Next Article in Journal
Searching for New Genetic Biomarkers of Axial Spondyloarthritis
Previous Article in Journal
Single-Cell RNA Transcriptomics Reveals the State of Hepatic Lymphatic Endothelial Cells in Hepatitis B Virus-Related Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Advances on Neurogastroenterology and Motility Disorders: Pathophysiology, Diagnostics and Management

1
Gastroenterology Department, Azrieli Faculty of Medicine, Bar Ilan University, Nazareth Hospital, Nazareth 16100, Israel
2
Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padua, 31100 Padua, Italy
3
Gastroenterology Unit, Azienda Ospedale Università di Padova, 35128 Padua, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(10), 2911; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jcm11102911
Submission received: 19 May 2022 / Accepted: 19 May 2022 / Published: 20 May 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Gastroenterology & Hepatopancreatobiliary Medicine)
Symptoms related to abnormalities in gastrointestinal tract motility and functions are very common in the general population, affecting both pediatrics and adults, from both sexes [1]. These symptoms are generally of a chronic nature and may affect the quality of life and any part of the gastrointestinal tract. The symptoms include globus sensation, dysphagia, heartburn and regurgitation, belching, epigastric pain or burning, nausea and vomiting, abdominal pain, bloating, constipation, fecal incontinence and others [1,2,3]. Generally, in organic diseases (inflammatory, autoimmune, neoplastic, etc.), the investigation and management routes are well established and based on known pathophysiological mechanisms and theories. However, this is not the case in functional disorders of the gastrointestinal tract. The general approach consists of excluding organic conditions by performing various blood tests, stool tests, and endoscopy and imaging, especially when alarm signs exist [4]. The majority of the patients, however, have negative investigations despite their debilitating symptoms and impaired quality of life. For these patients physiological testing can help to better understand the origin of the symptoms and naturally improve management.
The last decade has witnessed important advances in diagnostic tools and technologies used for the improved assessment of gastrointestinal function and motility [5,6]. A review by the International Working Group for Disorders of Gastrointestinal Motility and Function revealed that the performance of these diagnostics can identify clinically relevant pathologies that may guide management [7,8]. High resolution manometry (HRM) has become the gold standard modality for the evaluation of esophageal function and has extensively replaced the old conventional systems [9,10]. For patients with dysphagia and esophageal symptoms, the use of HRM systems has enabled a more precise assessment of esophageal and lower esophageal sphincter functions, with an improved ability to localize the lower esophageal sphincter. Importantly, the progress of HRM has enabled the introduction of the Chicago Classification, now at its fourth version, which uses a working scheme dividing esophageal disorders into major and minor esophageal disorders [11]. The Chicago Classification is currently considered the working algorithm for analyzing and interpreting HRM studies. Moreover, the endoluminal functional lumen imaging probe (EndoFLIP) has been developed as a modern technology performed under sedation, used to measure obstructions at the esophageo-gastric junction level by evaluating its distensibility [12]. EndoFLIP may further help to measure secondary peristalsis in patients with esophageal symptoms, enabling the diagnosis of achalasia or other major esophageal motility disorders. Advances in fluoroscopy methodology, such as the timed barium swallow protocol and timed barium surface area measurement, have further added to the diagnostic arsenal when assessing a patient with esophageal symptoms [13,14].
Further research has focused on improving our understanding of GERD pathogenesis, in order to ameliorate our diagnostic approach [15]. Indeed, only 30% of patients with GERD will have a diagnostic endoscopy (i.e., esophagitis or Barrett). The Lyon consensus stated that GERD could be confirmed when acid exposure time is (>6%/24 h) [16]. In patients with an inconclusive diagnosis, novel metrics from impedance-pH monitoring are currently suggested, namely the mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI) and post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave (PSPW) index, which demonstrated the ability to either confirm or refute GERD diagnosis [17]. The advent of wireless pH-monitoring (Bravo capsule) provides a catheter-free approach and enables a prolonged period (up to 96 h) of monitoring, which improves the test’s ability to assess the association of reflux and symptoms and is more easily tolerated by patients compared to the traditional catheter-based systems [18].
Notably, the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to the upper GI tract is mainly in the field of endoscopy; however, AI systems application is expanding in other upper GI settings, to include GERD, eosinophilic esophagitis, and motility disorders [19,20].
As for gastric symptoms, currently, scintigraphy of a solid meal (using a99m Technetium-labeled egg) is considered the gold standard for gastroparesis diagnosis [21]. However, breath tests and wireless motility capsules may be alternatives to scintigraphy for the assessment of gastric emptying [21]. In addition, in this context, EndoFLIP showed some important advancements for the clinically relevant disorders of the pylorus, requiring more invasive therapy when symptoms of gastroparesis are severe [12].
Disorders in the anorectum such as constipation and fecal incontinence are also common in the general population and cause severe impacts on life quality and productivity [22]. High resolution anorectal manometry is a modern tool considered to be the best-established diagnostic tool that permits an objective evaluation of anal and rectal sensory and motor functions. The recent London classification is a practical standardized protocol for the performance and analysis of anorectal manometry [23].
Numerous advances in the field of neurogastroenterology and motility have been achieved in recent years, including new imaging testing, developments at the cellular and molecular levels, the evolving role of the microbiome in various functional gastrointestinal symptoms, the role of diet and traditional and complementary medicine in managing functional gastrointestinal conditions, and many other advances from the clinical and laboratory levels. We believe that this Special Issue, in the Journal of Clinical Medicine, is of paramount significance and relevance for shedding light on the recent advances in neurogastroenterology and motility disorders, from pathophysiology to management, at the clinical and laboratory levels.

Author Contributions

A.M. and E.S.: design of the study, writing of the manuscript, approval of the final version. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

E.S. has served as speaker for Abbvie, AGPharma, Alfasigma, EG Stada Group, Fresenius Kabi, Grifols, Janssen, Innovamedica, Malesci, Pfizer, Reckitt Benckiser, Sandoz, SILA, Sofar, Takeda, Unifarco; has served as consultant for Alfasigma, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Diadema Farmaceutici, Falk, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, Merck & Co, Reckitt Benckiser, Regeneron, Sanofi, Shire, SILA, Sofar, Synformulas GmbH, Takeda, Unifarco; he received research support from Reckitt Benckiser, SILA, Sofar, Unifarco. A.M. has nothing to declare.

Abbreviations

EndoFLIPEndolumenal functional lumen imaging probe
GERDGastro-esophageal reflux disease
HRMhigh-resolution manometry
MNBImean nocturnal baseline impedance
PSPWpost-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave
AIArtificial Intelligence

References

  1. Farthing, M.; Roberts, E.S.; Samuel, D.G.; Williams, J.G.; Thorne, K.; Morrison-Rees, S.; John, A.; Akbari, A.; Williams, J.C. Survey of digestive health across Europe: Final report. Part 1: The burden of gastrointestinal diseases and the organisation and delivery of gastroenterology services across Europe. United Eur. Gastroenterol. J. 2014, 2, 539–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Anderson, P.; Dalziel, K.; Davies, E.; Fitzsimmons, D.; Hale, J.; Hughes, A.; Isaac, J.; Onishchenko, K.; Phillips, C.; Pockett, R. Survey of digestive health across Europe: Final report. Part 2: The economic impact and burden of digestive disorders. United Eur. Gastroenterol. J. 2014, 2, 544–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Canavan, C.; West, J.; Card, T. The epidemiology of irritable bowel syndrome. Clin. Epidemiol. 2014, 6, 71–80. [Google Scholar] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Mari, A.; Sweis, R. Assessment and management of dysphagia and achalasia. Clin. Med. 2021, 21, 119–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Ambartsumyan, L.; Khlevner, J.; Nurko, S.; Rosen, R.; Kaul, A.; Pandolfino, J.E.; Ratcliffe, E.; Yacob, D.; Li, B.; Punati, J.; et al. Proceedings of the 2018 Advances in Motility and in NeuroGastroenterology: AIMING for the Future Single Topic Symposium. J. Pediatr. Gastroenterol. Nutr. 2020, 71, e59–e67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. De-Madaria, E.; Mira, J.J.; Carrillo, I.; Afif, W.; Ang, D.; Antelo, M.; Bollipo, S.; Castells, A.; Chahal, P.; Heinrich, H.; et al. The present and future of gastroenterology and hepatology: An international SWOT analysis (the GASTROSWOT project). Lancet Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2022, 7, 485–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kahrilas, P.J.; on behalf of the International Working Group for Disorders of Gastrointestinal Motility and Function; Bredenoord, A.J.; Fox, M.; Gyawali, C.P.; Roman, S.; Smout, A.J.; Pandolfino, J.E. Advances in the management of oesophageal motility disorders in the era of high-resolution manometry: A focus on achalasia syndromes. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2017, 14, 677–688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Savarino, E.; Bredenoord, A.J.; Fox, M.; Pandolfino, J.E.; Roman, S.; Gyawali, C.P.; International Working Group for Disorders of Gastrointestinal Motility and Function. Expert consensus document: Advances in the physiological assessment and diagnosis of GERD. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2017, 14, 665–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Keller, J.; Bassotti, G.; Clarke, J.; Dinning, P.; Fox, M.; Grover, M.; Hellström, P.M.; Ke, M.; Layer, P.; Malagelada, C.; et al. Advances in the diagnosis and classification of gastric and intestinal motility disorders. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2018, 15, 291–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Tack, J.; Pauwels, A.; Roman, S.; Savarino, E.; Smout, A.; ESNM HRM consensus group. European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) recommendations for the use of high-resolution manometry of the esophagus. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2021, 33, e14043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Yadlapati, R.; Kahrilas, P.J.; Fox, M.R.; Bredenoord, A.J.; Gyawali, C.P.; Roman, S.; Babaei, A.; Mittal, R.K.; Rommel, N.; Savarino, E.; et al. Esophageal motility disorders on high-resolution manometry: Chicago classification version 4.0©. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2021, 33, e14058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Savarino, E.; di Pietro, M.; Bredenoord, A.J.; Carlson, D.A.; Clarke, J.O.; Khan, A.; Vela, M.F.; Yadlapati, R.; Pohl, D.; Pandolfino, J.E.; et al. Use of the Functional Lumen Imaging Probe in Clinical Esophagology. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2020, 115, 1786–1796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Mari, A.; Abu Baker, F.; Pellicano, R.; Khoury, T. Diagnosis and Management of Achalasia: Updates of the Last Two Years. J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10, 3607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Pesce, M.; Sweis, R. Advances and caveats in modern achalasia management. Ther. Adv. Chronic Dis. 2021, 12, 2040622321993437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Frazzoni, M.; Frazzoni, L.; Ribolsi, M.; De Bortoli, N.; Tolone, S.; Russo, S.; Conigliaro, R.; Penagini, R.; Fuccio, L.; Zagari, R.M.; et al. Applying Lyon Consensus criteria in the work-up of patients with proton pump inhibitory-refractory heartburn. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 2022, 55, 1423–1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Gyawali, C.P.; Kahrilas, P.J.; Savarino, E.; Zerbib, F.; Mion, F.; Smout, A.J.P.M.; Vaezi, M.; Sifrim, D.; Fox, M.R.; Vela, M.F.; et al. Modern diagnosis of GERD: The Lyon Consensus. Gut 2018, 67, 1351–1362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Ribolsi, M.; Frazzoni, M.; Marabotto, E.; De Carlo, G.; Ziola, S.; Maniero, D.; Balestrieri, P.; Cicala, M.; Savarino, E. Novel impedance-pH parameters are associated with proton pump inhibitor response in patients with inconclusive diagnosis of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease according to Lyon Consensus. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 2021, 54, 412–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Roman, S.; Gyawali, C.P.; Savarino, E.; Yadlapati, R.; Zerbib, F.; Wu, J.; Vela, M.; Tutuian, R.; Tatum, R.; Sifrim, D.; et al. Ambulatory reflux monitoring for diagnosis of gastro-esophageal reflux disease: Update of the Porto consensus and recommendations from an international consensus group. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2017, 29, e13067-15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Visaggi, P.; de Bortoli, N.; Barberio, B.; Savarino, V.; Oleas, R.; Rosi, E.M.; Marchi, S.; Ribolsi, M.; Savarino, E. Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis of Upper Gastrointestinal Diseases. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2022, 56, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Visaggi, P.; Barberio, B.; Gregori, D.; Azzolina, D.; Martinato, M.; Hassan, C.; Sharma, P.; Savarino, E.; de Bortoli, N. Systematic review with meta-analysis: Artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of oesophageal diseases. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 2022, 55, 528–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Schol, J.; Wauters, L.; Dickman, R.; Drug, V.; Mulak, A.; Serra, J.; Enck, P.; Tack, J.; ESNM Gastroparesis Consensus Group. United European Gastroenterology (UEG) and European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) consensus on gastroparesis. United Eur. Gastroenterol. J. 2021, 9, 287–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Sbeit, W.; Khoury, T.; Mari, A. Diagnostic approach to faecal incontinence: What test and when to perform? World J. Gastroenterol. 2021, 27, 1553–1562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Carrington, E.V.; Heinrich, H.; Knowles, C.H.; Fox, M.; Rao, S.; Altomare, D.F.; Bharucha, A.E.; Burgell, R.; Chey, W.D.; Chiarioni, G.; et al. The international anorectal physiology working group (IAPWG) recommendations: Standardized testing protocol and the London classification for disorders of anorectal function. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2020, 32, e13679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mari, A.; Savarino, E. Advances on Neurogastroenterology and Motility Disorders: Pathophysiology, Diagnostics and Management. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 2911. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jcm11102911

AMA Style

Mari A, Savarino E. Advances on Neurogastroenterology and Motility Disorders: Pathophysiology, Diagnostics and Management. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2022; 11(10):2911. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jcm11102911

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mari, Amir, and Edoardo Savarino. 2022. "Advances on Neurogastroenterology and Motility Disorders: Pathophysiology, Diagnostics and Management" Journal of Clinical Medicine 11, no. 10: 2911. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jcm11102911

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop