Advertisement

Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

, Volume 17, Issue 12, pp 2033–2038 | Cite as

Anatomophysiology of the Pharyngo-Upper Esophageal Area in Light of High-Resolution Manometry

  • Luciana C. Silva
  • Fernando A. M. Herbella
  • Luciano R. Neves
  • Fernando P. P. Vicentine
  • Sebastião P. Neto
  • Marco G. Patti
2012 SSAT Quick Shot Presentation

Abstract

Introduction

The motility of the pharynx, upper esophageal sphincter (UES), and proximal esophagus is still poorly understood. These structures have anatomical and functional peculiarities that hinder the accurate study of their motility with the technology traditionally available. High-resolution manometry (HRM) has characteristics that make it more suitable for the study of the upper digestive tract. This study aims to evaluate in healthy volunteers, using HRM and transnasal pharyngoscopy, (1) the correlation between anatomical landmarks and HRM plots and (2) the normal values for manometric parameters of the pharynx, UES, and proximal esophagus.

Methods

We studied 40 asymptomatic volunteers with HRM (50 % male; median age, 27 years). Fourteen of those also underwent transnasal pharyngoscopy.

Results and discussion

Pharyngeal peak pressure, rise time, recovery time, and duration of contraction were 128 mmHg (range, 100–164 mmHg), 197 ms (range, 169–268 ms), 385 ms (range, 285–465 ms), and 604 ms (range, 544–626 ms) at the velum and 116 mmHg (range, 97–139 mmHg), 128 ms (range, 100–156 ms), 194 ms (range, 148–219 ms), and 336 ms (range, 267–386 ms) at the epiglottis, respectively. UES extension, basal pressure, residual pressure, and duration of relaxation were 3 cm (range, 2.6–3.6 cm), 76 mmHg (range, 58–109 mmHg), 4.4 mmHg (range, 1.2–6.9 mmHg), and 678 ms (range, 636–757 ms), respectively. In the proximal esophagus, wave amplitudes at 2, 4, and 6 cm below the UES were 72 mmHg (range, 53–97 mmHg), 56 mmHg (range, 42–76 mmHg), and 48 mmHg (range, 35–59 mmHg), respectively.

Conclusions

In conclusion, normal values were established. These values may prove clinically useful and could contribute to future studies with dysphagic patients.

Keywords

High-resolution manometry Pharynx Upper esophageal sphincter Proximal esophagus Striated muscle 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Dr. Luciana C. Silva was funded by a governmental funding agency, Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior.

Conflict of Interest

There is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Gardner E, Gray DJ, O'Rahilly R. 1960. Anatomia. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mittal RL. Motor function of the pharynx, esophagus and its sphincters. San Rafael: Morgan & Claypoll Life Sciences; 2011.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sears VW, Castel JA, Castell DO. Radial and longitudinal asymmetry of human pharyngeal pressures during swallowing. Gastroenterology. 1991 Dec; 101(6): 1559–63.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dodds WJ, Hogan WJ, Lydon SB, Stewart ET, Stef JJ, Arndorfer RC. Quantitation of pharyngeal motor function in normal subjects. J Appl Physiol. 1975 Oct; 39(4): 692–6.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ayazi S, Crookes PF. High-resolution esophageal manometry: using technical advances for clinical advantages. J Gastrointest Surh. 2010 Feb; 14 Suppl 1: S24-32. Epub 2009 Sep 18.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoffmann MR, Ciucci MR, Mielens JD, Jiang JJ, McCulloch TM. Pharyngeal swallow adaptions to bolus volume measured with high-resolution manometry. Laryngoscope. 2010 December; 120 (12): 2367–2373.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McCulloch TM, Hoffman MR, Ciucci MR. High-resolution manometry of pharyngeal swallow pressure events associated with head turn and chin tuck. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2010; 119(6): 369–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Takasaki K, Umeki H, Kumigami H, Takasaki H. Influence of head rotation on upper esophageal sphincter pressure evaluated by high-resolution manometry system. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010 Feb, 142(2):214–7.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Amaris M, Dua K, Naini SR, Samuel E, Shaker R. Characterization of the upper esophageal sphincter response during cough. Chest 2012; 142 (5):1229–1236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hoffmann MR, Mielens JD, Ciucci MR, Jones CA, Jiang JJ, McCulloch TM. High-resolution manometry of pharyngeal swallow pressure events associated with effortful swallow and the Mendelshon maneuver. Dysphagia. 2012; 27:418–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Umeki H, Takasaki K, Enatsu K, Tanaka F, Kumigami H, Takhashi H. Effects of a tongue-holding maneuver during swallowing evaluated by high-resolution manometry. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009 Jul; 141(1):119:22.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vadar R, Sweis R, Anggiansah A, Wong T, Fox MR. Upper esophageal sphincter and esophageal motility in patients with chronic cough and reflux: assessment by high-resolution manometry. Diseases of the Esophagus. 2012 doi: 10.1111/j.1442.2050.2012.01354.x
  13. 13.
    Kwiatek MA, Mirza F, Kahrilas PJ, Pandolfino JE. Hyperdynamic upper esophageal sphincter pressure: a manometric observation in patients reporting globus sensation. Am J Gastroenterol 2009 Feb; 104(2): 289–98.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Takasaki K, Umeki H, Enatsu K, Tanaka F, Sakihama N, Kumagami H, Takahashi H. Investigation of pharyngeal swallowing function using high-resolution manometry. Laryngoscope. 2008; 118:1729–1732.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ghosh SK, Pandolfino JE, Zhang Q, Jarosz A, Kahrilas PJ. Deglutitive upper esophageal sphincter relaxation: a study of 75 volunteer subjects using solid-state high-resolution manometry. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2006: 291:G525-G531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mielens JD, Hoffmann MR, Ciucci MR. Automated analysis of pharyngeal pressure data obtained with high-resolution manometry. Dysphagia (2011) 26:3–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Singh ER, Rife C, Clayton S, Naas P, Nietert P, Castell DO. Interobserver variability in esophageal body among new physician users. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2013 Feb; 47(2):e12-6.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Takasaki K, Umeki H, Enatsu K, Kumagami H, Takahashi H. Evaluation of swallowing pressure in a patient with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis before and after cricopharyngeal myotomy using high-resolution manometry system. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2010 Oct;37(5):644–7. doi: 10.1016/j.anl.2010.02.003. Epub 2010 Feb 20.
  19. 19.
    Kuribayashi S, Massey BT, Hafeezullah M, Perera L, Hussaini SQ, Tatro L, Darling RJ, Franco R, Shaker R. Upper esophageal sphincter and gastroesophageal junction pressure changes act to prevent gastroesophageal and esophagopharyngeal reflux during apneic episodes in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Chest. 2010 Apr;137(4):769–76. doi: 10.1378/chest.09-0913. Epub 2009 Nov 13.
  20. 20.
    Kwiatek MA, Mirza F, Kahrilas PJ, Pandolfino JE. Hyperdynamic upper esophageal sphincter pressure: a manometric observation in patients reporting globus sensation. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 Feb;104(2):289–98. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2008.150. Epub 2009 Jan 20.)
  21. 21.
    Shaker R, Ren J, Podvrsan B, Dodds WJ, Hogan WJ, Kern M, Hoffmann R, Hintz J. Effect of aging and bolus variables on pharyngeal and upper esophageal sphincter motor function. Am J Physiol. 1993 Mar; 264 (3 Pt 1):G427-32.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dantas RO, Alves LM, Dalmazo J, Santos CM, Cassiani Rde A, Nascimento WV. Effect of age on proximal esophageal response to swallowing. Arq Gastroenterol. 2010 Oct-Dec; 47(4):339–43.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nativ-Zeltzer N, Kahrilas PJ, Logemann JA. Manofluorography in the evaluation of oropharyngeal dysphagia. Dysphagia. 2012 Jun;27(2):151–61.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hoffman MR, Jones CA, Geng Z, Abelhalim SM, Walczak CC, Mitchell AR, Jiang JJ, McCulloch TM. Classification of high-resolution manometry data according to videofluoroscopic parameters using pattern recognition. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013 Jul;149(1):126–33. doi: 10.1177/0194599813489506. Epub 2013 Jun 1.

Copyright information

© The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luciana C. Silva
    • 1
  • Fernando A. M. Herbella
    • 1
    • 4
  • Luciano R. Neves
    • 2
  • Fernando P. P. Vicentine
    • 1
  • Sebastião P. Neto
    • 1
  • Marco G. Patti
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Escola Paulista de MedicinaFederal University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Escola Paulista de MedicinaFederal University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA
  4. 4.Surgical Gastroenterology, Division of Esophagus and StomachHospital São PauloSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations