Barostat or dynamic balloon distention test

Which technique is best suited for esophageal sensory testing?

J. M. Remes-Troche, A. Attaluri, P. Chahal, Satish Sanku Chander Rao

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Esophageal sensation is commonly assessed by barostat-assisted balloon distension (BBD) or dynamic balloon distension (DBD) technique, but their relative merits are unknown. Our aim was to compare the usefulness and tolerability of both techniques. Sixteen healthy volunteers (male/female = 6/10) randomly underwent graded esophageal balloon distensions, using either BBD (n= 8) or DBD (n= 8). BBD was performed by placing a 5-cm long highly compliant balloon attached to a barostat, and DBD by placing a 5-cm long balloon attached to a leveling container. Intermittent phasic balloon distensions were performed in increments of 6mmHg. Sensory thresholds and biomechanical properties were assessed and compared. Sensory thresholds for first perception (mean ± standard deviation; 21 ± 6 vs. 21.2 ± 5, mmHg, P= 0.9), discomfort (38 ± 8 vs. 35 ± 9, P= 0.5), and pain (44 ± 4 vs. 45 ± 3, P= 0.7) were similar with BBD and DBD techniques. However, more subjects tolerated DBD (7/8, 88%) when compared with BBD (4/8, 50%). Forceful expulsion of balloon into stomach (n= 4), pulling around the mouth (n= 4), chest discomfort (n= 2) and retching (n= 2) were overlapping reasons for intolerance with BBD. Esophageal wall distensibility was similar with both techniques. Both techniques provided comparable data on biomechanical properties. However, DBD was better tolerated than BBD for evaluation of esophageal sensation. Hence, we recommend DBD for performing esophageal balloon distension test.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)584-589
Number of pages6
JournalDiseases of the Esophagus
Volume25
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Sensory Thresholds
Mouth
Stomach
Healthy Volunteers
Thorax
Pain

Keywords

  • Barostat
  • Chest pain
  • Dynamic balloon distension
  • Esophagus
  • Sensory testing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Barostat or dynamic balloon distention test : Which technique is best suited for esophageal sensory testing? / Remes-Troche, J. M.; Attaluri, A.; Chahal, P.; Rao, Satish Sanku Chander.

In: Diseases of the Esophagus, Vol. 25, No. 7, 01.09.2012, p. 584-589.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3d65c340f7464c99937f523bfe23b6e0,
title = "Barostat or dynamic balloon distention test: Which technique is best suited for esophageal sensory testing?",
abstract = "Esophageal sensation is commonly assessed by barostat-assisted balloon distension (BBD) or dynamic balloon distension (DBD) technique, but their relative merits are unknown. Our aim was to compare the usefulness and tolerability of both techniques. Sixteen healthy volunteers (male/female = 6/10) randomly underwent graded esophageal balloon distensions, using either BBD (n= 8) or DBD (n= 8). BBD was performed by placing a 5-cm long highly compliant balloon attached to a barostat, and DBD by placing a 5-cm long balloon attached to a leveling container. Intermittent phasic balloon distensions were performed in increments of 6mmHg. Sensory thresholds and biomechanical properties were assessed and compared. Sensory thresholds for first perception (mean ± standard deviation; 21 ± 6 vs. 21.2 ± 5, mmHg, P= 0.9), discomfort (38 ± 8 vs. 35 ± 9, P= 0.5), and pain (44 ± 4 vs. 45 ± 3, P= 0.7) were similar with BBD and DBD techniques. However, more subjects tolerated DBD (7/8, 88{\%}) when compared with BBD (4/8, 50{\%}). Forceful expulsion of balloon into stomach (n= 4), pulling around the mouth (n= 4), chest discomfort (n= 2) and retching (n= 2) were overlapping reasons for intolerance with BBD. Esophageal wall distensibility was similar with both techniques. Both techniques provided comparable data on biomechanical properties. However, DBD was better tolerated than BBD for evaluation of esophageal sensation. Hence, we recommend DBD for performing esophageal balloon distension test.",
keywords = "Barostat, Chest pain, Dynamic balloon distension, Esophagus, Sensory testing",
author = "Remes-Troche, {J. M.} and A. Attaluri and P. Chahal and Rao, {Satish Sanku Chander}",
year = "2012",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1442-2050.2011.01294.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "584--589",
journal = "Diseases of the Esophagus",
issn = "1120-8694",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Barostat or dynamic balloon distention test

T2 - Which technique is best suited for esophageal sensory testing?

AU - Remes-Troche, J. M.

AU - Attaluri, A.

AU - Chahal, P.

AU - Rao, Satish Sanku Chander

PY - 2012/9/1

Y1 - 2012/9/1

N2 - Esophageal sensation is commonly assessed by barostat-assisted balloon distension (BBD) or dynamic balloon distension (DBD) technique, but their relative merits are unknown. Our aim was to compare the usefulness and tolerability of both techniques. Sixteen healthy volunteers (male/female = 6/10) randomly underwent graded esophageal balloon distensions, using either BBD (n= 8) or DBD (n= 8). BBD was performed by placing a 5-cm long highly compliant balloon attached to a barostat, and DBD by placing a 5-cm long balloon attached to a leveling container. Intermittent phasic balloon distensions were performed in increments of 6mmHg. Sensory thresholds and biomechanical properties were assessed and compared. Sensory thresholds for first perception (mean ± standard deviation; 21 ± 6 vs. 21.2 ± 5, mmHg, P= 0.9), discomfort (38 ± 8 vs. 35 ± 9, P= 0.5), and pain (44 ± 4 vs. 45 ± 3, P= 0.7) were similar with BBD and DBD techniques. However, more subjects tolerated DBD (7/8, 88%) when compared with BBD (4/8, 50%). Forceful expulsion of balloon into stomach (n= 4), pulling around the mouth (n= 4), chest discomfort (n= 2) and retching (n= 2) were overlapping reasons for intolerance with BBD. Esophageal wall distensibility was similar with both techniques. Both techniques provided comparable data on biomechanical properties. However, DBD was better tolerated than BBD for evaluation of esophageal sensation. Hence, we recommend DBD for performing esophageal balloon distension test.

AB - Esophageal sensation is commonly assessed by barostat-assisted balloon distension (BBD) or dynamic balloon distension (DBD) technique, but their relative merits are unknown. Our aim was to compare the usefulness and tolerability of both techniques. Sixteen healthy volunteers (male/female = 6/10) randomly underwent graded esophageal balloon distensions, using either BBD (n= 8) or DBD (n= 8). BBD was performed by placing a 5-cm long highly compliant balloon attached to a barostat, and DBD by placing a 5-cm long balloon attached to a leveling container. Intermittent phasic balloon distensions were performed in increments of 6mmHg. Sensory thresholds and biomechanical properties were assessed and compared. Sensory thresholds for first perception (mean ± standard deviation; 21 ± 6 vs. 21.2 ± 5, mmHg, P= 0.9), discomfort (38 ± 8 vs. 35 ± 9, P= 0.5), and pain (44 ± 4 vs. 45 ± 3, P= 0.7) were similar with BBD and DBD techniques. However, more subjects tolerated DBD (7/8, 88%) when compared with BBD (4/8, 50%). Forceful expulsion of balloon into stomach (n= 4), pulling around the mouth (n= 4), chest discomfort (n= 2) and retching (n= 2) were overlapping reasons for intolerance with BBD. Esophageal wall distensibility was similar with both techniques. Both techniques provided comparable data on biomechanical properties. However, DBD was better tolerated than BBD for evaluation of esophageal sensation. Hence, we recommend DBD for performing esophageal balloon distension test.

KW - Barostat

KW - Chest pain

KW - Dynamic balloon distension

KW - Esophagus

KW - Sensory testing

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84866280308&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84866280308&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1442-2050.2011.01294.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1442-2050.2011.01294.x

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 584

EP - 589

JO - Diseases of the Esophagus

JF - Diseases of the Esophagus

SN - 1120-8694

IS - 7

ER -