Achalasia significantly affects patients' quality of life and can be difficult to diagnose and treat.
Objective
To review the diagnosis and management of achalasia, with a focus on phenotypic classification pertinent to therapeutic outcomes.
Evidence Review
Literature review and MEDLINE search of articles from January 2004 to February 2015. A total of 93 articles were included in the final literature review addressing facets of achalasia epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. Nine randomized controlled trials focusing on endoscopic or surgical therapy for achalasia were included (734 total patients).
Findings
A diagnosis of achalasia should be considered when patients present with dysphagia, chest pain, and refractory reflux symptoms after an endoscopy does not reveal a mechanical obstruction or an inflammatory cause of esophageal symptoms. Manometry should be performed if achalasia is suspected. Randomized controlled trials support treatments focused on disrupting the lower esophageal sphincter with pneumatic dilation (70%-90% effective) or laparoscopic myotomy (88%-95% effective). Patients with achalasia have a variable prognosis after endoscopic or surgical myotomy based on subtypes, with type II (absent peristalsis with abnormal pan-esophageal high-pressure patterns) having a very favorable outcome (96%) and type I (absent peristalsis without abnormal pressure) having an intermediate prognosis (81%) that is inversely associated with the degree of esophageal dilatation. In contrast, type III (absent peristalsis with distal esophageal spastic contractions) is a spastic variant with less favorable outcomes (66%) after treatment of the lower esophageal sphincter.
Conclusions and Relevance
Achalasia should be considered when dysphagia is present and not explained by an obstruction or inflammatory process. Responses to treatment vary based on which achalasia subtype is present.
The aim of this study was to explore perceptions of patient-centered care (PCC) among Veterans with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy using patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. We used three validated surveys to measure PCC concepts in a national sample of Veterans with GERD on PPIs. The Combined Outcome Measure for Risk Communication and Treatment Decision Making Effectiveness (COMRADE) measures patient experiences with risk communication and decision-making. The Patient Activation Measure (PAM) evaluates confidence and knowledge needed for self-management. The Patient Assessment of Care for Chronic Conditions (PACIC) assesses views of chronic care received. We used descriptive statistics to describe patient characteristics and PCC outcomes. Respondents (n=444) were mostly male (95.1%) with a mean age of 67.7 years. The mean COMRADE score measuring patient experiences with risk communication was 55.3 (SD=19.0). The mean PAM score was 56.1 (SD=19.2); 47.8% of respondents were considered disengaged patients lacking confidence and knowledge for self-management. The mean PACIC summary score was 3.03 (SD=1.2), with highest scores in the Delivery System Design/Decision Support (3.38, SD=1.2) subscale, and lowest scores in Follow-up/Coordination (2.58, SD=1.3). Veterans reported that care was well-organized and supportive in enhancing decision-making. Potential gaps may exist in delivering follow-up care, enhancing patient activation, and informing patients about risks of available GERD treatments. This is the first study to evaluate patient perceptions of PCC in a national sample of Veterans with GERD on PPIs. Findings can inform further investigation and development of targeted interventions to enhance patient experiences among individuals with GERD.
Women with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) commonly report an increase in their IBD symptoms related to their menstrual cycle. Hormonal contraceptives are safe for women with IBD and frequently used for reproductive planning, but data are lacking on their effect on IBD-related symptoms.We completed a cross-sectional phone survey of 129 women (31% response rate), aged 18 to 45 years, with IBD in an academic practice between March and November 2013. An electronic database query identified eligible women, and we sent an opt-out letter before contact. Questions included demographics, medical and reproductive history, and current/previous contraceptive use. Women were asked if/how their menses affected IBD-related symptoms and if/how their contraceptive affected symptoms. We calculated descriptive statistics and made comparisons by Crohn's disease versus ulcerative colitis on Stata V11.Participants were predominately white (85%) and college educated (97%), with a mean age of 34.2 (SD 6.2, range 19-45) years. Sixty percent had Crohn's disease, and 30% had IBD-related surgery previously. Half of the participants were parous, and 57% desired future pregnancy. Of the participants, 88% reported current or past hormonal contraceptive use and 60% noted cyclical IBD symptoms. Symptomatic improvement in cyclical IBD symptoms was reported by 19% of estrogen-based contraceptive users and 47% of levonorgestrel intrauterine device users. Only 5% of all hormonal method users reported symptomatic worsening.In a subset of women with IBD, 20% of hormonal contraception users reported improved cyclical menstrual-related IBD symptoms. Health care providers should consider potential noncontraceptive benefits of hormonal contraception in women with cyclical IBD symptoms.
Abstract Background: Most studies of colorectal cancer (CRC) risk factors pool cases across anatomical sites, though tumor characteristics and embryologic origins differ. Our aim was to conduct a site-stratified (proximal, distal, rectal) case control study of candidate risk factors for CRC. Methods: Our study base was US Veterans with >1 colonoscopy 1999-2011. CRC cases at baseline colonoscopy were identified with the Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry. Controls had normal colonoscopy without biopsy, no history of CRC, and no CRC within 3 years of index colonoscopy. Age, sex, race/ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), diabetes, and smoking were considered candidate risk factors. Primary outcome was CRC, stratified by site. Site-specific odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each risk factor were computed with unadjusted and adjusted multinomial logistic regression models. Results: We identified 21,739 CRC cases and 616,323 normal colonoscopy controls. For cases combined vs. controls, median age was 68 vs. 61 years, 98% vs. 95% were male, median BMI was 27.8 vs. 28.8 kg/m2, 28% vs. 24% had diabetes, and 25% vs. 29% were non-smokers; race/ethnicity was similar. Presence and strength of associations differed by risk factor and CRC site (Table). Smoking was more closely associated with rectal (OR=1.84) than proximal (OR=1.59) or distal cancer (OR=1.50). Diabetes was more closely associated with proximal than distal or rectal cancer (OR=1.28, 1.17 and 1.12, respectively). Blacks had reduced odds for rectal (OR=0.89), but increased odds for distal (OR=1.27) and particularly proximal cancer (OR=1.60) when compared to non-Hispanic whites. For males vs. females, odds of rectal was higher than distal or proximal cancer (OR=2.64, 1.95 and 1.32, respectively). Conclusions: Presence and strength of association of cancer risk factors may differ by CRC site. Site should be a key consideration in future studies of CRC risk. Table 1.Site specific risk factors for 21,739 CRC cases compared to 616,323 normal colonoscopy controlsAnatomic Site of CRC*Proximal (n=7,686)Distal (n=7,036)Rectal (n=7,017)Candidate Risk FactorOR (CI)OR (CI)OR (CI)Age, years†1.100 (1.096-1.103)1.065 (1.062-1.069)‡1.055 (1.051- 1.059)‡§Gender, male vs. female1.318 (1.080-1.608)1.950 (1.538-2.471)‡2.636 (2.006-3.463)‡Race/ethnicityBlack vs. non-Hispanic white1.596 (1.480-1.720)1.270 (1.167-1.381)‡0.886 (0.808-0.971)‡§Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic white1.291 (1.123-1.485)1.531 (1.337-1.753)1.219 (1.053-1.411)§Asian vs. non-Hispanic white0.872 (0.634-1.201)0.917 (0.662-1.272)0.556 (0.371-0.832)BMI, kg/m2†0.994 (0.988-1.000)1.005 (0.999-1.012)‡0.963 (0.957-0.970)‡§Diabetes, yes vs. no1.278 (1.196-1.366)1.170 (1.089-1.257)1.119 (1.038-1.207)‡SmokingCurrent vs. never1.594 (1.476-1.722)1.500 (1.383-1.627)1.837 (1.695-1.992)‡§Former vs. never0.997 (0.926-1.073)1.082 (1.001-1.171)1.085 (0.998-1.119)* Multinomial analyses adjusted for other risk factors, as well as year of colonoscopy, 1999-2011† by one unit increment‡ p<0.05 when compared to proximal cancer§ p<0.05 when compared to distal cancerCRC, colorectal cancer; BMI, body mass index. Citation Format: Samir Gupta, Ranier Bustamante, Ashley Earles, Maria E. Martinez, Karen Messer, Christina D. Williams, Andrew J. Gawron, Tonya Kaltenbach, Lin Liu. Site specific risk factors for colorectal cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 281. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-281
Objective. To examine if genetic variations in chemokine receptor and ligand genes are associated with gastric cancer risk and survival. Methods. The study included 298 cases and 417 controls from a population-based study of gastric cancer conducted in Warsaw, Poland in 1994–1996. We investigated seven single nucleotide polymorphisms in a chemokine ligand (CXCL12) and chemokine receptor (CCR2, CCR5, CX3CR1) genes and one frameshift deletion (CCR5) in blood leukocyte DNA in relation to gastric cancer risk and survival. Genotyping was conducted at the NCI Core Genotyping Facility. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were computed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Survival analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazards models. Results. Gastric cancer risk was not associated with single chemokine polymorphisms. A CCR5 haplotype that contained the common alleles of IVS1+151 G>T (rs2734648), IVS2+80 C>T (rs1800024) and minor allele of IVS1+246 A>G (rs1799987) was associated with a borderline significantly increased risk (OR = 1.5, 95% CI: 1.0–2.2). For gastric cancer cases, there was a greater risk of death for carriers of the minor alleles of CCR2 Ex2+241 G>A (rs1799864) (HR = 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1–2.1) and CCR5 IVS2+80 C>T (rs1800024) (HR = 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1–2.1). Carriers of the CCR5 minor allele of IVS1+151 G>T (rs2734648) had a decreased risk of death compared to homozygote carriers of the common allele (HR = 0.8, 95% CI: 0.6–1.0). Conclusions. Our findings do not support an association between gastric cancer risk and single chemokine genetic variation. The observed associations between cancer risk and a CCR5 haplotype and between survival and polymorphisms in CCR2 and CCR5 need replication in future studies.
