http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
High-resolution Manometry Findings in Patients After Sclerotherapy for Esophageal Varices
( Fernando A M Herbella ),( Ramiro Colleoni ),( Luiz Bot ),( Fernando P P Vicentine ),( Marco G Patti ) 대한소화기기능성질환·운동학회 2016 Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (JNM Vol.22 No.2
Background/Aims Endoscopic therapy for esophageal varices may lead to esophageal dysmotility. High-resolution manometry is probably the more adequate tool to measure esophageal motility in these patients. This study aimed to evaluate esophageal motility using high resolution manometry following eradication of esophageal varices by endoscopic sclerotherapy. Methods We studied 21 patients (11 women, age 52 [45-59] years). All patients underwent eradication of esophageal varices with endoscopic sclerotherapy and subsequent high resolution manometry. Results A significant percentage of defective lower esophageal sphincter (basal pressure 14.3 [8.0-20.0] mmHg; 43% hypertonic) and hypocontractility (distal esophageal amplitude 50 [31-64] mmHg; proximal esophageal amplitude 40 [31-61] mmHg; distal contractile integral 617 [403-920] mmHg·sec·cm; 48% ineffective) was noticed. Lower sphincter basal pressure and esophageal amplitude correlated inversely with the number of sessions (P < 0.001). No manometric parameter correlated with symptoms or interval between last endoscopy and manometry. Conclusions Esophageal motility after endoscopic sclerotherapy is characterized by: (1) defective lower sphincter and (2) defective and hypotensive peristalsis. Esophageal dysmotility is associated to an increased number of endoscopic sessions, but manometric parameters do not predict symptoms. (J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2016;22:226-230)
Pitfalls in the Interpretation of Chicago Classification for Esophageal Motility Disorders
( Fernando A M Herbella ),( Francisco Schlottmann ),( Marco G Patti ) 대한소화기기능성질환·운동학회 2021 Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (JNM Vol.27 No.4
High-resolution manometry permitted the creation of the Chicago classification, that is the categorization for esophageal motility disorders most currently used. Despite its wide acceptance, there are few pitfalls for the correct interpretation of the tests. This technique review illustrates some difficult cases that may lead to misinterpretation of the results. Difficult cases are analyzed, such as the distinction of: (1) esophagogastric junction morphology and lower esophageal sphincter excursion, (2) intrabolus pressure pattern or common cavity, (3) hypercontractile esophagus (jackhammer) and achalasia type III, (4) absent contractility and severe ineffective esophageal motility or achalasia type I, and (5) simultaneous distal esophageal spasm and ineffective esophageal motility. (J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2021;27:513-517)
Understanding the Chicago Classification: From Tracings to Patients
( Francisco Schlottmann ),( Fernando A Herbella ),( Marco G Patti ) 대한소화기기능성질환·운동학회(구 대한소화관운동학회) 2017 Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (JNM Vol.23 No.4
Current parameters of the Chicago classification include assessment of the esophageal body (contraction vigour and peristalsis), lower esophageal sphincter relaxation pressure, and intra-bolus pressure pattern. Esophageal disorders include achalasia, esophagogastric junction outflow obstruction, major disorders of peristalsis, and minor disorders of peristalsis. Sub-classification of achalasia in types I, II, and III seems to be useful to predict outcomes and choose the optimal treatment approach. The real clinical significance of other new parameters and disorders is still under investigation. (J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2017;23:487-494)
Rafael C. Katayama,Carlos H. Arasaki,Fernando A.M. Herbella,Ricardo A. Neto,Gaspar de Jesus Lopes Filho 대한비만학회 2021 The Korean journal of obesity Vol.30 No.4
Background: One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a simpler procedure than Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB); however, biliary reflux can occur and impair outcomes. This study aimed to compare outcomes of OAGB and RYGB. Methods: Twenty patients with morbid obesity were randomized prospectively into two groups: OAGB (n=10) or RYGB (n=10). Quality of life (36-item short-form health survey [SF-36]), satisfaction (Visick scale), and body mass index (BMI) were evaluated before and 6 months after the operation. All patients underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy with gastric and esophageal mucosal biopsies at 3 and 6 months after their operation. Results: The study found no significant difference in BMI before surgery (OAGB, 43.2 kg/m2; RYGB, 43.1 kg/m2; P=0.90) or at 6 months postoperative (OAGB, 32.1 kg/m2; RYGB, 31.8 kg/m2; P=0.91). There was no significant difference in improvement of quality of life (four SF-36 domains) or satisfaction (P=0.08) between groups at 6 months. There was no statistical difference between gastric (P=0.10) and esophageal (P=0.76) inflammation grade at three or 6 months between the two groups. Conclusion: OAGB and RYGB are equally effective in terms of weight loss, patient satisfaction, and quality of life improvement at 6 months after the procedures. Inflammation grade and cellular damage in the gastric pouch and in the esophagus were similar.