AIM:To investigate dysfunctions in esophageal peristalsis and sensation in patients with Barrett’s esophagus following acid infusion using endoscopy-based testing.METHODS:First,physiological saline was infused into the esophagus of five healthy subjects,at a rate of 10 mL/min for 10 min,followed by infusion of HCl.Esophageal contractions were analyzed to determine whether the contractions observed by endoscopy and ultrasonography corresponded to the esophageal peristaltic waves diagnosed by manometry.Next,using nasal endoscopy,esophageal sensations and contractions were investigated in patients with,as well as controls without,Barrett’s esophagus using the same infusion protocol.RESULTS:All except one of the propulsive contractions identified endoscopically were recorded as secondary peristaltic waves by manometry.Patients with long segment Barrett’s esophagus(LSBE)tended to have a shorter lag time than the control group,although the difference did not reach statistical significance(88±54s vs 162±150 s respectively,P=0.14).Furthermore,patients with LSBE had significantly fewer secondary contractions following the infusion of both saline and HCl than did either the control group or patients with short segment Barrett’s esophagus(4.1±1.2 vs 8.0±2.8,P<0.001 and 7.3±3.2,P<0.01,respectively,following saline infusion;5.3±1.2vs 8.4±2.4 and 8.1±2.9 respectively,P<0.01 for both,following infusion of HCl).CONCLUSION:Using nasal endoscopy and a simple acid-perfusion study,we were able to demonstrate disorders in secondary peristalsis in patients with LSBE. AIM: To investigate dysfunctions in esophageal peristalsis and sensation in patients with Barrett’s esophagus following acid infusion using endoscopy-based testing. METHODS: First, physiological saline was infused into the esophagus of five healthy subjects, at a rate of 10 mL / min for 10 min, followed by infusion of HCl. Esophageal contractions were analyzed to determine whether the contractions observed by endoscopy and ultrasonography corresponded to the esophageal peristaltic waves diagnosed by manometry .Next, using nasal endoscopy, esophageal sensations and contractions were investigated in patients with, as well as controls without, Barrett’s esophagus using the same infusion protocol .RESULTS: All except one of the propulsive contractions identified endoscopically were recorded as secondary peristaltic waves by manometry. Patients with long segment Barrett’s esophagus (LSBE) tended to have a shorter lag time than the control group, although the difference did not reach statistical significa fourteen (162 ± 150 s respectively, P = 0.14) .Furthermore, patients with LSBE had significant fewer secondary contractions following the infusion of both saline and HCl than did either either the control group or patients with short segment Barrett’s esophagus (4.1 ± 1.2 vs 8.0 ± 2.8, P <0.001 and 7.3 ± 3.2, P <0.01, respectively, following saline infusion; 5.3 ± 1.2 vs. 8.4 ± 2.4 and 8.1 ± 2.9 respectively, P <0.01 for both, following infusion of HCl). CONCLUSION: Using nasal endoscopy and a simple acid-perfusion study, we were able to demonstrate disorders in secondary peristalsis in patients with LSBE.