OBJECTIVE: The laryngopharyngeal form of gastroesophageal reflux disease (LF GERD) is a frequent manifestation of supraesophageal GERD. Diagnosis of LF GERD is difficult: most of the common diagnostic methods of GERD have insufficient accuracy in establishing LF GERD. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of endoscopic and laryngologic examination in the diagnosis of LF GERD and to create a laryngoscopic reflux index (LRI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 108 LF GERD patients and 90 controls were investigated. The criteria for LF GERD were: complaints, reflux-laryngitis, and esophagitis (endoscopically or histologically proven). Lesions in four laryngeal regions were evaluated: arytenoids (A), intraarytenoid notch (IAN), vestibular folds (VF), and vocal cords (VC). Three types of mucosal lesions were evaluated on a points basis: alterations of the epithelium, erythema, and edema. Total LRI was calculated by summing-up the indices in the separate laryngeal areas. RESULTS: The LRI mean value (11.48+/-3.78 points) of LF GERD patients was statistically significantly greater than that (1.64+/-1.93 points) of the controls. The most significant laryngoscopic changes of LF GERD were: mucosal lesions of IAN, mucosal lesions of VC, and edema of VC. A combination of these three findings reliably distinguishes the LF GERD patients from controls in 95.9% of cases. The mucosal lesions of IAN have the greatest importance in diagnosing LF GERD: the odds ratio to LF GERD - 21.32, p<0.001. Endoscopic esophagitis was established in 36 (33.3%) cases. The severity of esophagitis did not correlate with the severity of the laryngeal findings. CONCLUSIONS: Laryngoscopy is superior to endoscopy in diagnosing LF GERD. Endoscopy has limited value in the diagnosis of LF GERD. Establishing the LRI could be helpful in the differential diagnosis of the disease in the everyday clinical practice.
OBJECTIVE: The laryngopharyngeal form of gastroesophageal reflux disease (LF GERD) is a frequent manifestation of supraesophageal GERD. Diagnosis of LF GERD is difficult: most of the common diagnostic methods of GERD have insufficient accuracy in establishing LF GERD. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of endoscopic and laryngologic examination in the diagnosis of LF GERD and to create a laryngoscopic reflux index (LRI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 108 LF GERD patients and 90 controls were investigated. The criteria for LF GERD were: complaints, reflux-laryngitis, and esophagitis (endoscopically or histologically proven). Lesions in four laryngeal regions were evaluated: arytenoids (A), intraarytenoid notch (IAN), vestibular folds (VF), and vocal cords (VC). Three types of mucosal lesions were evaluated on a points basis: alterations of the epithelium, erythema, and edema. Total LRI was calculated by summing-up the indices in the separate laryngeal areas. RESULTS: The LRI mean value (11.48+/-3.78 points) of LF GERD patients was statistically significantly greater than that (1.64+/-1.93 points) of the controls. The most significant laryngoscopic changes of LF GERD were: mucosal lesions of IAN, mucosal lesions of VC, and edema of VC. A combination of these three findings reliably distinguishes the LF GERD patients from controls in 95.9% of cases. The mucosal lesions of IAN have the greatest importance in diagnosing LF GERD: the odds ratio to LF GERD - 21.32, p<0.001. Endoscopic esophagitis was established in 36 (33.3%) cases. The severity of esophagitis did not correlate with the severity of the laryngeal findings. CONCLUSIONS: Laryngoscopy is superior to endoscopy in diagnosing LF GERD. Endoscopy has limited value in the diagnosis of LF GERD. Establishing the LRI could be helpful in the differential diagnosis of the disease in the everyday clinical practice.
Authors: Andrés Coca-Pelaz; Juan P Rodrigo; Daniela Paccagnella; Robert P Takes; Alessandra Rinaldo; Carl E Silver; Julia A Woolgar; Michael L Hinni; Alfio Ferlito Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2012-07-07 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Yoshihiro Komatsu; Lori A Kelly; Ali H Zaidi; Christina L Rotoloni; Juliann E Kosovec; Emily J Lloyd; Amina Waheed; Toshitaka Hoppo; Blair A Jobe Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-08-27 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Alexios S Vardouniotis; Alexander D Karatzanis; Eleni Tzortzaki; Elias Athanasakis; Katerina D Samara; Georgios Chalkiadakis; Nikolaos Siafakas; George A Velegrakis Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2009-04-02 Impact factor: 2.503