Dr GI Joe

Diagnosis and Management of Esophageal Motility Disorders

Introduction
This protocol provides a standardized, evidence-based framework for the diagnosis and management of esophageal motility disorders, grounded in the Chicago Classification v4.0. Its purpose is to equip gastroenterology fellows with a systematic approach to patient care, beginning with initial symptom evaluation and progressing through advanced diagnostic interpretation and therapeutic decision-making. By following this structured pathway, fellows can build the clinical reasoning necessary to navigate this complex field with confidence and precision.

1.0 Initial Patient Evaluation and Diagnostic Sequencing
A structured initial evaluation is strategically paramount in patients with suspected esophageal motor dysfunction. Before proceeding to specialized motility testing, clinicians must first systematically exclude structural, malignant, and inflammatory causes of esophageal symptoms. This critical step is essential to avoid misdiagnosis, prevent therapeutic errors, and ensure that definitive motility testing is applied to the appropriate patient population.
The stepwise diagnostic approach for a patient presenting with symptoms suggestive of an esophageal motility disorder is as follows:

Patient Presentation & Identification of Alarm Features
Patients typically present with core symptoms such as dysphagia (difficulty swallowing, which can be to liquids, solids, or both), non-cardiac chest pain, refractory reflux symptoms, or regurgitation of undigested food. The presence of any of the following alarm features mandates an immediate upper endoscopy:
Alarm Features:
  • Significant weight loss
  • Anemia
  • Overt gastrointestinal bleeding
  • Progressive, worsening symptoms
  • New onset of symptoms in a patient over age 50

First-Line Investigation: Upper Endoscopy (EGD)
An EGD is the mandatory first-line investigation for any patient with dysphagia or other alarm features. Its primary purpose is to rule out structural pathology, including strictures, rings, webs, malignancy (pseudoachalasia), and eosinophilic esophagitis. While the primary goal is exclusion, secondary findings such as retained food, saliva, or a puckered esophagogastric junction (EGJ) may suggest an underlying motility disorder. The guiding principle remains: "Achalasia isn't achalasia until you scope it."

Second-Line Investigation: Barium Esophagram
Following an unrevealing EGD, a barium esophagram is often the next logical step. This radiographic study is highly valuable for identifying classic patterns associated with specific motor disorders. A timed barium esophagram can further assess esophageal function by measuring contrast clearance at one, two, and five minutes.

Definitive Diagnostic Test: High-Resolution Manometry (HRM)
HRM is the gold standard for definitively diagnosing and classifying esophageal motility disorders. It is indicated for patients with dysphagia and a normal EGD, for those with suspected motility issues based on a barium swallow, or for evaluating refractory GERD symptoms after structural and inflammatory causes have been excluded.

Adjunctive Testing: EndoFLIP
The Functional Lumen Imaging Probe (EndoFLIP) is an adjunctive technology performed during endoscopy to evaluate the distensibility of the esophagogastric junction. It provides complementary data to support a diagnosis of achalasia or EGJ outflow obstruction (EGJOO) but is not a replacement for HRM as the primary diagnostic tool.
Once structural etiologies have been thoroughly excluded and an indication for HRM is established, a systematic interpretation of the manometric data using the Chicago Classification framework is required to arrive at a precise diagnosis.

2.0 High-Resolution Manometry (HRM) Interpretation: The Chicago v4.0 Framework
The Chicago Classification v4.0 provides the objective, standardized framework for interpreting HRM studies, ensuring a consistent and reproducible diagnostic approach. This framework is built upon a hierarchical analysis of three core manometric metrics that evaluate lower esophageal sphincter relaxation, peristaltic vigor, and peristaltic timing.

The Three Core Manometry Metrics:
Integrated Relaxation Pressure (IRP): The IRP is the primary measure of EGJ relaxation following a swallow. An elevated IRP is the hallmark of impaired EGJ relaxation and points toward a disorder on the achalasia or EGJ outflow obstruction (EGJOO) spectrum.
Distal Contractile Integral (DCI): The DCI measures the vigor, or strength, of the esophageal body contraction. Its value (measured in mmHg·cm·s) categorizes peristalsis along a spectrum:
  • Greater than 8000: Hypercontractile
  • 450–8000: Normal
  • Less than 450: Weak/Ineffective
  • Less than 100 (or ~0): Absent/Failed
Distal Latency (DL): The DL measures the timing of the peristaltic wave, specifically the interval from the start of the swallow to the arrival of the contractile wave in the distal esophagus. A DL < 4.5 seconds is defined as a "premature contraction" and is the pathognomonic finding of distal esophageal spasm.

The Diagnostic Logic of the Chicago Classification:
The Chicago Classification follows a clear, hierarchical algorithm:

Step 1: Analyze LES Relaxation (IRP). The first and most critical step is to evaluate the IRP. An elevated IRP immediately places the patient on the spectrum of EGJ outflow disorders (achalasia or EGJOO). A normal IRP rules out these conditions and directs the analysis toward disorders of peristalsis.
Step 2: Analyze Peristaltic Timing (DL) [if IRP is normal]. If the IRP is normal, the next step is to assess the timing of contractions. A premature DL (< 4.5 seconds in ≥20% of swallows) defines Distal Esophageal Spasm. If the timing is normal, the final step is to analyze contractile strength.
Step 3: Analyze Peristaltic Strength (DCI) [if IRP and DL are normal]. With normal EGJ relaxation and normal peristaltic timing, the DCI value differentiates between Hypercontractile (Jackhammer) Esophagus, Ineffective Esophageal Motility (IEM), and Absent Contractility.
This systematic, three-step process forms the foundation for accurately classifying the full range of esophageal motility disorders.

3.0 Manometric Classification of Esophageal Motility Disorders
This section systematically details the major esophageal motility disorders as defined by the Chicago v4.0 criteria. For each disorder, this protocol outlines the definitive manometric findings, along with key clinical pearls and common diagnostic pitfalls to guide clinical decision-making.

3.1 Disorders of EGJ Outflow (Elevated IRP)
These disorders are fundamentally characterized by impaired relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter.
Achalasia Types I, II, and III:
  • Type I (Classic Achalasia): Elevated IRP with minimal esophageal pressurization
  • Type II (Pan-esophageal Pressurization): Elevated IRP with ≥20% of swallows showing pan-esophageal pressurization
  • Type III (Spastic Achalasia): Elevated IRP with ≥20% of swallows showing premature contractions (spastic pattern)
EGJ Outflow Obstruction (EGJOO):
  • Defining HRM Criteria: Elevated IRP with evidence of preserved peristalsis.
  • Diagnostic Pitfall: This is an inconclusive diagnosis based on manometry alone. The finding is often an artifact caused by factors like a hiatal hernia, catheter angulation, or opioid use. It requires confirmation with supportive testing (e.g., timed barium esophagram, EndoFLIP) to verify a true mechanical or functional obstruction before any treatment is considered.

3.2 Disorders of Peristalsis (Normal IRP)
These disorders are characterized by normal LES relaxation but abnormal function of the esophageal body.

Distal Esophageal Spasm (DES):
  • Defining HRM Criteria: Normal IRP with ≥20% of swallows demonstrating premature contractions (DL < 4.5 sec).
  • Clinical Pearl: This is the manometric correlate to a "corkscrew esophagus" seen on a barium swallow. The older term "diffuse esophageal spasm" is conceptually related but has been replaced by this more precise, manometrically-defined diagnosis.
Hypercontractile (Jackhammer) Esophagus:
  • Defining HRM Criteria: Normal IRP with ≥20% of swallows demonstrating a hypercontractile DCI > 8000 mmHg·cm·s.
  • Clinical Pearl: Jackhammer esophagus is a disorder of excessive contractile strength, not premature timing like DES. The obsolete term "nutcracker esophagus" (previously defined as DCI > 5000) has been replaced by this more specific and clinically relevant diagnosis.
Ineffective Esophageal Motility (IEM):
  • Defining HRM Criteria: Normal IRP with either >70% of swallows being weak (DCI < 450 mmHg·cm·s) or ≥50% of swallows being failed.
  • Clinical Pearl: This is the most common manometric abnormality identified, particularly in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). It is not typically a direct target for therapy; management focuses on associated conditions like GERD.
Absent Contractility:
  • Defining HRM Criteria: Normal IRP with 100% failed swallows (DCI < 100 mmHg·cm·s).
  • Clinical Pearl: It is crucial to differentiate the cause. Idiopathic absent contractility presents with a normal IRP. In contrast, Scleroderma Esophagus, a high-yield association for board examinations (often seen in CREST syndrome), is classically defined by absent contractility PLUS a hypotensive LES. This combination leads to profound, severe reflux and its associated complications.

In addition to these manometrically-defined motor disorders, specific behavioral syndromes can also be identified during motility evaluation.

4.0 Diagnosis of Behavioral Esophageal Syndromes
Not all symptoms of esophageal dysfunction stem from primary muscle or nerve pathology. Certain behavioral syndromes can mimic motility disorders and are distinguished by characteristic clinical and manometric features. Their recognition is critical, as they require an entirely different management approach.

4.1 Rumination Syndrome
Clinical Presentation: Patients describe an effortless, non-nauseous regurgitation of recently ingested food into the mouth, typically within minutes of eating. The food is often re-chewed and re-swallowed or spat out.
Characteristic Findings: HRM with impedance reveals a characteristic pattern of an abrupt rise in intra-gastric pressure from somatic abdominal wall contraction, followed by inappropriate LES relaxation and retrograde flow of gastric contents.
Differentiation: This pattern is distinct from vomiting, which is preceded by nausea and retching, and from GERD, which is typically delayed, nocturnal, and involves acidic reflux rather than recently ingested food.

4.2 Supragastric Belching
Clinical Presentation: This syndrome is characterized by repetitive, often socially disruptive belching. The belches originate from air that is unconsciously sucked or aspirated into the esophagus from the pharynx, not from the stomach. The behavior often ceases with distraction or during sleep.
Characteristic Findings: HRM with impedance demonstrates the rapid entry of air into the esophagus from above (the pharynx), followed immediately by its expulsion.
Differentiation: This is distinct from gastric belching, which is the physiologic venting of air from the stomach via a transient LES relaxation.
The correct identification of these syndromes is essential for guiding patients toward appropriate, behavior-focused therapies, which will be detailed alongside treatments for motor disorders in the following section.

5.0 Evidence-Based Treatment Pathways
Treatment strategies for esophageal disorders are highly dependent on the specific diagnosis derived from the comprehensive evaluation. This section organizes therapeutic options by disorder, outlining first-line medical and procedural interventions and their underlying rationales.

Primary Treatment Pathways by Disorder:
Achalasia:
  • First-Line: Pneumatic dilation or laparoscopic Heller myotomy with fundoplication
  • Emerging: Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM)
  • Medical: Calcium channel blockers or nitrates (limited efficacy)
  • Botulinum Toxin: Reserved for poor surgical candidates
EGJ Outflow Obstruction (EGJOO):
  • First-Line: Treat underlying cause if identified (hiatal hernia repair, medication adjustment)
  • Confirmatory Testing: Timed barium esophagram, EndoFLIP before intervention
  • Intervention: Only if confirmed functional obstruction
Distal Esophageal Spasm:
  • First-Line: Smooth muscle relaxants (calcium channel blockers, nitrates)
  • Second-Line: Tricyclic antidepressants, SSRIs for pain modulation
  • Procedural: Botulinum toxin injection, rarely pneumatic dilation
Jackhammer Esophagus:
  • First-Line: Smooth muscle relaxants, proton pump inhibitors if concurrent GERD
  • Second-Line: Tricyclic antidepressants for visceral hypersensitivity
  • Procedural: Botulinum toxin injection in refractory cases
Ineffective Esophageal Motility:
  • Primary Focus: Treat associated GERD aggressively
  • PPI Therapy: High-dose, twice-daily dosing
  • Lifestyle: Dietary modifications, positioning
  • Avoid: Prokinetics (contraindicated)
Absent Contractility:
  • Idiopathic: Aggressive GERD management, dietary modifications
  • Scleroderma: Intensive PPI therapy, fundoplication contraindicated
  • Complications: Monitor for strictures, Barrett's esophagus
Rumination Syndrome:
  • First-Line: Behavioral therapy, diaphragmatic breathing exercises
  • Education: Patient education about the voluntary nature
  • Adjunctive: Baclofen in select cases
Supragastric Belching:
  • First-Line: Behavioral modification, speech therapy
  • Distraction Techniques: Cognitive behavioral therapy
  • Avoid: Prokinetics or acid suppression (ineffective)

To reinforce these concepts, the appendix consolidates the highest-yield clinical takeaways and common diagnostic pitfalls encountered in practice and on board examinations.

6.0 Appendix: High-Yield Clinical Pearls and Diagnostic Pitfalls
This section consolidates the most critical, high-yield points and common examination traps related to esophageal motility disorders to reinforce key concepts for clinical practice and board review.

Buzzword and Pitfall Quick Reference:
Classic Associations:
  • "Corkscrew esophagus" on barium swallow = Distal Esophageal Spasm
  • "Bird's beak" appearance = Achalasia
  • CREST syndrome + absent contractility = Scleroderma esophagus
  • "Pseudoachalasia" in elderly = Malignancy until proven otherwise
Common Diagnostic Pitfalls:
  • EGJOO is often artifactual - always confirm with supportive testing
  • Normal endoscopy does not rule out achalasia
  • Scleroderma esophagus = absent contractility + hypotensive LES (not just absent contractility)
  • Jackhammer esophagus is about strength, not timing (unlike DES)
Critical Clinical Pearls:
  • Always scope before diagnosing achalasia
  • IEM is commonly associated with GERD, not a primary target for therapy
  • Behavioral syndromes require behavioral interventions, not medical therapy
  • POEM is emerging as preferred therapy for Type III achalasia
  • Fundoplication is contraindicated in scleroderma esophagus

What is Dr GI Joe?

I'm Dr. Joseph Kumka, Gastroenterology Fellow, educator, and creator of this podcasts. Whether you're a resident gearing up for the boards, a fellow diving deep into subspecialty topics, or a practicing clinician hungry for high-yield updates—you’re in the right place.

Subscribe, engage, and let's raise the bar together.

Please not that that these are AI generated podcasts curated from most up to date resources.

Welcome to the Deep Dive.

Today, we're tackling something pretty complex in Gosesophagalility disorders.

Yeah, it's a field full of technical jargon, you know, lots of acronyms.

It can definitely feel overwhelming if you don't have a clear map.

Absolutely.

So our mission today is to take the latest diagnostic standard, the Chicago Classification version 4.0, and really burn it down for you.

We want to give you a clear step by step guide.

Show how cllamissions actually think through these cases from a patient's symptoms right through to interpreting those tricky monometries readouts.

Exactly.

We're aiming for that high yield understanding.

By the end of this, you should grasp the, what is it, three core measure met?

Yeah, three key metrics, yeah.

IRP, DL, and DCI.

Get those, and you can really understand that the classification and crucially how it guides treatment.

Okay, so we'll hit the big ones.

Accalasia, all three types, EGJ, outflow obstruction , distalosophagal spasm.

Hypercontractile or Jack Hammer's office.ophagus, inffective motility and absent contractility, the old range.

But let's start where it always starts with the patient.

Right.

So someone comes in, maybe they have dysphagia, trouble swalling, could be a liquid solids or both, or maybe it's chest pain that isn't heart related or really stubborn reflex.

Regurgitation, too, sometimes.

Yeah, regurgitation.

Now, the gut reaction might be, let's test how the esophagus is squeezing.

So why don't we jump straight to monometry?

Ah, that's the absolute crucial first point.

And honestly, a common pitfall.

If someone has dysphagia, especially if they have alarm symptoms?

Like losing weight unexpectedly, anemia being over 50.

Exactly.

You have to rule out a structural problem first, an arm tree comes later .

Always.

So step one is always a an upper endoscopy, an EGD.

Correct.

You need that scope first.

And what are we hunting for with the scope?

I mean, besides an obvious blockage, like a stricture or a web.

The main thing, the critical thing, is ruling out pseoacqualasia.

That's basically a malignancy, usually an adocarcinoma right down in the GE junction.

And it mimics true acylasia.

Perfectly.

It causes outflow obstruction, looks the same onarium swallows sometimes .

If you skip that EGD, you could mistake a cancer for a benign motility disorder.

The consequences, well, they're obviously severe.

Okay, message received loud and clear.

EGED first.

So if the scope is clean, no tumor, no major blockage, what's typically the next step before monometry?

Often, we'll go for a bum mesophogram, sometimes a timed one, it adds functional information, the scope sees the lining, the barium shows how things look when swallowing happens.

Right.

This is where we get those textbook pictures.

Precisely.

You might see that classic, smooth, narrowing at the bottom of the bird's beak, which screams accolasia.

Or the twisty look.

Yeah, or the corkscrew or rosary bead pattern, if it's more of a spastic thing.

But, you know, these are suggestive.

To really classify the disorder accurately, you need the pressure readings, the numbers.

Which brings us finally to the gold standard .

High resolution Monometry, HRM.

That's the one.

Everything in Chicago 4.0 hinges on the HRM data.

Okay, let's dig into into those numbers.

You said three key metrics.

Can you break them down for us?

Make it less technical.

Let's try.

Think of it like this.

The esophagus has a gate at the bottom, a signal controlling the muscle squeeze, and the power of that squeeze itself.

Gate, signal power.

Okay, First, the gate.

That's the IRP integrated relaxation pressure.

It measures how well the lower esophagal sphter, the LS actually opens up when you swallow.

So if the IRP number is high...

The gate's stuck.

It's not relaxing properly .

Impaired LES relaxation.

Got it.

High IRP points towards an outflow problem, like acalia or maybe EGOO.

Exactly.

Second, the signal.

That's DL Dal latency.

This is all about timing.

Does the wave of contraction travel down the esophia smoothly or does it fire off too early?

And there's a specific cutoff time.

Yes.

The magic number is 4.5 seconds.

If the DL is short, less than 4.5 seconds, it means the contraction started prematurely.

That's spasm territory..

Okay, gate, IRP.

Signal timing, DL.

That's the third one, Power.

Right, the punch.

That's the DCI, distal contractile integral.

This measures the strength or vigor of the squings in the main part of the assultesophagus.

So this tells us if it's squeezing too hard or too weakly?

Precisely.

If the DCI is really high, over 8,000, that's a hypercontractile, super strong squeeze in a jackhammer.

If it's really low, under 450, the squeeze is weak, ineffective.

IRP DL DCI.

Gate signal punch .

Okay, that framework really helps.

So let's follow the logic.

First question.

Is the IRP elevated?

Is the gate stuck?

Okay, if the IRP is elevated, yes, we've got an outflow problem.

We're dealing with something in the Accalagia family, or E.G. JOO , how the muscle above the blockage behaves tells us which one it is.

Let's start with Te Ialia, the classic kind.

Type I is straightforward, high IRP, and basically absent peristalsis.

The muscle in the esophial body is just given up.

It's flaccid deb above the tight LS.

No squeeze at all.

Okay, type two.

This one sounds weird.

Panisophagal pressurization.

What's that look like?

Yeah, type 2 is elevated IRP plus, in at least 20% of swallows, you see this widespread simultaneous pressure build up throughout the esophagus.

Like the whole tube is squeezing at once instead of in a wave.

Exactly.

It's trying to force things through the blocked LS, generating pressure everywhere.

Interestingly, this residual muscle activity means type two actually has the best prognosis.

We'll get to that.

Okay.

And type three, the spastic type.

When Type 3 is often the most painful.

You've got the elevated IRP, the stuck gate, plus those premature contractsions.

Remember the short deal .

Less than 4.5 seconds and 20% are Morse walls.

So, it's blocked at the bottom and spasming above it.

Ouch.

Yeah, it's a double whammy.

Blockage and spasm.

That covers the three accolias.

What about the last one in the high IRP category?

EGJ outflow Obstruction or AGJOO?

Ah, EGJO-O. This is a tricky one.

It has the elevated IRP, likeylia, but crucially, the peristis, the muscle wave above it , is normal, or at least somewhat preser.

So the muscle itself is working, but the pressure reading at the junction is high.

Why is that tricky?

Because it's often not a true fixed obstruction.

It can be an artifact.

An artifact, you mean like the test wasn't quite right.

Could be.

Maybe the monometry catheter got kicked slightly, or the patient has a big hiatal hernia pressing on the area .

Or very commonly it's related to medications, especially opioids, they can tighten up the LES.

So you can't just treat based on that number alone?

Absolutely not.

With EGOO, you must get corroborating evidence.

Do a time bum swallow, does it empty slowly or maybe an endo flip test to measure the actual opening diameter and distens?

You need proof of a real mechanical issue before you consider treatment.

Right.

Confirm before intervening.

Makes sense.

Okay, let's shift gears.

What if the IRP is normal ?

The gate is opening?

Okay.

If the IRP is normal, the LES isn't the primary problem, so now we look at the timing, the DL.

The signal speed.

Right.

If the IRP is normal, but the DL is short under that 4.5 second threshold in at least 20% of the swallows, the musc is firing too early.

That's Dal lesophagal spasm, DE.

Creature uncoordinated squeezes.

Exactly.

And that's the motility disorder that typically correlates with that corkscrew appearance you might see on a barium study , defined by the timing abnormality.

Okay.

Now, what if the gate is fine, normal IRP, and the timing is fine?

Normalormal deal?

Then we look at the last piece.

The power, the DCI.

The punch.

Let's start with too much power.

If IRP and DL are normal, but the DCI is huge over 8, are more swallows, that's hypercontraction.ile esophagus, better known as jackhammer esophagus.

Slamming contractions, right?

I imagine that causes significant pain.

Often intense chest pain.

Yeah.

It's just pure excessive force.

And no, this replaced the old term nutcracker esophagus.

Jackhammer is the current term for DCI 8000.

Good clarification.

Now, the other extreme, normal gait, normal timing, but weak power.

That's ineffective esophical motility, IEM .ed by a low DCI under 450 in the majority, usually over 50% or even 70%, depending on criteria, of swallows.

The squeezes are just too feeble to properly clear food or refluxate.

And you see this a lot in people with GERD.

Very commonly.

It's thought that the poor clearance from the weak contractions likely worsens their refux symptoms, because stuff that comes up doesn't get pushed back down effectively.

Makes sense.

And if the weakness is total , like zero power.

If you have 100% failed swallows, DCI basically is zero, that's classified as absent contracts..

Yeah.

The esophagal body muscle just isn't contracting at all.

Now, speaking of absent contractility, there's a really important condition to differentiate here, isn't there?

Scleroderma.

Yes, absolutely critical.

Scleroderma esophagus has a very specific monometry signature.

What is it?

It's absent contractility, just like the idiopathic form , but it also has a hypotensive LS.

The lower esophel sphinter pressure itself is abnormally low.

So not only does the pump not work, but the valve at the bottom is leaky.

Exactly.

The gate is floppy and wide open, and that combination is devastating clinically.

Because without that LES barrier, you get massive free flowing reflux from the stomach right up the esophagus .

It leads to severe esophagitis, strictures, and a very high risk of aspiration into the lungs.

It's the classic esophageal finding in crest syndrome.

Okay, that low LES pressure is the key differentiator.

Now, quickly, before we hit treatments, what about those behavioral mimics?

Ratesumination and supergastric belching?

How do we spot those?

Right.

These can confuse things.

The clue on monometry, often using impedence monitoring, too, is that the primary event is't in the esophagus muscle itself.

So what do you see for rumination?

With rumination syndrome, the patient effortlessly brings up recently eaten undigested food .

Monometry shows a sudden spike and gastrop pressure just beforeurg.

It's an abdominal muscle contraction, a voluntary or subconscious squeeze pushing the food up.

Not an esophageal problem, but an abdominal action.

Correct.

And with supergastricing, the patient complains of excessive .

But the imped sensors show air, entering the esophagus from above, they're sucking air in, and then immediately expelling.

It's not gas coming up from the stomach.

Oh, again, a behavioral pattern, not a motility disorder, and the treatment reflects that.

Totally different.

Treatment for both is behavioral things like diaphragmatic breathing exercises, cognitive behavioral therapy , not pills or surgery.

Okay, that distinction is vital.

Let's finally talk treatment strategy.

How does our IRPD,LDCI diagnosis guide what we actually do for the patient?

It lines up pretty well.

Yeah.

Fundamentally, if the problem is accalia spectrum or confirmed AGJO, meaning elevated IRP of achanical block.

No, you need to open the gate mechanically.

Exactly.

That means procedures, helleriotomy, surgery, pneum dilation, PD stretching with the balloon, or poem, Ploscopomy, cutting the muscle from inside with the scope.

And if it's one of the spastic disorders, normal IRP, but abnormal timing, D or power, jackhammer?

Then the muscle is overactive, maybe hypersensitive.

So you try medical therapy first.

Smooth muscle relaxants, calcium channel blockers, nitrates, maybe sylophil, sometimes low dose antidepressants, like TCAs, can help with pain signaling, too.

Let's drill down on acylia treatment.

You mentioned type two has the best prognosis.

Why again?

Because in type 2, that panosophagal pressurization shows the esophagal body muscle still has some oom .

Once you relieve the LES of obstruction with Heller, PD, or poem, that residual pressure helps clear the esophagus effectively.

They respond well to pretty much any of his standard treatments.

What about type three, the spastic type?

Why is PM often preferred there?

Ah, Type 3 is tough.

It's got the LS block and that long segment of spastic muscle contracting prematrial above it.

Right, the double problem.

So a standard helleromyotomy or a balloon dilation mainly just targets the LS itself.

It might not adequately address the extensive spasm higher up.

But POM can.

Poem gives the endoscop the flexibility to extend theomy, the muscle cut much further up the esophagus, cutting through that spastic segment along with the L .

That longer cut is often needed for durable relief in type 3.

So poem's advantage is the ability to customize the length of the muscle cut for the specific problem.

What about Botox?

Where does that fit in?

Botox injections into the LS are really reserved for patients who are too frail or elderly for the more definitiveitive procedures like surgery or poem.

It works, but the effect is temporary.

Usually only lasts 6, 12 months.

It's more palliative.

And quickly, if medical therapy fails for severe DES or jackasshammer, can poem help there too?

Yes, it's becoming an option.

If someone has debilitating symptoms from spasm or hypercontraction that don't respond to medication , poem can be used to perform a targeted myomy of just the affected segment of the esophagal body, leaving the LS intact.

Fascinating how the endoscopic tools are being adapted.

So that really walks us through the whole Chicago 4.0 process.

From symptoms, the crucial EGD ruleout.

Through understanding IRP, DLDC.

To classifying the specific disorder and finally matching it to the most logical treatment strategy.

It's a structured approach.

Yeah.

And the key really isn't just knowing the definitions.

It's about constantly applying that framework and remembering the checks and balances.

Like the EGD first rule?

Always.

Even if the monometry looked like textbook type I acia, you have to know you ruled out pseudo-acia first.

True understanding here means knowing the rules, yes, but critically knowing the exceptions and the potential traps along the way.

That's what ensures patient safety.

A fantastic point to end on.

Thinking critically about the whole process, not just the final label, thank you for joining us for this deep dive today.

Was this transcription useful or not useful?