Ambulatory 24-Hour Double-Probe pH Monitoring: The Importance of Manometry

Objective Historically, manometry has been used for sphincter localization before ambulatory 24‐hour double‐probe pH monitoring to ensure accurate placement of the probes. Recently, direct‐vision placement (DVP), using transnasal fiberoptic laryngoscopy (TFL), has been offered as an alternative tech...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Laryngoscope 2001-11, Vol.111 (11), p.1970-1975
Hauptverfasser: Johnson, Paul E., Koufman, James A., Nowak, Lisa J., Belafsky, Peter C., Postma, Gregory N.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1975
container_issue 11
container_start_page 1970
container_title The Laryngoscope
container_volume 111
creator Johnson, Paul E.
Koufman, James A.
Nowak, Lisa J.
Belafsky, Peter C.
Postma, Gregory N.
description Objective Historically, manometry has been used for sphincter localization before ambulatory 24‐hour double‐probe pH monitoring to ensure accurate placement of the probes. Recently, direct‐vision placement (DVP), using transnasal fiberoptic laryngoscopy (TFL), has been offered as an alternative technique. Presumably, DVP might be used to precisely place the proximal (pharyngeal) pH probe; however, using DVP, there appears to be no way to accurately position the distal (esophageal) probe. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of DVP for pH probe placement using manometric measurement as the gold standard. Methods Thirty patients undergoing pH monitoring participated in this prospective study. Each subject underwent manometric examination of the esophagus to determine the precise location of the upper and lower esophageal sphincters (UES and LES). In addition, external anatomic landmarks were used to estimate interprobe distances. A physician blinded to the manometry results then placed a pH catheter using DVP so that the proximal probe was located just above the UES. The results were recorded and compared with those obtained by manometry. Results Accurate DVP of the proximal pH probe was achieved in 70% (23 of 30) of the subjects. The use of external anatomic landmarks to estimate interprobe distance resulted in accurate positioning of the distal probe in only 40% (12 of 30) of the subjects. Using fixed interprobe distances of 15 cm and 20 cm, distal probe position accuracy was 3% (1 of 30) and 40% (12 of 30), respectively. Therefore, using DVP, the distal esophageal probe was in an incorrect position in 60% to 97% of subjects. Conclusion For double‐probe pH monitoring, the proximal probe can be accurately positioned by DVP; however, there is no precise way to determine the interprobe distance required to correctly position the distal pH probe. Failure to accurately position the distal probe results in grossly inaccurate esophageal acid‐exposure times. Thus, manometry is needed to ensure valid double‐probe pH monitoring data.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/00005537-200111000-00019
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72408156</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>72408156</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5069-5c2330f3c6c63bf9e5402013b5f8e468025e78f7faa87f35c2e29417249d99dd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1vEzEQhi0EoqHtX0C-wM0w_lrb3KIWmqIUUNWqcLK8GxsWdtepvas2_x6nCe2VkSzL0jMzrx4jhCm8o2DUeyglJVeEAVBKy4uUQ80zNKOSUyKMkc_RDIBxoiX7foBe5fy7EIpLeIkOKNWF1jBDn-d9PXVujGmDmSCLOCV8Gqe68-RbirXH6wW-iENbgHb4-QFf_fL4vF_HNLqh8TgGfOGG2PsxbY7Qi-C67I_39yG6_vTx6mRBll_Pzk_mS9JIqAyRDeMcAm-qpuJ1MF4KYEB5LYP2otLApFc6qOCcVoEX3DMjqGLCrIxZrfgherubu07xdvJ5tH2bG991bvBxyraQoKmsCqh3YJNizskHu05t79LGUrBbj_afR_vo0T54LK2v9zumuverp8a9uAK82QMuN64Lqeho8xMnKJccthlOd9xd2_nNfwewy_nlDykFfahtHrIb0-bR3z-OcemPrRRX0t58ObNCV-WDb6Rd8r_QVpm7</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>72408156</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Ambulatory 24-Hour Double-Probe pH Monitoring: The Importance of Manometry</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Johnson, Paul E. ; Koufman, James A. ; Nowak, Lisa J. ; Belafsky, Peter C. ; Postma, Gregory N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Paul E. ; Koufman, James A. ; Nowak, Lisa J. ; Belafsky, Peter C. ; Postma, Gregory N.</creatorcontrib><description>Objective Historically, manometry has been used for sphincter localization before ambulatory 24‐hour double‐probe pH monitoring to ensure accurate placement of the probes. Recently, direct‐vision placement (DVP), using transnasal fiberoptic laryngoscopy (TFL), has been offered as an alternative technique. Presumably, DVP might be used to precisely place the proximal (pharyngeal) pH probe; however, using DVP, there appears to be no way to accurately position the distal (esophageal) probe. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of DVP for pH probe placement using manometric measurement as the gold standard. Methods Thirty patients undergoing pH monitoring participated in this prospective study. Each subject underwent manometric examination of the esophagus to determine the precise location of the upper and lower esophageal sphincters (UES and LES). In addition, external anatomic landmarks were used to estimate interprobe distances. A physician blinded to the manometry results then placed a pH catheter using DVP so that the proximal probe was located just above the UES. The results were recorded and compared with those obtained by manometry. Results Accurate DVP of the proximal pH probe was achieved in 70% (23 of 30) of the subjects. The use of external anatomic landmarks to estimate interprobe distance resulted in accurate positioning of the distal probe in only 40% (12 of 30) of the subjects. Using fixed interprobe distances of 15 cm and 20 cm, distal probe position accuracy was 3% (1 of 30) and 40% (12 of 30), respectively. Therefore, using DVP, the distal esophageal probe was in an incorrect position in 60% to 97% of subjects. Conclusion For double‐probe pH monitoring, the proximal probe can be accurately positioned by DVP; however, there is no precise way to determine the interprobe distance required to correctly position the distal pH probe. Failure to accurately position the distal probe results in grossly inaccurate esophageal acid‐exposure times. Thus, manometry is needed to ensure valid double‐probe pH monitoring data.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0023-852X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-4995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/00005537-200111000-00019</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11801980</identifier><identifier>CODEN: LARYA8</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Esophagus ; extraesophageal reflux ; Female ; Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen ; Gastroesophageal Reflux - diagnosis ; GERD ; Humans ; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration ; laryngopharyngeal reflux ; Male ; Manometry ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Monitoring, Ambulatory - methods ; Other diseases. Semiology ; pH monitoring ; pH probes ; Pharynx ; reflux</subject><ispartof>The Laryngoscope, 2001-11, Vol.111 (11), p.1970-1975</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2001 The Triological Society</rights><rights>2002 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5069-5c2330f3c6c63bf9e5402013b5f8e468025e78f7faa87f35c2e29417249d99dd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5069-5c2330f3c6c63bf9e5402013b5f8e468025e78f7faa87f35c2e29417249d99dd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1097%2F00005537-200111000-00019$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1097%2F00005537-200111000-00019$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>310,311,315,781,785,790,791,1418,23935,23936,25145,27929,27930,45579,45580</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=14135306$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11801980$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Paul E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koufman, James A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nowak, Lisa J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Belafsky, Peter C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Postma, Gregory N.</creatorcontrib><title>Ambulatory 24-Hour Double-Probe pH Monitoring: The Importance of Manometry</title><title>The Laryngoscope</title><addtitle>The Laryngoscope</addtitle><description>Objective Historically, manometry has been used for sphincter localization before ambulatory 24‐hour double‐probe pH monitoring to ensure accurate placement of the probes. Recently, direct‐vision placement (DVP), using transnasal fiberoptic laryngoscopy (TFL), has been offered as an alternative technique. Presumably, DVP might be used to precisely place the proximal (pharyngeal) pH probe; however, using DVP, there appears to be no way to accurately position the distal (esophageal) probe. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of DVP for pH probe placement using manometric measurement as the gold standard. Methods Thirty patients undergoing pH monitoring participated in this prospective study. Each subject underwent manometric examination of the esophagus to determine the precise location of the upper and lower esophageal sphincters (UES and LES). In addition, external anatomic landmarks were used to estimate interprobe distances. A physician blinded to the manometry results then placed a pH catheter using DVP so that the proximal probe was located just above the UES. The results were recorded and compared with those obtained by manometry. Results Accurate DVP of the proximal pH probe was achieved in 70% (23 of 30) of the subjects. The use of external anatomic landmarks to estimate interprobe distance resulted in accurate positioning of the distal probe in only 40% (12 of 30) of the subjects. Using fixed interprobe distances of 15 cm and 20 cm, distal probe position accuracy was 3% (1 of 30) and 40% (12 of 30), respectively. Therefore, using DVP, the distal esophageal probe was in an incorrect position in 60% to 97% of subjects. Conclusion For double‐probe pH monitoring, the proximal probe can be accurately positioned by DVP; however, there is no precise way to determine the interprobe distance required to correctly position the distal pH probe. Failure to accurately position the distal probe results in grossly inaccurate esophageal acid‐exposure times. Thus, manometry is needed to ensure valid double‐probe pH monitoring data.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Esophagus</subject><subject>extraesophageal reflux</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen</subject><subject>Gastroesophageal Reflux - diagnosis</subject><subject>GERD</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hydrogen-Ion Concentration</subject><subject>laryngopharyngeal reflux</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Manometry</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Monitoring, Ambulatory - methods</subject><subject>Other diseases. Semiology</subject><subject>pH monitoring</subject><subject>pH probes</subject><subject>Pharynx</subject><subject>reflux</subject><issn>0023-852X</issn><issn>1531-4995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1vEzEQhi0EoqHtX0C-wM0w_lrb3KIWmqIUUNWqcLK8GxsWdtepvas2_x6nCe2VkSzL0jMzrx4jhCm8o2DUeyglJVeEAVBKy4uUQ80zNKOSUyKMkc_RDIBxoiX7foBe5fy7EIpLeIkOKNWF1jBDn-d9PXVujGmDmSCLOCV8Gqe68-RbirXH6wW-iENbgHb4-QFf_fL4vF_HNLqh8TgGfOGG2PsxbY7Qi-C67I_39yG6_vTx6mRBll_Pzk_mS9JIqAyRDeMcAm-qpuJ1MF4KYEB5LYP2otLApFc6qOCcVoEX3DMjqGLCrIxZrfgherubu07xdvJ5tH2bG991bvBxyraQoKmsCqh3YJNizskHu05t79LGUrBbj_afR_vo0T54LK2v9zumuverp8a9uAK82QMuN64Lqeho8xMnKJccthlOd9xd2_nNfwewy_nlDykFfahtHrIb0-bR3z-OcemPrRRX0t58ObNCV-WDb6Rd8r_QVpm7</recordid><startdate>200111</startdate><enddate>200111</enddate><creator>Johnson, Paul E.</creator><creator>Koufman, James A.</creator><creator>Nowak, Lisa J.</creator><creator>Belafsky, Peter C.</creator><creator>Postma, Gregory N.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley-Blackwell</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>8BM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200111</creationdate><title>Ambulatory 24-Hour Double-Probe pH Monitoring: The Importance of Manometry</title><author>Johnson, Paul E. ; Koufman, James A. ; Nowak, Lisa J. ; Belafsky, Peter C. ; Postma, Gregory N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5069-5c2330f3c6c63bf9e5402013b5f8e468025e78f7faa87f35c2e29417249d99dd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Esophagus</topic><topic>extraesophageal reflux</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen</topic><topic>Gastroesophageal Reflux - diagnosis</topic><topic>GERD</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hydrogen-Ion Concentration</topic><topic>laryngopharyngeal reflux</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Manometry</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Monitoring, Ambulatory - methods</topic><topic>Other diseases. Semiology</topic><topic>pH monitoring</topic><topic>pH probes</topic><topic>Pharynx</topic><topic>reflux</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Paul E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koufman, James A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nowak, Lisa J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Belafsky, Peter C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Postma, Gregory N.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><jtitle>The Laryngoscope</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Johnson, Paul E.</au><au>Koufman, James A.</au><au>Nowak, Lisa J.</au><au>Belafsky, Peter C.</au><au>Postma, Gregory N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Ambulatory 24-Hour Double-Probe pH Monitoring: The Importance of Manometry</atitle><jtitle>The Laryngoscope</jtitle><addtitle>The Laryngoscope</addtitle><date>2001-11</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>111</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>1970</spage><epage>1975</epage><pages>1970-1975</pages><issn>0023-852X</issn><eissn>1531-4995</eissn><coden>LARYA8</coden><abstract>Objective Historically, manometry has been used for sphincter localization before ambulatory 24‐hour double‐probe pH monitoring to ensure accurate placement of the probes. Recently, direct‐vision placement (DVP), using transnasal fiberoptic laryngoscopy (TFL), has been offered as an alternative technique. Presumably, DVP might be used to precisely place the proximal (pharyngeal) pH probe; however, using DVP, there appears to be no way to accurately position the distal (esophageal) probe. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of DVP for pH probe placement using manometric measurement as the gold standard. Methods Thirty patients undergoing pH monitoring participated in this prospective study. Each subject underwent manometric examination of the esophagus to determine the precise location of the upper and lower esophageal sphincters (UES and LES). In addition, external anatomic landmarks were used to estimate interprobe distances. A physician blinded to the manometry results then placed a pH catheter using DVP so that the proximal probe was located just above the UES. The results were recorded and compared with those obtained by manometry. Results Accurate DVP of the proximal pH probe was achieved in 70% (23 of 30) of the subjects. The use of external anatomic landmarks to estimate interprobe distance resulted in accurate positioning of the distal probe in only 40% (12 of 30) of the subjects. Using fixed interprobe distances of 15 cm and 20 cm, distal probe position accuracy was 3% (1 of 30) and 40% (12 of 30), respectively. Therefore, using DVP, the distal esophageal probe was in an incorrect position in 60% to 97% of subjects. Conclusion For double‐probe pH monitoring, the proximal probe can be accurately positioned by DVP; however, there is no precise way to determine the interprobe distance required to correctly position the distal pH probe. Failure to accurately position the distal probe results in grossly inaccurate esophageal acid‐exposure times. Thus, manometry is needed to ensure valid double‐probe pH monitoring data.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, NJ</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>11801980</pmid><doi>10.1097/00005537-200111000-00019</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0023-852X
ispartof The Laryngoscope, 2001-11, Vol.111 (11), p.1970-1975
issn 0023-852X
1531-4995
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72408156
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete; Access via Wiley Online Library
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Esophagus
extraesophageal reflux
Female
Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen
Gastroesophageal Reflux - diagnosis
GERD
Humans
Hydrogen-Ion Concentration
laryngopharyngeal reflux
Male
Manometry
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Monitoring, Ambulatory - methods
Other diseases. Semiology
pH monitoring
pH probes
Pharynx
reflux
title Ambulatory 24-Hour Double-Probe pH Monitoring: The Importance of Manometry
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T12%3A55%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ambulatory%2024-Hour%20Double-Probe%20pH%20Monitoring:%20The%20Importance%20of%20Manometry&rft.jtitle=The%20Laryngoscope&rft.au=Johnson,%20Paul%20E.&rft.date=2001-11&rft.volume=111&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1970&rft.epage=1975&rft.pages=1970-1975&rft.issn=0023-852X&rft.eissn=1531-4995&rft.coden=LARYA8&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/00005537-200111000-00019&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E72408156%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=72408156&rft_id=info:pmid/11801980&rfr_iscdi=true