Prevalence of IEM Among Upper GIT Symptoms

NCT ID: NCT05913011

Last Updated: 2023-06-22

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Total Enrollment

50 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2023-08-31

Study Completion Date

2024-09-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

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

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

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

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Esophageal Motility Disorders

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

OTHER

Study Time Perspective

CROSS_SECTIONAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. patient bove the age of 18 years old
2. All patient presented with upper git symptoms

Exclusion Criteria

1 - Patients \<18 years old 2- patient with known obstructive esophageal disease by endoscopy (i.e. cancer, Stricture) 3- systemic illnesses, scleroderma 4- esophagogastric junction (EGJ) outflow obstruction (mean integrated relaxation pressure ≥15 mmHg).

5- achalasia, 6-Patient who had previouslyundergone esophageal surgery (i.e. antireflux surgery or myotomy) or endoscopic intervention (i.e. transoral fundoplication) were excluded.

7- Patient with atypical (ENT or respiratory) symptoms only . 8-Patient with oropharyngeal dysphagia without associated esophageal symptoms .

9-patient receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy 10-patient with thyroid disfunction 11- patient with pulber palsy
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Assiut University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Aya Ahmed Otify

Investigator

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Aya Ahmed Otify, Resident doc

Role: CONTACT

01144131480

Marwat Mohammed Abokresha, Professor

Role: CONTACT

01001971906

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Zhuang QJ, Tan ND, Zhang MY, Chen SF, Luo Y, Xiao YL. Ineffective esophageal motility in Chicago Classification version 4.0 better predicts abnormal acid exposure. Esophagus. 2022 Jan;19(1):197-203. doi: 10.1007/s10388-021-00867-5. Epub 2021 Aug 10.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 34378104 (View on PubMed)

Schlottmann F, Patti MG. Primary Esophageal Motility Disorders: Beyond Achalasia. Int J Mol Sci. 2017 Jun 30;18(7):1399. doi: 10.3390/ijms18071399.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28665309 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

Prevalence of IEM among U GIT

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Upper GI MM vs Manometry
NCT06973070 COMPLETED