Literature DB >> 24917995

Pharyngeal pH alone is not reliable for the detection of pharyngeal reflux events: A study with oesophageal and pharyngeal pH-impedance monitoring.

Marie Desjardin1, Sabine Roman2, Stanislas Bruley des Varannes3, Guillaume Gourcerol4, Benoit Coffin5, Alain Ropert6, François Mion2, Frank Zerbib1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pharyngeal pH probes and pH-impedance catheters have been developed for the diagnosis of laryngo-pharyngeal reflux.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the reliability of pharyngeal pH alone for the detection of pharyngeal reflux events.
METHODS: 24-h pH-impedance recordings performed in 45 healthy subjects with a bifurcated probe for detection of pharyngeal and oesophageal reflux events were reviewed. Pharyngeal pH drops to below 4 and 5 were analysed for the simultaneous occurrence of pharyngeal reflux, gastro-oesophageal reflux, and swallows, according to impedance patterns.
RESULTS: Only 7.0% of pharyngeal pH drops to below 5 identified with impedance corresponded to pharyngeal reflux, while 92.6% were related to swallows and 10.2 and 13.3% were associated with proximal and distal gastro-oesophageal reflux events, respectively. Of pharyngeal pH drops to below 4, 13.2% were related to pharyngeal reflux, 87.5% were related to swallows, and 18.1 and 21.5% were associated with proximal and distal gastro-oesophageal reflux events, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that pharyngeal pH alone is not reliable for the detection of pharyngeal reflux and that adding distal oesophageal pH analysis is not helpful. The only reliable analysis should take into account impedance patterns demonstrating the presence of pharyngeal reflux event preceded by a distal and proximal reflux event within the oesophagus.

Keywords:  Gastro-oesophageal reflux; laryngo-pharyngeal reflux; oesophageal impedance; pharyngeal pH

Year:  2013        PMID: 24917995      PMCID: PMC4040740          DOI: 10.1177/2050640613513016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J        ISSN: 2050-6406            Impact factor:   4.623


  17 in total

1.  A new technique for measurement of pharyngeal pH: normal values and discriminating pH threshold.

Authors:  S Ayazi; J C Lipham; J A Hagen; A L Tang; J Zehetner; J M Leers; A Oezcelik; E Abate; F Banki; S R DeMeester; T R DeMeester
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  A new pH catheter for laryngopharyngeal reflux: Normal values.

Authors:  George Sun; Srikant Muddana; James C Slaughter; Sean Casey; Eric Hill; Farnoosh Farrokhi; C Gaelyn Garrett; Michael F Vaezi
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.325

3.  Management of laryngopharyngeal reflux: an unmet medical need.

Authors:  F Zerbib; D Stoll
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.598

4.  Normal values of pharyngeal and esophageal 24-hour pH impedance in individuals on and off therapy and interobserver reproducibility.

Authors:  Frank Zerbib; Sabine Roman; Stanislas Bruley Des Varannes; Guillaume Gourcerol; Benoît Coffin; Alain Ropert; Patricia Lepicard; François Mion
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 11.382

5.  Gastroesophageal reflux evaluation in patients affected by chronic cough: Restech versus multichannel intraluminal impedance/pH metry.

Authors:  Dario Ummarino; Liv Vandermeulen; Bart Roosens; Daniel Urbain; Bruno Hauser; Yvan Vandenplas
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2012-09-28       Impact factor: 3.325

6.  Meta-analysis: the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors for laryngeal symptoms attributed to gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

Authors:  L Gatta; D Vaira; G Sorrenti; S Zucchini; C Sama; N Vakil
Journal:  Aliment Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2007-02-15       Impact factor: 8.171

7.  Proximal sensor data from routine dual-sensor esophageal pH monitoring is often inaccurate.

Authors:  Matt McCollough; Abdul Jabbar; Robert Cacchione; Jeff W Allen; Steve Harrell; John M Wo
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.199

8.  Oropharyngeal pH monitoring for laryngopharyngeal reflux: is it a reliable test before therapy?

Authors:  Cristian Vailati; Giorgia Mazzoleni; Stefano Bondi; Mario Bussi; Pier Alberto Testoni; Sandro Passaretti
Journal:  J Voice       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 2.009

9.  How many cases of laryngopharyngeal reflux suspected by laryngoscopy are gastroesophageal reflux disease-related?

Authors:  Nicola de Bortoli; Andrea Nacci; Edoardo Savarino; Irene Martinucci; Massimo Bellini; Bruno Fattori; Linda Ceccarelli; Francesco Costa; Maria Gloria Mumolo; Angelo Ricchiuti; Vincenzo Savarino; Stefano Berrettini; Santino Marchi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-08-28       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Modern medical and surgical management of difficult-to-treat GORD.

Authors:  Frank Zerbib; Daniel Sifrim; Radu Tutuian; Stephen Attwood; Lars Lundell
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.623

View more
  10 in total

1.  Dental erosions and other extra-oesophageal symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: Evidence, treatment response and areas of uncertainty.

Authors:  Ans Pauwels
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.623

2.  Acidic Pharyngeal Reflux Does Not Correlate with Symptoms and Laryngeal Injury Attributed to Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.

Authors:  Martin Duricek; Peter Banovcin; Tatiana Halickova; Rudolf Hyrdel; Marian Kollarik
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-11-14       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  Pharyngeal pH monitoring in gastrectomy patients - what do we really measure?

Authors:  Dirk Wilhelm; Alissa Jell; Hubertus Feussner; Roland M Schmid; Monther Bajbouj; Valentin Becker
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2015-11-13       Impact factor: 4.623

Review 4.  ACG Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

Authors:  Philip O Katz; Kerry B Dunbar; Felice H Schnoll-Sussman; Katarina B Greer; Rena Yadlapati; Stuart Jon Spechler
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 5.  Clinical Update Findings about pH-Impedance Monitoring Features in Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Patients.

Authors:  Jerome R Lechien
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 4.964

6.  Hypopharyngeal multichannel intraluminal impedance leads to the promising outcome of antireflux surgery in Japanese population with laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms.

Authors:  Takeshi Suzuki; Yosuke Seki; Yoshitaka Okamoto; Toshitaka Hoppo
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for oesophageal manometry and oesophageal reflux monitoring.

Authors:  Nigel J Trudgill; Daniel Sifrim; Rami Sweis; Mark Fullard; Kumar Basu; Mimi McCord; Michael Booth; John Hayman; Guy Boeckxstaens; Brian T Johnston; Nicola Ager; John De Caestecker
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 23.059

8.  Simultaneous Evaluation of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and Swallowing Function Using Hypopharyngeal Multichannel Intraluminal Impedance Measurements in Neurologically Impaired Patients.

Authors:  Daisuke Masui; Suguru Fukahori; Naoki Hashizume; Shinji Ishii; Naruki Higashidate; Saki Sakamoto; Shiori Tsuruhisa; Hirotomo Nakahara; Nobuyuki Saikusa; Yoshiaki Tanaka; Minoru Yagi
Journal:  J Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 4.924

9.  Impaired Proximal Esophageal Contractility Predicts Pharyngeal Reflux in Patients With Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Symptoms.

Authors:  Daniel R Sikavi; Jennifer X Cai; Ryan Leung; Thomas L Carroll; Walter W Chan
Journal:  Clin Transl Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 4.488

Review 10.  [Current possibilities and challenges in the diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux].

Authors:  D Runggaldier; J Hente; M Brockmann-Bauser; D Pohl; J E Bohlender
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 1.284

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.