Three-Dimensional High-Resolution Esophageal Manometry Study of the Esophagogastric Junction in Patients with Achalasia

  • Marie-Anne GuillaumotEmail author
  • Chloé Léandri
  • Sarah Leblanc
  • Romain Coriat
  • Frédéric Prat
  • Stanislas Chaussade
  • Maximilien Barret
Original Article



A novel three-dimensional high-resolution esophageal manometry provides a dynamic 360° representation of the pressure at the esophagogastric junction.


To describe the three-dimensional high-resolution esophageal manometry patterns of achalasia.


We retrospectively included all consecutive patients who underwent three-dimensional high-resolution esophageal manometry before and after treatment (pneumatic dilatation or per-oral endoscopic myotomy) for achalasia between November 2016 and July 2017. The distribution of the pressures at the esophagogastric junction on three-dimensional high-resolution esophageal manometry was determined.


Eighteen patients were included. Mean integrated relaxation pressure was 20.7 mmHg, and median (range) Eckardt score was 7 (4–10). Nine patients were treated by pneumatic dilatation and seven by myotomy. Nine patients underwent three-dimensional high-resolution esophageal manometry after treatment. Before treatment, the esophagogastric junction pressure distribution was best observed at end expiration and during the 4 s of the integrated relaxation pressure measurement. During the integrated relaxation pressure, the lower esophageal sphincter was asymmetric in 12 patients with a high-pressure zone between the left and the posterior side of the esophagogastric junction. After treatment, five patients had a residual high-pressure point on the left or the posterior side of the esophagogastric junction.


Three-dimensional high-resolution esophageal manometry allows a simple assessment of the pressure topography at the EGJ. In patients with achalasia, we found the esophagogastric junction pressure to be asymmetric with a peak pressure on the greater curvature side. Three-dimensional high-resolution esophageal manometry has the potential to guide initial and redo treatments.


Achalasia High-resolution esophageal manometry 3D-HRM Three-dimensional esophageal manometry Esophagogastric junction Functional morphology Pressure profile 



Crural diaphragm


Computerized tomography


Esophagogastric junction


Lower esophageal sphincter


Integrated relaxation pressure


Three-dimensional high-resolution manometry



The authors thank the Medtronic Company for gratuitously providing the 3D high-resolution manometry probe.

Author’s contribution

M-AG performed the 3D-HRM, collected the data, and wrote the article. CL performed the 3D-HRM. MB analyzed the data, designed the research study, and wrote the paper. SL, RC, FP, and SC made significant comments and modifications to the manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Roman S, Huot L, Zerbib F, et al. High-resolution manometry improves the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders in patients with dysphagia: a randomized multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2016;111:372–380.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mittal RK, Balaban DH. The esophagogastric junction. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:924–932.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mittal RK, Zifan A, Kumar D, Ledgerwood-Lee M, Ruppert E, Ghahremani G. Functional morphology of the lower esophageal sphincter and crural diaphragm determined by three-dimensional high-resolution esophago-gastric junction pressure profile and CT imaging. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2017;313:G212–G219.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kwiatek MA, Pandolfino JE, Kahrilas PJ. 3D-high resolution manometry of the esophagogastric junction. Neurogastroenterol Motil Off J Eur Gastrointest Motil Soc. 2011;23:461–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nicodème F, Soper NJ, Lin Z, Pandolfino JE, Kahrilas PJ. Calculation of esophagogastric junction vector volume using three-dimensional high-resolution manometry. Dis Esophagus Off J Int Soc Dis Esophagus. 2015;28:684–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Swift GL, Smith PM, McKirdy HC, Lowndes RH. Vector volume analysis of the lower esophageal sphincter in achalasia and the effect of balloon dilation. Dis Esophagus Off J Int Soc Dis Esophagus. 2001;14:54–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nicodème F, Pandolfino JE, Lin Z, Xiao Y, Escobar G, Kahrilas PJ. Adding a radial dimension to the assessment of esophagogastric junction relaxation: validation studies of the 3D-eSleeve. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2012;303:G275–G280.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boeckxstaens GE, Zaninotto G, Richter JE. Achalasia. Lancet Lond Engl. 2014;383:83–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heniford BT, Matthews BD, Kercher KW, et al. Laparoscopic anterior esophageal myotomy and toupet fundoplication for achalasia. Am Surg. 2001;67:1059–1065.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mattioli S, Pilotti V, Felice V, Di Simone MP, D’Ovidio F, Gozzetti G. Intraoperative study on the relationship between the lower esophageal sphincter pressure and the muscular components of the gastro-esophageal junction in achalasic patients. Ann Surg. 1993;218:635–639.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oelschlager BK, Chang L, Pellegrini CA. Improved outcome after extended gastric myotomy for achalasia. Arch Surg Chic Ill. 1960;2003:490–495.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Inoue H, Minami H, Kobayashi Y, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia. Endoscopy. 2010;42:265–271.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khashab MA, Sharaiha RZ, Saxena P, et al. Novel technique of auto-tunneling during peroral endoscopic myotomy (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;77:119–122.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rieder E, Swanström LL, Perretta S, Lenglinger J, Riegler M, Dunst CM. Intraoperative assessment of esophagogastric junction distensibility during per oral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal motility disorders. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:400–405.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Teitelbaum EN, Boris L, Arafat FO, et al. Comparison of esophagogastric junction distensibility changes during POEM and Heller myotomy using intraoperative FLIP. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:4547–4555.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Onimaru M, Inoue H, Ikeda H, et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy is a viable option for failed surgical esophagocardiomyotomy instead of redo surgical Heller myotomy: a single center prospective study. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217:598–605.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ramchandani M, Nabi Z, Reddy DN, et al. Outcomes of anterior myotomy versus posterior myotomy during POEM: a randomized pilot study. Endosc Int Open. 2018;6:E190–E198.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tan Y, Lv L, Wang X, et al. Efficacy of anterior versus posterior per-oral endoscopic myotomy for treating achalasia: a randomized, prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;88:46–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Onimaru M, Inoue H, Ikeda H, et al. Greater curvature myotomy is a safe and effective modified technique in per-oral endoscopic myotomy (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:1370–1377.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Gastroenterology DepartmentCochin Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de ParisParisFrance

Personalised recommendations