Skip to main content
Log in

Edrophonium provocative test in noncardiac chest pain

Evaluation of testing techniques

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Edrophonium chloride is used frequently as a provocative agent in the assessment of noncardiac chest pain (NCCP). However, the optimum dose and most appropriate method of interpreting test results is controversial. We studied 150 consecutive NCCP patients and 50 age-matched controls who alternately received either 80 μg/kg or 10 mg intravenous bolus doses of edrophonium preceded by saline placebo injections. Distal esophageal pressures were measured before and after drug injection in response to ten 5-cc wet swallows. Following 10 mg of edrophonium, 33% of patients and 4% of controls reported chest pain, while 29% of patients and no controls receiving the 80 μg/kg dose complained of chest pain. Amplitude changes after either dose were not significantly different for all comparisons, but the duration of response did distinguish the two doses in patients with chest pain. A significantly greater (P=0.01) increase in distal contraction duration occurred after 10 mg (74±12%; ±se) compared to 80 μg/kg dose (43± 6%). However, individual responses to the two doses overlapped considerably. If a positive test is redefined to include both chest pain and manometric changes that are significantly different from controls, the positivity rate changes drastically; 33% to 9% in the 10- mg group and 30% to 3% in the 80- μg/kg group. Side effects were similar between doses, but there was a significant (P=0.02) linear relationship between intensity of side effects and the edrophonium dose per kilogram of body weight. From this study and a review of the literature, we conclude that either dose of edrophonium is appropriate for provocative testing but that the interpretation of results is dependent upon technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ward BW, Wu WC, Richter JE, Nackshaw BT, Castell DO: Long-term follow-up of symptomatic status of patients with non-cardiac chest pain: Is diagnosis of esophageal etiology helpful? Am J Gastroenterol 82:215–218, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Richter JE, Castell DO: Esophageal disease as a cause of non-cardiac chest pain. Adv Intern Med 33:311–336, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Benjamin SB, Richter JE, Cordova CM, Kuff TE, Castell DO: Prospective manometric evaluation with pharmacologic provocation of patients with suspected esophageal motility dysfunction. Gastroenterology 84:893–901, 1983

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hollis JB, Castell DO: Effects of cholinergic stimulation on human esophageal peristalsis. J Appl Physiol. 40:40–43, 1976

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Richter JE, Hackshaw BT, Wu WC, Castell DO: Edrophonium: A useful provocative test for esophageal chest pain. Ann Intern Med 103:14–21, 1985

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lee CA, Reynolds JC, Ouyang A, Baker L, Cohen S: Esophageal chest pain: Diagnostic value of high-dose Tensilon provocative testing. Dig Dis Sci 32:682–688, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Freidin N, Mittal R, McCallum RW: Is esophageal manometric recording during Tensilon test useful in noncardiac chest pain. Gastroenterology (Abstract 1395A), May 1987

  8. Nasrallah SM, Hendrix EA: Comparison of hypertonic glucose to other provocative tests in patients with noncardiac chest pain. Am J Gastroenterology 82:406–409, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  9. Castell DO, Richter JE: Edrophonium testing for esophageal pain; concurrence and discord. Dig Dis Sci 32:897–899, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Richter JE, Wu WC, Johns DN, Blackwell JN, Nelson JL, Castell JA, Castell DO: Esophageal manometry in 95 healthy adult volunteers: variability of pressures with age and frequency of “abnormal” contractions. Dig Dis Sci 32:583–592, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dodds WJ, Hogan WJ, Reid DP, Stewart ET: A comparison between primary esophageal peristalsis following wet and dry swallows. J Appl Physiol 35:851–857, 1973

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hollis JB, Castell DO: Effect of dry swallows and wet swallows of different volumes of esophageal peristalsis. J Appl Physiol 38:1161–1164, 1975

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Barish CF, Castell DI, Richter JE: Graded esophageal balloon distention: A new provocative test for non-cardiac chest pain. Dig Dis Sci 31:1292–1298, 1986

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Case WL, Smith JW: The intraesophageal balloon distention test in the diagnosis of esophageal chest pain. Gastroenterology 96:76A, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hewson EG, Dalton CB, Richter JE: Comparison of esophageal manometry, provocative testing and ambulatory monitoring in patients with unexplained chest pain. Dig Dis Sci 35:302–309, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Vantrappen G, Janssen J, Ghillebert G: The irritable oesophagus—a frequent cause of angina-like pain. Lancet 1:1232–1234, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Peters L, Maas L, Petty D, Dalton CB, Penner D, Wu W, Castell D, Richter J: Spontaneous non-cardiac chest pain. Evaluation by 24-hour ambulatory esophageal motility and pH monitoring. Gastroenterology 94:878–886, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dalton, C.B., Hewson, E.G., Castell, D.O. et al. Edrophonium provocative test in noncardiac chest pain. Digest Dis Sci 35, 1445–1451 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01540560

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01540560

Key words

Navigation