PubMed1996
The records of all patients who had duodenojejunal manometry (DJM) from 1989 to 1995 were retrospectively reviewed. We evaluated the main symptoms of the patients, the indication for the study, its result, and the impact on therapy and management. One hundred sixteen patients out of 154 were included in the study, of whom 96 were women and 20 were men, with a mean age of 41.2 years. Twenty-five had perfused tube studies, and 91 had prolonged ambulatory recordings. Forty-one patients were referred for evaluation of abdominal pain, 34 for chronic constipation, 24 for nausea and vomiting, 8 for pseudoobstruction, and the remaining 9 for other reasons. All patients had appropriate endoscopic, radiographic, or scintigraphic studies prior to manometry. Forty-seven (40.5%) had abnormal manometry: 20 of 41 (48.8%) for abdominal pain, 7 of 34 (20.6%) for chronic constipation, 10 of 24 (41.7%) for nausea and vomiting, 5 of 8 (62.5%) for pseudoobstruction, and 5 of 9 (55.6%) for the miscellaneous group. The various subgroups did not have specific patterns of motor abnormalities. In 22 patients (18.9%) manometry helped in the choice of therapy: in 15 patients by affecting surgical approach, particularly in the constipation group, and in 7 patients by affecting feeding options and prokinetic agents. Detection of motor abnormalities was helpful in patients with severe symptoms thought to have functional disease even when no specific therapy was rendered. Thus, DJM was abnormal in 2/5 patients referred for evaluation of suspected motility disorders. It directly affected therapy in approximately 1/5 patients, particularly in those with constipation. It is helpful in the management of patients even when specific therapy is not rendered, particularly in those with abdominal pain. The modest impact on specific therapy is related to limited availability of effective prokinetic drugs and the limited specificity and predictive value of tests results.