4.3 Article

Earliest Videofluoromanometric Pharyngeal Signs of Dysphagia in ALS Patients

Journal

DYSPHAGIA
Volume 29, Issue 5, Pages 539-544

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00455-014-9542-9

Keywords

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; Videofluoromanometric swallowing study; Pharyngeal contraction time; Upper esophageal sphincter

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to find whether there are manometric pharyngeal changes that may have diagnostic and prognostic relevance in the amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patient who does not show changes in contrast-medium oropharyngeal transit in a videofluoroscopic swallowing study. Ten ALS patients, with an ALS Severity Scale Score of at least 7, no need to change dietary habit, no aspiration and/or penetration, and no other changes in contrast-medium oropharyngeal transit, were collected from our institution's database of videofluoromanometric swallowing studies. They were included in the study together with a group of 11 healthy volunteers. For each subject, 12 manometric items-7 for the pharyngeal phase and 5 for UES functionality-were evaluated. Statistically significant differences between the ALS patients and the healthy volunteers were found for pharyngeal contraction time of the upper region (median = 1,120, range = 880-1,420 vs. median = 970, range = 800-1,140), pharyngeal contraction time of the intermediate region (median = 1140, range = 960-1,360 vs. median = 770, range = 280-1,180), pharyngeal contraction time of the lower region (median = 1,320, range = 920-1,760 vs. median = 800, range = 620-1,780), and residual pressure after the relaxation of the UES (median = 2.2, range = -20.2 to 27.8 vs. median = -5.7, range = -2.9 to 8.4). A videofluoromanometric swallowing study may show an increase in the pharyngeal contraction time and in residual pressure after relaxation of the UES in ALS patients without videofluoroscopic changes in contrast-medium oropharyngeal transit.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available