4.4 Article

The pharyngeal contractile integral is a useful indicator of pharyngeal swallowing impairment

Journal

NEUROGASTROENTEROLOGY AND MOTILITY
Volume 29, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nmo.13144

Keywords

dysphagia; manometry; pharynx

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [1K24DC12801]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundA limitation to the expanded use of high-resolution pharyngeal manometry (HRPM) in clinical practice is the lack of useful pharyngeal parameters that are easy to interpret, generalizable between patients, and do not require specialized software. In this study, we sought to test the relationship between the pharyngeal contractile integral (PhCI) with videofluoroscopic abnormalities as assessed with the Modified Barium Swallow Impairment Profile((c)). MethodsAdult dysphagic patients were recruited to undergo simultaneous HRPM and videofluoroscopy during a standardized swallowing protocol. Key ResultsThirty-six patients were included in the study. The mean PhCI was 247mm Hgcms (range 2-488mm Hgcms). The lower pharyngeal total (PT) group (N=20; mean PT=3.9) had a mean PhCI of 299mm Hgcms, while the higher PT group (N=16; mean PT=12.7) had a mean PhCI score of 188mm Hgcms (P=.01). There was also a significant negative correlation between normalized PhCI to PT scores (r=-.47; P=.004). Patients with higher PhCIs exhibited less severe penetration-aspiration scores on thin liquids (1.44 vs 3.78; P=.03) and all consistencies combined (1.21 vs 1.99; P=.03). Conclusions & InferencesThe PhCI is a useful indicator of the presence of pharyngeal swallowing impairment and is technically simple to calculate with currently available software programs. Advancement of software is necessary to refine the clinical value of this parameter. High-resolution pharyngeal manometry has the potential to be a valuable adjunct procedure for the evaluation and treatment of dysphagic individuals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available