Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 160

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Distal Esophageal Spasm in High-Resolution Esophageal Pressure Topography: Defining Clinical Phenotypes

Open access
Pandolfino, John E., Roman, Sabine, Carlson, Dustin, Luger, Daniel, Bidari, Kiran, Boris, Lubomyr, Kwiatek, Monika A., Kahrilas, Peter J.·2011·Gastroenterology

Abstract

BACKGROUND The manometric diagnosis of distal esophageal spasm (DES) uses “simultaneous contractions” as a defining criterion, ignoring the concept of short latency distal contractions as an important feature. Our aim was to apply standardized metrics of contraction velocity and latency to high-resolution esophageal pressure topography (EPT) studies to refine the diagnosis of DES. METHODS Two thousand consecutive EPT studies were analyzed for contractile front velocity (CFV) and distal latency to identify patients potentially having DES. Normal limits for CFV and distal latency were established from 75 control subjects. Clinical data of patients with reduced distal latency and/or rapid CFV were reviewed. RESULTS Of 1070 evaluable patients, 91 (8.5%) had a high CFV and/or low distal latency. Patients with only rapid contractions (n = 186 [17.4%] using conventional manometry criteria; n = 85 [7.9%] using EPT criteria) were heterogeneous in diagnosis and symptoms, with the majority ultimately categorized as weak peristalsis or normal. In contrast, 96% of patients with premature contraction had dysphagia, and all (n = 24; 2.2% overall) were ultimately managed as spastic achalasia or DES. CONCLUSIONS The current DES diagnostic paradigm focused on “simultaneous contractions” identifies a large heterogeneous set of patients, most of whom do not have a clinical syndrome suggestive of esophageal spasm. Incorporating distal latency into the diagnostic algorithm of EPT studies improves upon this by isolating disorders of homogeneous pathophysiology: DES with short latency and spastic achalasia. We hypothesize that prioritizing measurement of distal latency will refine the management of these disorders, recognizing that outcomes trials are necessary.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.04.058

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 160

Metadata

Authors
Pandolfino, J. E., Roman, S., Carlson, D., Luger, D., Bidari, K., Boris, L., Kwiatek, M. A., & Kahrilas, P. J.
Venue
Gastroenterology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-08
Volume
141
Issue
2
Pages
469-475
ISSN
0016-5085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1971497722
Cited by
160
References
0
FWCI
12.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Distal Esophageal Spasm in High-Resolution Esophageal Pressure Topography: Defining Clinical Phenotypes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1053/j.gastro.2011.04.058
The paper
Pandolfino, J. E., Roman, S., Carlson, D., Luger, D., Bidari, K., Boris, L., Kwiatek, M. A., & Kahrilas, P. J. (2011). Distal Esophageal Spasm in High-Resolution Esophageal Pressure Topography: Defining Clinical Phenotypes. Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2011.04.058

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.