Browsing by Author "Bilder, Claudio"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire shows better discriminative capacity for clinical and manometric findings than the Eckardt score: results from a multicenter study
    (2022) Cisternas, Daniel; Taft, Tiffany; Carlson, Dustin A.; Glasinovic, Esteban; Monrroy Bravo, Hugo Alfonso; Rey, Paula; Hani, Albis; Ardila‐Hani, Andrés; Leguizamo, Ana María; Bilder, Claudio; Ditaranto, Andrés; Varela, Amanda; Agotegaray, Joaquin; Remes‐Troche, José María; Ruiz de León, Antonio; Pérez de la Serna, Julio; Marín, Ingrid; Serra, Jordi
    Abstract Introduction: Grading dysphagia is crucial for clinical management of patients. The Eckardt score (ES) is the most commonly used for this purpose. We aimed to compare the ES with the recently developed Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire (BEDQ) in terms of their correlation and discriminative capacity for clinical and manometric findings and evaluate the effect of gastroesophageal reflux symptoms on both. Methods: Symptomatic patients referred for high-resolution manometry (HRM) were prospectively recruited from seven centers in Spain and Latin America. Clinical data and several scores (ES, BEDQ, GERDQ) were collected and contrasted to HRM findings. Standard statistical analysis was performed. Key results: 426 patients were recruited, 31.2% and 41.5% being referred exclusively for dysphagia and GERD symptoms, respectively. Both BEDQ and ES were independently associated with achalasia. Only BEDQ was independently associated with being referred for dysphagia and with relevant HRM findings. ROC curve analysis for achalasia diagnosis showed AUC of 0.809 for BEDQ and 0.765 for ES, with the main difference being higher BEDQ sensitivity (80.0% vs 70.8% for ES). GERDQ independently predicted ES but not BEDQ. In the absence of dysphagia (BEDQ = 0), GERD symptoms significantly determine ES. Conclusions and inferences: Our study suggests both the BEDQ and ES can complementarily describe symptomatic burden in achalasia. BEDQ has several advantages over the ES in the dysphagia evaluation, basically due to its higher sensitivity for manometric diagnosis and independence of GERD symptoms. ES should be used as an achalasia-specific metric, while BEDQ is a better symptom-generic evaluating tool.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The Spanish version of the esophageal hypervigilance and anxiety score shows strong psychometric properties: results of a large prospective multicenter study in Spain and Latin America
    (2021) Cisternas, Daniel; Taft, Tiffany; Carlson, Dustin A.; Glasinovic, Esteban; Monrroy Bravo, Hugo Alfonso; Rey, Paula; Hani, Albis; Ardila‐Hani, Andrés; Leguizamo, Ana María; Bilder, Claudio; Ditaranto, Andrés; Varela, Amanda; Agotegaray, Joaquín; Remes‐Troche, José María; Ruiz de León, Antonio; Pérez de la Serna, Julio; Marín, Ingrid; Serra, Jordi
    Background Anxiety is a significant modulator of sensitivity along the GI tract. The recently described Esophageal Hypervigilance and Anxiety Score (EHAS) evaluates esophageal-specific anxiety. The aims of this study were as follows: 1. translate and validate an international Spanish version of EHAS. 2. Evaluate its psychometric properties in a large Hispano-American sample of symptomatic individuals. Methods A Spanish EHAS version was developed by a Delphi process and reverse translation. Patients referred for high-resolution manometry (HRM) were recruited prospectively from seven Spanish and Latin American centers. Several scores were used: EHAS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Eckardt score (ES), Gastroesophageal Reflux Questionnaire (GERDQ), and the Brief Esophageal Dysphagia Questionnaire (BEDQ). Standardized psychometric analyses were performed. Key Results A total of 443 patients were recruited. Spanish EHAS showed excellent reliability (Cronbach´s alpha = 0.94). Factor analysis confirmed the presence of two factors, corresponding to the visceral anxiety and hypervigilance subscales. Sufficient convergent validity was shown by moderate significant correlations between EHAS and other symptomatic scores. Patients with high EHAS scores had significantly more dysphagia. There was no difference in EHAS scores when compared normal vs abnormal or major manometric diagnosis. Conclusions and Inferences A widely usable Spanish EHAS version has been validated. We confirm its excellent psychometric properties in our patients, confirming the appropriateness of its use in different populations. Our findings support the appropriateness of evaluating esophageal anxiety across the whole manometric diagnosis spectrum.