PubMed1990
Two methods are used to assess esophageal motility. The mapping technique uses catheter withdrawal at 1 cm steps until the entire esophagus is evaluated. A simpler method is commonly used that involves keeping the catheter stationary for the entire evaluation. We compared these 2 techniques in 30 patients referred for the evaluation of dysphagia. Emphasis was placed on the distal 10 cm of the esophagus because this is the primary location of esophageal motility disorders. There was excellent correlation between techniques for mean distal amplitude (r = 0.945), mean distal duration (r = 0.942), and percentage of non-peristaltic contractions (r = 0.967). The overall manometry diagnosis was similar by both methods in 27 (90%) patients. Three patients had different manometry diagnoses resulting from use of the two techniques. However, the change in diagnosis was only clinically important in one patient in whom the mapping technique identified a segmental motility disorder that had been missed by the stationary technique. Stationary manometry had a 94% sensitivity and 93% specificity rate for identifying motility disorders compared to mapping manometry. We conclude that stationary manometry is a simple and accurate method for evaluating esophageal pressures and distal disorders. Only those patients with normal results of stationary studies may benefit by further mapping to identify rare segmental motility disorders.