BACKGROUND: The larynx and hypopharynx are common sites for head and neck cancer, which shares many risk factors with upper digestive tract disease. Patient survival with malignancies depends on stage at the time of diagnosis. Endoscopic screening of the hypopharynx is neither routinely performed in clinical practice nor has it been evaluated in a formal study. METHODS: This is a prospective pilot study of patients undergoing routine EGD. Demographic data were collected from patients prior to the procedure. All patients in the study underwent an EGD and prior to performing the standard portion of the EGD procedure, the endoscopist evaluated the larynx and hypopharynx with both white light endoscopy (WLE) and narrow band imaging (NBI). Details of the procedure, including ability to see all anatomic structures, time spent, complications, and findings, were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 111 patients were included in the study. The exam of the laryngopharynx was completed in 87% of patients (97/111). Reasons for incomplete exam included intubated patients (2/14), inadequate sedation (9/14), and inability to see the entire hypopharynx (3/14). The mean time of the WLE was 20.2 s, while the NBI evaluation took 15.6 s for a mean and 35.8 s for the entire exam of the larynx and hypopharynx. Minor procedural complications occurred in 3/11 (2.7%) of the patients and included hypotension, tachycardia, and hypoxia. There were 6 patients who had hypopharyngeal abnormalities seen on both WLE and NBI (5.4%) and were subsequently referred to otolaryngology. Of the six referrals, one patient had a vocal cord biopsy showing leukoplakia, while the others were deemed normal anatomic variants. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of the hypopharynx can be accomplished by gastrointestinal endoscopists at the time of EGD in the vast majority of patients in a safe manner while adding only about 35 s to the overall exam time.
BACKGROUND: The larynx and hypopharynx are common sites for head and neck cancer, which shares many risk factors with upper digestive tract disease. Patient survival with malignancies depends on stage at the time of diagnosis. Endoscopic screening of the hypopharynx is neither routinely performed in clinical practice nor has it been evaluated in a formal study. METHODS: This is a prospective pilot study of patients undergoing routine EGD. Demographic data were collected from patients prior to the procedure. All patients in the study underwent an EGD and prior to performing the standard portion of the EGD procedure, the endoscopist evaluated the larynx and hypopharynx with both white light endoscopy (WLE) and narrow band imaging (NBI). Details of the procedure, including ability to see all anatomic structures, time spent, complications, and findings, were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 111 patients were included in the study. The exam of the laryngopharynx was completed in 87% of patients (97/111). Reasons for incomplete exam included intubated patients (2/14), inadequate sedation (9/14), and inability to see the entire hypopharynx (3/14). The mean time of the WLE was 20.2 s, while the NBI evaluation took 15.6 s for a mean and 35.8 s for the entire exam of the larynx and hypopharynx. Minor procedural complications occurred in 3/11 (2.7%) of the patients and included hypotension, tachycardia, and hypoxia. There were 6 patients who had hypopharyngeal abnormalities seen on both WLE and NBI (5.4%) and were subsequently referred to otolaryngology. Of the six referrals, one patient had a vocal cord biopsy showing leukoplakia, while the others were deemed normal anatomic variants. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of the hypopharynx can be accomplished by gastrointestinal endoscopists at the time of EGD in the vast majority of patients in a safe manner while adding only about 35 s to the overall exam time.
Authors: Joanne F Aitken; Philippa H Youl; Monika Janda; John B Lowe; Ian T Ring; Mark Elwood Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2006-02-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Henry T Hoffman; Kimberly Porter; Lucy H Karnell; Jay S Cooper; Randall S Weber; Corey J Langer; Kie-Kian Ang; Greer Gay; Andrew Stewart; Robert A Robinson Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Maria C Magnus; Ma Ping; Miao Miao Shen; John Bourgeois; Jeanette H Magnus Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2011-03-17 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Brian W Sipe; Douglas K Rex; Danielle Latinovich; Chris Overley; Karen Kinser; Lisa Bratcher; David Kareken Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: L Staníková; R Walderová; D Jančatová; M Formánek; K Zeleník; Pavel Komínek Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 2.503