Subtypes & The Chicago Classification
At a Glance
The Chicago Classification uses manometry tests to divide achalasia into three subtypes (Types I, II, and III). Knowing your specific type is crucial because it predicts your prognosis and helps your doctor choose between treatments like POEM, Heller myotomy, or dilation.
Your manometry report likely includes a Roman numeral: Type I, Type II, or Type III. These categories are part of the Chicago Classification (v4.0), the international system doctors use to define exactly how your esophagus is failing to move food. Knowing your subtype is one of the most important pieces of information you can have, as it predicts how you will respond to different treatments.
The Three Subtypes of Achalasia
While all types involve a failure of the “trap door” (the lower esophageal sphincter) to open, they differ in what the rest of the esophagus is doing.
Type I: The “Classic” Quiet Esophagus
In Type I, the esophagus has completely stopped trying to squeeze. It is “aperistaltic,” meaning there is 100% failed movement [1]. This is often considered a later stage of the disease, where the esophageal muscles have become exhausted and the tube may have become dilated (stretched out) [2].
Type II: The Pressurized Esophagus
Type II is the most common form. While the esophagus doesn’t coordinate a normal swallow, it builds up pressure throughout the entire tube—a phenomenon called panesophageal pressurization [3]. This pressure actually helps “push” food through the tight sphincter once it is treated. For this reason, Type II consistently has the best prognosis and the highest success rates across all treatment types [4][5].
Type III: The Spastic Esophagus
Type III is the rarest and most complex. In addition to the “stuck” trap door, the esophagus has abnormal, powerful, and often painful spastic contractions [1]. Because these spasms can occur higher up in the esophagus, Type III requires a different approach to treatment to ensure the spastic areas are properly addressed [6].
How Your Type Drives Your Treatment
Your subtype acts as a guide for your medical team when choosing between the primary treatment options.
- Type I and II: These types respond very well to Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy (surgery), POEM (endoscopic procedure), and sometimes Pneumatic Dilation (stretching the sphincter with a balloon) [4].
- Type III: This type strongly favors POEM. During a POEM procedure, the doctor can perform a “longer myotomy”—meaning they can cut the muscle further up the esophagus to neutralize the spastic contractions that are causing pain and blockage [6][7].
When the “Gold Standard” Isn’t Enough: FLIP
Sometimes, a standard manometry test (the “gold standard”) doesn’t provide a clear answer. In these cases, your doctor may use FLIP (Functional Luminal Imaging Probe) panometry [8].
During an endoscopy, a small balloon is inflated in your esophagus to measure its distensibility index (DI)—essentially how much the “trap door” is willing to stretch [9]. If your DI is low, it confirms that the opening is too tight, providing the evidence needed to move forward with treatment even if your manometry was inconclusive [8][10].
| Feature | Type I | Type II | Type III |
|---|---|---|---|
| Squeezing | None (Quiet) | Pan-pressurization | Spastic / Painful |
| Prognosis | Good | Excellent | Challenging |
| Best Treatment | LHM / POEM / PD | LHM / POEM / PD | POEM (for long myotomy) |
Common questions in this guide
What are the three types of achalasia?
Which achalasia subtype has the best prognosis?
What is the best treatment for Type III achalasia?
What happens if my manometry test for achalasia is inconclusive?
Questions to Ask Your Doctor
Curated prompts to bring to your next appointment.
- 1.Which specific subtype (Type I, II, or III) was noted on my Chicago Classification manometry report?
- 2.If I have Type III achalasia, does my care team have the expertise to perform the longer myotomy required with the POEM procedure?
- 3.Since Type II has the best prognosis, how does this affect my expected timeline for symptom relief?
- 4.If my manometry was inconclusive, would a FLIP panometry test provide the necessary clarity for my diagnosis?
- 5.How does the 'panesophageal pressurization' in Type II explain the specific sensations or pain I feel when I swallow?
Questions For You
Tap a prompt to share your answer — we'll use it plus this page's context to start a tailored conversation.
References
References (10)
- 1
Chicago Classification update (version 4.0): Technical review on diagnostic criteria for achalasia.
Khan A, Yadlapati R, Gonlachanvit S, et al.
Neurogastroenterology and motility 2021; (33(7)):e14182 doi:10.1111/nmo.14182.
PMID: 34190376 - 2
Achalasia: Diagnosis, Management and Surveillance.
Pomenti S, Blackett JW, Jodorkovsky D
Gastroenterology clinics of North America 2021; (50(4)):721-736 doi:10.1016/j.gtc.2021.07.001.
PMID: 34717867 - 3
Identifying spastic variant of type II achalasia after treatment with high-resolution manometry and FLIP Panometry.
Vespa E, Farina DA, Kahrilas PJ, et al.
Neurogastroenterology and motility 2023; (35(7)):e14552 doi:10.1111/nmo.14552.
PMID: 36807659 - 4
An Update on Current Management Strategies for Achalasia and Future Perspectives.
Smith I, Kahaleh M
Journal of clinical gastroenterology 2018; (52(4)):277-286 doi:10.1097/MCG.0000000000000966.
PMID: 29256992 - 5
Type II achalasia is associated with a comparably favorable outcome following per oral endoscopic myotomy.
Tomizawa Y, Mahmud N, Dasher K, et al.
Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus 2021; (34(6)) doi:10.1093/dote/doaa107.
PMID: 33180122 - 6
Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) vs laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for the treatment of Type III achalasia in 75 patients: a multicenter comparative study.
Kumbhari V, Tieu AH, Onimaru M, et al.
Endoscopy international open 2015; (3(3)):E195-201 doi:10.1055/s-0034-1391668.
PMID: 26171430 - 7
Long-term outcomes of per-oral endoscopic myotomy compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy for achalasia: a single-center experience.
Podboy AJ, Hwang JH, Rivas H, et al.
Surgical endoscopy 2021; (35(2)):792-801 doi:10.1007/s00464-020-07450-6.
PMID: 32157405 - 8
Dysphagia: Novel and Emerging Diagnostic Modalities.
Krause AJ, Carlson DA
Gastroenterology clinics of North America 2021; (50(4)):769-790 doi:10.1016/j.gtc.2021.07.003.
PMID: 34717870 - 9
EndoFLIP in the Esophagus: Assessing Sphincter Function, Wall Stiffness, and Motility to Guide Treatment.
Donnan EN, Pandolfino JE
Gastroenterology clinics of North America 2020; (49(3)):427-435 doi:10.1016/j.gtc.2020.04.002.
PMID: 32718562 - 10
Classifying Esophageal Motility by FLIP Panometry: A Study of 722 Subjects With Manometry.
Carlson DA, Gyawali CP, Khan A, et al.
The American journal of gastroenterology 2021; (116(12)):2357-2366 doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000001532.
PMID: 34668487
This page explains achalasia subtypes and manometry reports for educational purposes only. Always consult your gastroenterologist or surgeon for help interpreting your specific Chicago Classification results and treatment plan.
Get notified when new evidence is published on Idiopathic achalasia.
We monitor PubMed for new peer-reviewed studies on this topic and email a short summary when something meaningful changes.