Search

Purpose: Modified barium swallow study (MBSS) is a videofluoroscopic evaluation of oropharyngeal swallowing. Views of esophageal bolus flow during MBSS are permitted under speech-language pathology practice guidelines. However, controversy exists over its implementation. Poor consensus and limited practice guidance may lead to clinical practice variations. Aims of the investigation were to (a) describe current practice patterns of speech-language pathologist visualizing bolus flow through the esophagus during the MBSS, (b) understand areas of variation when incorporating esophageal visualization during the MBSS, and (c) determine clinicians' willingness to modify MBSS procedures to include esophageal imaging. Method: A web-based survey (Qualtrics XM) consisting of 26 questions was distributed via web posting and e-mail to members of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Special Interest Group 13 and Dysphagia Café. The survey was open for 3 months. Descriptive and associative statistics were completed. Field-testing was performed prior to dissemination of the survey to address content validity. Results: A total of 321 individuals participated; 265 responses were used for analysis. Ninety-three percent of respondents viewed the esophagus during the MBSS. Twelve percent followed to the proximal esophagus, 15% to the mid esophagus, 66% to the lower esophagus, and 6% to varied levels. Variability was also reported in contrast type, volume administered, and nomenclature used. Interestingly, few people (3.61%) disagreed that esophageal visualization should be performed during MBSS. Conclusions: Speech-language pathology respondents in this study visualize contrast flow through the esophagus and are enthusiastic about expanding the standard MBSS. However, results of the survey demonstrate a lack of uniformity in assessment practices. Unfortunately, this may impact the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility when adding esophageal visualization to the MBSS. This study highlights the need for a standardized protocol and identifies current barriers and controversies that may prevent expanding the MBSS to more comprehensively evaluate individuals with dysphagia.

Endoscopy plays a critical role in caring for and evaluating the patient with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Endoscopy is essential for diagnosis, assessment of response to therapy, treatment of esophageal strictures, and ongoing monitoring of patients in histologic remission. To date, less-invasive testing for identifying or grading EoE severity has not been established, whereas diagnostic endoscopy as integral to both remains the criterion standard. Therapeutic endoscopy in patients with adverse events of EoE may also be required. In particular, dilation may be essential to treat and attenuate progression of the disease in select patients to minimize further fibrosis and stricture formation. Using a modified Delphi consensus process, a group of 20 expert clinicians and investigators in EoE were assembled to provide guidance for the use of endoscopy in EoE. Through an iterative process, the group achieved consensus on 20 statements yielding comprehensive advice on tissue-sampling standards, gross assessment of disease activity, use and performance of endoscopic dilation, and monitoring of disease, despite an absence of high-quality evidence. Key areas of controversy were identified when discussions yielded an inability to reach agreement on the merit of a statement. We expect that with ongoing research, higher-quality evidence will be obtained to enable creation of a guideline for these issues. We further anticipate that forthcoming expert-generated and agreed-on statements will provide valuable practice advice on the role and use of endoscopy in patients with EoE.

Optimal ambulatory reflux monitoring methodology in symptomatic reflux patients continues to be debated.To utilise published literature and expert opinion to develop recommendation statements addressing use of ambulatory reflux monitoring in clinical practice METHODS: The RAND Appropriateness Method (RAM) was utilised among 17 experts with discussion, revision and two rounds of ranking of recommendation statements. Ambulatory reflux monitoring protocol, methodology and thresholds ranked as appropriate by ≥80% of panellists met the criteria for appropriateness.Prolonged (96-h recommended) wireless pH monitoring off proton pump inhibitor (PPI) was identified as the appropriate diagnostic tool to assess the need for acid suppression in patients with unproven gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and persisting typical reflux symptoms despite once-daily PPI. Acid exposure time (AET)4.0% on all days of monitoring with negative reflux-symptom association excludes GERD and does not support ongoing PPI treatment. Conversely, AET6.0% across ≥2 days is conclusive evidence for GERD and supports treatment for GERD, while AET10% across ≥2 days identifies severe acid burden that supports escalation of anti-reflux treatment. In previously proven GERD, impedance-pH monitoring on PPI is helpful in defining refractory GERD and mechanisms of continued symptoms; the presence of40 reflux events, AET 2.0% and a negative reflux-symptom association does not support escalation of anti-reflux treatment. In contrast, AET 4.0% and positive reflux-symptom association support escalation of anti-reflux treatment, including use of invasive therapeutics.Statements meeting appropriateness for average clinical care have been identified when utilising reflux monitoring in patients with typical reflux symptoms and PPI non-response.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: As many as one-half of all patients with suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) do not derive benefit from acid suppression. This review outlines a personalized diagnostic and therapeutic approach to GERD symptoms. METHODS: The Best Practice Advice statements presented here were developed from expert review of existing literature combined with extensive discussion and expert opinion to provide practical advice. Formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of recommendations was not the intent of this clinical practice update. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Clinicians should develop a care plan for investigation of symptoms suggestive of GERD, selection of therapy (with explanation of potential risks and benefits), and long-term management, including possible de-escalation, in a shared-decision making model with the patient. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Clinicians should provide standardized educational material on GERD mechanisms, weight management, lifestyle and dietary behaviors, relaxation strategies, and awareness about the brain-gut axis relationship to patients with reflux symptoms. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Clinicians should emphasize safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the treatment of GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Clinicians should provide patients presenting with troublesome heartburn, regurgitation, and/ or non-cardiac chest pain without alarm symptoms a 4- to 8-week trial of single-dose PPI therapy. With inadequate response, dosing can be increased to twice a day or switched to a more effective acid suppressive agent once a day. When there is adequate response, PPI should be tapered to the lowest effective dose. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: If PPI therapy is continued in a patient with unproven GERD, clinicians should evaluate the appropriateness and dosing within 12 months after initiation, and offer endoscopy with prolonged wireless reflux monitoring off PPI therapy to establish appropriateness of long-term PPI therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: If troublesome heartburn, regurgitation, and/or non-cardiac chest pain do not respond adequately to a PPI trial or when alarm symptoms exist, clinicians should investigate with endoscopy and, in the absence of erosive reflux disease (Los Angeles B or greater) or long-segment (≥3 cm) Barrett’s esophagus, perform prolonged wireless pH monitoring off medication (96-hour preferred if available) to confirm and phenotype GERD or to rule out GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Complete endoscopic evaluation of GERD symptoms includes inspection for erosive esophagitis (graded according to the Los Angeles classification when present), diaphragmatic hiatus (Hill grade of flap valve), axial hiatus hernia length, and inspection for Barrett’s esophagus (graded according to the Prague classification and biopsied when present). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Clinicians should perform upfront objective reflux testing off medication (rather than an empiric PPI trial) in patients with isolated extra-esophageal symptoms and suspicion for reflux etiology. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: In symptomatic patients with proven GERD, clinicians should consider ambulatory 24-hour pHimpedance monitoring on PPI as an option to determine the mechanism of persisting esophageal symptoms despite therapy (if adequate expertise exists for interpretation). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Clinicians should personalize adjunctive pharmacotherapy to the GERD phenotype, in contrast to empiric use of these agents. Adjunctive agents include alginate antacids for breakthrough symptoms, nighttime H2 receptor antagonists for nocturnal symptoms, baclofen for regurgitation or belch predominant symptoms, and prokinetics for coexistent gastroparesis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Clinicians should provide pharmacologic neuromodulation, and/or referral to a behavioral therapist for hypnotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, diaphragmatic breathing, and relaxation strategies in patients with functional heartburn or reflux disease associated with esophageal hypervigilance reflux hypersensitivity and/or behavioral disorders. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: In patients with proven GERD, laparoscopic fundoplication and magnetic sphincter augmentation are effective surgical options, and transoral incisionless fundoplication is an effective endoscopic option in carefully selected patients. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: In patients with proven GERD, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is an effective primary anti-reflux intervention in obese patients, and a salvage option in non-obese patients, whereas sleeve gastrectomy has potential to worsen GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Candidacy for invasive anti-reflux procedures includes confirmatory evidence of pathologic GERD, exclusion of achalasia, and assessment of esophageal peristaltic function.

Oropharyngeal and esophageal dysphagia may occur simultaneously. However, symptoms are often evaluated separately. Few standardized, multi-texture esophageal screening protocols exist as an addition to the modified barium swallow study (MBSS). Given the gap in MBSS evaluation standards, providers may be lacking information needed to fully assess the swallowing process and create appropriate dysphagia management plans. The aim was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of a standardized esophageal screening protocol performed by an SLP compared to formal reference esophageal examinations. A cross-sectional analytic study was performed. Consecutively referred patients who underwent same-day consultation with the SLP and a gastroenterologist were included. MBSS with a standardized esophageal screen was performed. Same-day formal esophageal testing was completed and included timed barium emptying study or high-resolution manometry. Summary diagnostic accuracy measures were calculated. Seventy-three patients matched the inclusion criteria. Median age was 62.5 years (25-87), 55% were female. Sensitivity of the esophageal screen for the detection of esophageal abnormality was 83.7% (95% CI 70-91.9%); specificity was 73.7% (95% CI 55.6-85.8%). The positive likelihood ratio was 3.14 (95% CI 1.71-5.77), whereas the negative likelihood ratio was 0.22 (95% CI 0.11-0.45). Positive and negative predictive values were 82% and 76%, respectively. Use of a systematic, multi-texture esophageal screen protocol interpreted by SLPs accurately identifies multiphase dysphagia and should be considered in addition to standard MBSS testing. Inclusion of a cursory esophageal view may more adequately assess dysphagia symptoms and help to promote multidisciplinary care.

We evaluated the feasibility and impact of expiratory muscle strength training (EMST) on respiratory and bulbar function in persons with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).Twenty-five ALS patients participated in this delayed intervention open-label clinical trial. Following a lead-in period, patients completed a 5-week EMST protocol. Outcome measures included: maximum expiratory pressure (MEP); physiologic measures of swallow and cough; and penetration-aspiration scale (PAS) scores.Of participants who entered the active phase of the study (n = 15), EMST was well tolerated and led to significant increases in MEPs and maximum hyoid displacement during swallowing post-EMST (P0.05). No significant differences were observed for PAS scores or cough spirometry measures.EMST was feasible and well tolerated in this small cohort of ALS patients and led to improvements in expiratory force-generating pressures and swallow kinematics. Further investigation is warranted to confirm these preliminary findings. Muscle Nerve 54: 48-53, 2016.

The human type C adenovirus E1a 13S messenger RNA encodes a gene product, that positively regulates the transcription of viral genes and certain cellular genes and is involved in the transformation of primary mammalian cells. The E1a gene product was expressed at high levels in Escherichia coli. In a Xenopus oocyte microinjection assay, the purified Escherichia coli-produced protein activated the E1a-responsive adenovirus E3 promoter and functioned as efficiently as the E1a gene itself.