is common after lung transplantation, it remains difficult to predict which patients will develop these complications post-transplant. Black patients were more likely to be diagnosed with gastroparesis after adjusting for relevant confounders. Gastroparesis is associated with increased risk of CLAD, and further studies are needed to assess whether early detection and treatment can reduce the incidence of CLAD.

Summary Symptom severity and prevalence of erosive disease in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) differ between genders. It is not known how gastroenterologists incorporate patient gender in their decision-making process. We aimed to evaluate how gender influences the diagnosis and management recommendations for patients with GERD. We invited a nationwide sample of gastroenterologists via voluntary listservs to complete an online survey of fictional patient scenarios presenting with different GERD symptoms and endoscopic findings. Patient gender for each case was randomly generated. Study participants were asked for their likelihood of a diagnosis of GERD and subsequent management recommendations. Results were analyzed using chi-square tests, Fisher Exact tests, and multivariable logistic regression. Of 819 survey invitations sent, 135 gastroenterologists responded with 95.6% completion rate. There was no significant association between patient gender and prediction for the likelihood of GERD for any of the five clinical scenarios when analyzed separately or when all survey responses were pooled. There was also no significant association between gender and decision to refer for fundoplication, escalate PPI therapy, or start of neuromodulation/behavioral therapy. Despite documented symptomatic and physiologic differences of GERD between the genders, patient gender did not affect respondents’ estimates of GERD diagnosis or subsequent management. Further outcomes studies should validate whether response to GERD treatment strategies differ between women and men.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and aspiration of enteric contents are associated with worse outcomes after lung transplantation. The purpose of this study was to elucidate populations of patients who benefit the most from fundoplication after lung transplantation.Lung transplantations from 2001 to 2019 (n = 971) were retrospectively reviewed and stratified by fundoplication before (n = 128) or after (n = 24) chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) development vs patients who did not undergo fundoplication. Patients with a fundoplication before CLAD were propensity matched to patients without a fundoplication. The primary outcome of interest was posttransplant survival. Time-to-event rates were calculated using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model and Kaplan-Meier functions.Fundoplication before CLAD improved posttransplant survival before and after propensity matching, and it remained a significant predictor after adjusting for baseline characteristics (hazard ratio [HR],0.57; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.4 to 0.8; P = .001). Transplant recipients with a restrictive disorder (HR, 0.46; 95 % CI, 0.3 to 0.73; P = .001), age younger than 65 years (HR, 0.48; 95 % CI, 0.32 to 0.71; P;0.001), and with both single (HR, 0.47; 95 % CI, 0.28 to 0.79; P = .005) and double (HR, 0.55; 95 % CI, 0.32 to 0.93; P = .027) lung transplants had a significant decrease in mortality after fundoplication. The effect was present after excluding early deaths and CLAD diagnoses. Gastroesophageal reflux disease diagnosed by pH, impedance, or esophagogastroduodenoscopy was not associated with worse outcomes. Among patients with CLAD, a fundoplication was an independent predictor of post-CLAD survival (HR, 0.27; 95 % CI; 0.12 to 0.61; P = .002).Fundoplication before or after CLAD development is an independent predictor of survival. Younger patients with restrictive disease, independent of the type of transplant, have a survival benefit. Gastroesophageal reflux disease diagnosed by conventional methods was not associated with worse survival.

Three manometric subtypes of achalasia were defined in the Chicago Classification approximately 10 years ago: type I (aperistalsis), type II (pan-pressurization), and type III (spastic). Since the widespread use of this classification scheme, the evolving prevalence of these subtypes has not been elucidated. We aim to determine the prevalence of each subtype a decade after the adoption of the Chicago Classification.This is a retrospective cohort analysis of patients diagnosed with achalasia on high-resolution manometry (HRM) at two major academic medical centers between 2015 and 2018. Patients were excluded if they had a diagnosis of another esophageal motility disorder, previously treated achalasia, or foregut surgery. Demographic data, manometric subtype, and esophageal dilatation grade on endoscopy were obtained. Prevalence of achalasia subtypes was compared with a published historical control population (2004-2007). Fischer's exact and t tests were used for analysis.Of 147 patients in the contemporary cohort and 99 in the historical control cohort, the prevalence of type I achalasia was 8% versus 21%, type II 63% versus 50%, and type III 29% versus 29%, respectively (p = 0.01). The mean age in our population was 58 years compared to 57 years in the historical control, and the proportion of men 48% versus 47%, respectively (p = 0.78). Mean endoscopic dilatation grade in the contemporary cohort was 1.5 for type I patients, 0.9 for type II, and 0.4 for type III, compared with 1.5, 0.6, and 0.4, respectively. Overall mean dilatation grade was 0.8 in our cohort versus 0.7 in the historical control (p = 0.58).The prevalence of type II achalasia was significantly greater and prevalence of type I significantly less in our patient population compared to our predefined historical control. Other characteristics such as age and sex did not appear to contribute to these differences. Histopathological evidence has suggested that type II achalasia may be an earlier form of type I; thus, the increased prevalence of type II achalasia may be related to earlier detection of the disease. The adoption of HRM, widespread use of the Chicago Classification, and increased disease awareness in the past decade may be contributing to these changes in epidemiology.

Goal The goal of this study was to compare the clinical presentations of esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction (EGJOO) with coexisting abnormal esophageal body motility (EBM) to isolated EGJOO. Background The clinical significance and management of EGJOO remain debated, as patients may have varied to no symptoms. The effect of coexisting abnormal EBM in EGJOO is unclear. We hypothesized that a concomitant EBM disorder is associated with clinical symptoms of EGJOO. Study This was a retrospective cohort study of consecutive adults diagnosed with EGJOO on high-resolution impedance-manometry (HRIM) at 2 academic centers in March 2018 to September 2018. Patients with prior treatment for achalasia, foregut surgery, or evidence of obstruction were excluded. Subjects were divided into EGJOO with abnormal EBM per Chicago classification v3.0 and isolated EGJOO. Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher-exact or Student t test (univariate) and logistic or linear regression (multivariate). Results Eighty-two patients (72% women, age 61.1±10.7 y) were included. Thirty-one (37.8%) had abnormal EBM, including 16 (19.5%) ineffective esophageal motility and 15 (18.2%) hypercontractile esophagus. Esophageal symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation, chest pain, dysphagia) were more prevalent among those with abnormal EBM (90.3% vs. 64.7%, P=0.01). On logistic regression adjusting for age, gender, body mass index, and opioid use, abnormal EBM remained predictive of esophageal symptoms (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 7.51, P=0.007). On separate models constructed, HE was associated with chest pain (aOR 7.45, P=0.01) and regurgitation (aOR 4.06, P=0.046), while ineffective esophageal motility was predictive of heartburn (aOR 5.84, P=0.009) and decreased complete bolus transit (β-coefficient -0.177, P=0.04). Conclusion Coexisting abnormal EBM is associated with esophageal symptoms and bolus transit in patients with EGJOO.

The COVID-19 pandemic seemingly is peaking now in New York City and has triggered significant changes to the standard management of gastrointestinal diseases. Priorities such as minimizing viral transmission, preserving personal protective equipment, and freeing hospital beds have driven unconventional approaches to managing gastroenterology (GI) patients. Conversion of endoscopy units to COVID units and redeployment of GI fellows and faculty has profoundly changed the profile of most GI services. Meanwhile, consult and procedural volumes have been reduced drastically. In this review, we share our collective experiences regarding how we have changed our practice of medicine in response to the COVID surge. Although we review our management of specific consults and conditions, the overarching theme focuses primarily on noninvasive measures and maximizing medical therapies. Endoscopic procedures have been reserved for those timely interventions that are most likely to be therapeutic. The role of multidisciplinary discussion, although always important, now has become critical. The support of our faculty and trainees remains essential. Local leadership can encourage well-being by frequent team check-ins and by fostering trainee development through remote learning. Advancing a clear vision and a transparent process for how to organize and triage care in the recovery phase will allow for a smooth transition to our new normal.

Both over-the-counter and prescription medications are used widely in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). Patients with mild or intermittent symptoms may benefit from lifestyle modifications and as-needed antacids. Histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) are an appropriate therapy for patients with mild reflux symptoms. Patients with severe disease or erosive esophagitis should be managed with proton pump inhibitors while lifestyle and dietary changes are initiated. Potassium-competitive acid blockers are a promising new class of acid blockers, which act faster than PPIs but are not yet widely available in the United States. Promotility agents can be helpful in patients with GERD and comorbid motility disorders but are not usually effective in patients with GERD alone. Less is known about the benefits of these medications in patients with LPR.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected GI fellowship training programs including the consideration of virtual interviews for applicants during the 2020-2021 academic year Prior studies have shown success with virtual interviews within GI, but this has not been implemented on a larger scale This study aimed to clarify the potential impact of COVID-19 on GI fellowship recruitment, particularly in areas hardest hit by COVID-19 METHODS: In May, a questionnaire was distributed to the GI Program Directors' Listserv requesting participation via Survey Monkey Data regarding demographics of programs and program director (PD) perception of the impact of COVID-19 on the upcoming recruitment season were collected An email blast was sent to the entire listserv, with follow up individual emails to PDs Results were analyzed using SPSS v25 RESULTS: 57 PDs started the questionnaire with a 95% completion rate There was representation from all geographic regions, size, institution affiliation, and pandemic stage [Table 1] 23 programs (40 4%) were from institutions identifying as pandemic Stage 3 by the ACGME (extraordinary circumstances) PDs from Stage 3 institutions did not expect differences in application strength or letters of recommendation from prior years but did expect a decrease in research productivity from applicants compared to other programs (78 3%vs 41 9%, P = 0 03) Programs at Stage 3 institutions were more likely to expect decreases in number of applications (43 5% vs 16 1%, P = 0 03) but did not anticipate increasing the number of interviews conducted If virtual interviews are utilized, PDs had a varied response to predict the success level of the interview season (Scale 0-100;mean =7 2 ± 27 2) There was no difference in predicted success based on pandemic stage (P = 0 76) but PDs from community and academic-affiliated programs were far less optimistic about having a successful interview season compared to those from tertiary care centers (mean 36 4 vs 55 9, P = 0 04) See Table 2 for additional results CONCLUSION: GI fellowship PDs have differing views on how the COVID-19 pandemic will affect the upcoming fellowship recruitment season Programs in areas with high COVID-19 prevalence are more concerned about decreased applications, and programs from community and academic affiliated institutions have more doubts about an overall successful recruitment Programs should work together to share experiences and best practice standards to increase success for all programs (Table Presented)

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective for many conditions but are often overprescribed. Recent concerns about long-term risks have made patients re-evaluate their need to take PPIs chronically, though these population-based studies have methodological weaknesses. The goal of this review is to provide evidenced-based strategies for discontinuation of PPI therapy. Given that some patients experience rebound symptoms when abruptly stopping continuous PPI therapy due to its effect on hypergastrinemia, strategies focus on avoiding rebound. Tapering the PPI and then initiating a “step-down” approach with the use of alternative medications may be effective. “On-demand therapy” provides patients with the option to take intermittent PPI courses, reducing overall use and cost while preserving patient satisfaction. It is important for providers to consider ambulatory pH or pH/impedance testing to rule out diagnoses that may require alternative medications like neuromodulators. A number of studies reviewed here can provide guidance in counseling patients on PPI discontinuation. It is important for the provider to obtain a baseline needs assessment for PPI therapy and to elucidate predictors of difficulty in discontinuation prior to initiating a strategy.

Esophageal symptoms can arise from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) as well as other mucosal and motor processes, structural disease, and functional esophageal syndromes. GERD is the most common esophageal disorder, but diagnosis may not be straightforward when symptoms persist despite empiric acid suppressive therapy and when mucosal erosions are not seen on endoscopy (as for nonerosive reflux disease, NERD). Esophageal physiological tests (ambulatory pH or pH-impedance monitoring and manometry) can be of value in defining abnormal reflux burden and reflux-symptom association. NERD diagnosed on the basis of abnormal reflux burden on ambulatory reflux monitoring is associated with similar symptom response from antireflux therapy for erosive esophagitis. Acid suppression is the mainstay of therapy, and antireflux surgery has a definitive role in the management of persisting symptoms attributed to NERD, especially when the esophagogastric junction is compromised. Adjunctive approaches and complementary therapy may be of additional value in management. In this review, we describe the evaluation, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, and management of NERD.

Background: The pH data of multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH testing (MII-pH) may be analyzed by using all pH drops (simulating traditional pH-monitoring) or only analyzing pH drops associated with impedance changes. It is unknown whether the acid exposure measurements would differ between these methods in a group of symptomatic patients. Methods: We evaluated MII-pH studies of patients from 2008 to 2013. Acid analysis was performed in two methods: 1. Creating non-mealtime pH measurements related to retrograde bolus movements (“pH-MII method”) 2. Creating non-mealtime pH measurements anytime the pH fell below 4 (“all-pH method”). Statistical analysis was performed using t-test, Fischer’s test, and logistic regression. Results: 121 patients were eligible. The mean percent total acid exposure time (4.05) was significantly higher in the all-pH method (vs. 1.63 p=0.001). The proportion of patients with abnormal acid exposure time (24.7%) and DeMeester score (24.8%) was higher in the all-pH method (vs. 8.3%, p=0.001; vs. 9.1%, p=0.002). Compared to those without a hiatal hernia (HH), more patients with a HH >2cm had significant differences between analysis methods in upright (19.4% vs. 5.56%, p=0.03), recumbent (29% vs. 6.67%; p=0.002), total time (45.2% vs. 6.67%, p=0.001), and DeMeester score (35.5% vs. 8.89%; p=0.001). Adjusting for age, sex, and PPI usage, HH remained a significant predictor of whether results would differ (OR 12; CI 3.34-42.8 total exposure, OR 8.75; CI 2.36-32.5 DeMeester). Conclusion: Analysis of esophageal acid exposure using all pH data detected more acid reflux than when incorporating impedance measures, particularly in those with a HH. This finding may relate to small volume reflux. Therefore analysis of all-pH reflux rather than just MII-pH should be considered in those patients with a HH.

Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is defined as a distal contractile integral 450 mmHg/s/cm in at least 50% of ten liquid swallows on high-resolution esophageal manometry (HREM). Whether this latest definition correlates with degree of symptoms has not been studied.Patients presenting for HREM prospectively rated their symptoms using the Eckardt score. Topography plots were retrospectively reviewed and classified according to the latest Chicago Classification. Patients with non-obstructive dysphagia and an Eckardt score of at least 1 were included. Patients with major motility disorders were excluded. Scores between patients with IEM (group A) and patients with normal classification (group B) were compared using two-tailed t-tests. Spearman's correlation coefficient was calculated to determine correlation between symptoms and percent bolus clearance.A total of 241 patients were screened; 33 patients met criteria for group A and 44 patients for group B. There was no difference between the two groups in mean symptom severity for dysphagia (1.63 vs. 1.61, P = 0.89), chest pain (0.67 vs. 0.75, P = 0.64), regurgitation (1.06 vs. 0.85, P = 0.32), or weight loss (0.85 vs. 0.49, P = 0.11). The percent bolus clearance was significantly lower in group A (46.5% vs. 76.7%, P 0.01). There was a moderate inverse correlation between dysphagia and percent bolus clearance (R = - 0.37) in group A, but none in group B (R = 0.09).The classification of IEM did not discriminate from normal studies for symptom severity in our cohort. However, patients with IEM did have an inverse correlation between dysphagia score and bolus clearance, but those without IEM did not. Adding impedance information to the motor pattern classification should be considered in the symptom assessment in minor motility disorders.

Esophageal intramural pseudodiverticulosis (EIPD) is a rare condition often presenting with esophageal strictures. Treatment is often limited to endoscopic dilatation and treatment of the underlying esophageal pathology. We present a case of a patient with longstanding GERD on famotidine (she experienced anaphylaxis with proton pump inhibitors [PPIs]) who presented with dysphagia and weight loss. Work-up revealed a diagnosis of EIPD with a 5-mm mid-esophageal stricture. Therapy with dilatation was unsuccessful until the addition of sucralfate, after which dilatation was successful and symptoms resolved. In patients who are unable to take PPIs, the addition of sucralfate may enhance the success of dilatations of esophageal strictures and EIPD.

Background The incidence of Clostridium difficile infection is increasing in the United States. The aim of our investigation is to compare short-term and long-term outcomes of patients admitted with an ulcerative colitis (UC) flare and co-existent C. difficile infection to those of non-infected patients. Methods A historical cohort study was undertaken examining admissions at Mount Sinai Hospital between June 2004 and June 2005 using ICD-9 criteria for UC. Charts were abstracted for those patients for whom C. difficile testing was performed. Results Of 288 admissions, 99 charts met the inclusion criteria. Fifty-two patients were C. difficile-negative and 47 were positive. Demographic data and laboratory values upon admission did not differ between the two groups. Patients who were C. difficile-positive had significantly more UC-related hospitalizations and emergency room visits in the year following initial admission (58 visits vs. 27, P = 0.001 and eight visits vs. 1 visit (P = 0.012), respectively). One year following the index admission, C. difficile patients had significantly higher rates of colectomy compared to C. difficile-negative patients (44.6% vs. 25%, P = 0.04). Length of hospitalization (11.7 vs. 11 days), use of cyclosporine therapy during index admission (48% vs. 47% of patients), and percentage requiring colectomy at initial admission (23.4% vs. 13.5%) did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions Our data suggest that patients presenting with a UC flare who are infected with C. difficile have worse long-term clinical outcomes than those that are C. difficile-negative. C. difficile testing should be performed for all patients presenting with UC flare. Further studies are warranted to elucidate how infection can alter the natural history of UC.

Dynamic pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (DP-MRI) offers a comprehensive evaluation of pelvic organ structure in addition to functional information regarding evacuation. Opportunity to apply this technology can be limited due to regional lack of availability. Ideally, clues from standard anorectal testing could predict abnormalities on DP-MRI, leading to its efficient use. The aim of this study is to determine whether high-resolution anorectal manometry (HR-ARM) correlates with findings on DP-MRI.This is a retrospective study of HR-ARM performed on patients with constipation who also underwent DP-MRI. Studies were reviewed for significant findings including posterior pelvic organ prolapse, rectocele 3 cm, rectal intussusception, and anorectal angle. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson's correlation coefficient, Student's t-test, and Fisher's exact test.Twenty-three patients undergoing HR-ARM (age range 25-78) also underwent DP-MRI. All were female; 76% were Caucasian. Twenty had significant structural findings: small pelvic prolapse (n = 2), moderate pelvic prolapse (n = 10), large pelvic prolapse (n = 9), rectocele (n = 8), or rectal intussusception (n = 3). Only intrarectal pressure on HR-ARM weakly correlated with size of rectocele (r = 0.46; P = 0.03) and degree of pelvic organ prolapse (r = 0.48; P = 0.02). The remainder of the HR-ARM parameters did not significantly correlate with DP-MRI findings. Patients with dyssynergy were not more likely to have rectoceles 3 cm (44.4% versus 35.7%; P = 0.5) or large prolapses (44.4% versus 50%, P = 1.0), compared with those without dyssynergy, on HR-ARM.We were unable to find a correlation between HR-ARM findings and structural pelvic defects on DP-MRI. Therefore, these two technologies provide complementary information in the evaluation of defecatory dysfunction.

Multichannel intraluminal impedance–pH testing (MII–pH) allows for the detection of acid and non-acid reflux, thus, increasing yield over pH testing. Limited data exist on how physicians use test results in practice. The aim of our study was to evaluate the influence of MII–pH testing on patient care. We reviewed records of patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease who underwent MII–pH testing. Management decisions evaluated included changes in prescribed medications and surgical consultation for anti-reflux surgery. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson Chi square test, and multivariable logistic regression. MII–pH testing resulted in a medication change in 41 % of patients, surgical consultation in 19.7 %, and anti-reflux surgery in 11.1 %. In patients who were not on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, MII–pH results were most useful in the decision to start a PPI. On PPI therapy, results were more often used to decide whether to increase (32.3 %) or switch the PPI (23.5 %) in patients with continued acid reflux. Results were most useful to stop the PPI in normal studies (11.1 %). More patients with non-acid reflux (14.3 %) and normal results (19.7 %) were started on a neuromodulator compared to other diagnoses. The MII–pH result was most useful in the decision to start baclofen or bethanecol when the patient was found to have non-acid reflux (25 %). Patients with an abnormal MII–pH or abnormal MII alone were more likely to be referred to surgery (OR 19.5, p

Paraneoplastic hepatopathy has been reported with various malignancies, most commonly with renal cell cancer. This non-metastatic hepatic dysfunction in such malignancies is known as Stauffer syndrome. We describe a 61-year-old man who presented with symptoms of bowel obstruction with marked cholestasis and high levels of alkaline phosphatase and bilirubin. Imaging revealed an unremarkable liver and a mass in the ileocecal valve with mesenteric lymphadenopathy. Biopsies were consistent with a carcinoid tumor. Liver dysfunction gradually resolved after surgical resection of the tumor. Paraneoplastic syndrome should be considered in the differential diagnosis for patients with carcinoid tumors who present with cholestasis.

Biofeedback therapy (BF) is a well-established treatment modality for patients with dyssynergic defecation and fecal incontinence (FI). Randomized controlled trials from highly specialized tertiary care centers report response rates of 70% to 80% for dyssynergic defecation and 55% to 75% for FI. Whether this therapy is as successful outside of clinical trials or specialized biofeedback referral centers remains unclear.Our primary aim was to determine what percentage of patients referred for BF actually complete therapy and identify barriers to treatment. Our secondary aim was to determine the clinical response rate in a heterogeneous population of patients undergoing BF at our institution and a variety of regional locations.We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent high resolution anorectal manometry between 2007 and 2010 for symptoms of defecatory dysfunction. BF was recommended at the time of manometry analysis based on findings of dyssynergy, impaired or heightened rectal sensation, or poor augmentation of sphincter on squeeze maneuvers. Clinical response was recorded after a course of BF (≥ 5 sessions).Two hundred three patients (78% female, 72% white; median age 52) underwent anorectal manometry for symptoms of constipation (130), FI (54), combination (12), and rectal pain (7). BF was recommended in 119 cases (58.6%): constipation (80), FI (27), combination (9), and rectal pain (3). Only 39 out of 80 (48%) patients with constipation ultimately underwent BF. Of the 27 FI cases, only 12 (44%) patients underwent BF. Barriers to BF included lack of insurance coverage, distance to local treatment facilities, and acute medical issues taking precedence. Of those who underwent at least 5 BF sessions, subjective short-term response rates based on patient opinion were 17/28 (60%) in the constipation group and 8/10 (80%) in the FI group. Age, sex, and race had no effect on whether the patients attended biofeedback or whether they responded to treatment. The location of BF also did not predict response to therapy.In a heterogeneous patient population, less than half of patients recommended for BF ultimately underwent therapy. Despite this, the response rates in this small population undergoing BF in the "real world" are only slightly less than published randomized control trials. Prospective studies are warranted to further elucidate and eliminate barriers to BF, especially given that "real world" BF response rates may be comparable with those seen in clinical trials.