Literature DB >> 30430298

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

Martin Duricek1, Peter Banovcin2, Tatiana Halickova3, Rudolf Hyrdel1, Marian Kollarik4,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is suspected when the symptoms are attributed to the penetration of acidic gastroesophageal reflux (GER) into the larynx. However, the relationships between the intensity of LPR and symptoms and laryngeal injury have not been elucidated. Several factors confound the study of LPR, namely pH is monitored in the pharynx (pharyngeal reflux) but the pharyngeal acidity (pH) required to induce laryngeal injury is unknown, the GER origin of pharyngeal acid is not always established, and a recent treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPI) confounds the analysis. AIMS: We aimed to limit these confounding factors to analyze the relationship between LPR and symptoms and laryngeal injury.
METHODS: We used dual pharyngeal and distal esophageal 24-h pH/impedance monitoring to establish GER origin of pharyngeal reflux, we used an unbiased approach to analysis by evaluating a whole range of acidity (pH < 6, pH < 5.5, pH < 5.0, pH < 4.5 and pH < 4.0) in patients with suspected LPR without PPI for  > 30 days.
RESULTS: Pharyngeal reflux was (median[IQR]) 14[8-20.5] and 4[1.5-6.5] pharyngeal reflux episodes with pH < 6.0 and pH < 5.5, respectively. Pharyngeal reflux with pH < 5.0 was rare. Comprehensive analysis did not reveal any correlation between symptoms (reflux symptom index) or laryngeal injury (reflux finding score) and the number of pharyngeal reflux episodes or duration of pharyngeal acid exposure at any pH level.
CONCLUSION: Unbiased comprehensive approach did not reveal any relationship between acidic pharyngeal reflux and the symptoms or laryngeal injury attributed to LPR. Limited clinical usefulness of pharyngeal monitoring reported by others is unlikely due to confounding factors.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acid; Gastroesophageal reflux; Laryngopharyngeal reflux; Reflux finding score; pH–impedance monitoring

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30430298     DOI: 10.1007/s10620-018-5372-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis Sci        ISSN: 0163-2116            Impact factor:   3.199


  39 in total

Review 1.  Functional testing: pharyngeal pH monitoring and high-resolution manometry.

Authors:  Edoardo Savarino; Patrizia Zentilin; Vincenzo Savarino; Andrea Tenca; Roberto Penagini; John O Clarke; Ivana Bravi; Frank Zerbib; Elif Saritaş Yüksel
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 5.691

2.  Effect of different pH criteria on dual-sensor pH monitoring in the evaluation of supraesophageal gastric reflux in children.

Authors:  Eric Chiou; Rachel Rosen; Samuel Nurko
Journal:  J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.839

3.  How much pharyngeal exposure is "normal"? Normative data for laryngopharyngeal reflux events using hypopharyngeal multichannel intraluminal impedance (HMII).

Authors:  Toshitaka Hoppo; Alejandro F Sanz; Katie S Nason; Thomas L Carroll; Clark Rosen; Daniel P Normolle; Nicholas J Shaheen; James D Luketich; Blair A Jobe
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-10-28       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Acid, nonacid, and gas reflux in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease during ambulatory 24-hour pH-impedance recordings.

Authors:  D Sifrim; R Holloway; J Silny; Z Xin; J Tack; A Lerut; J Janssens
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 22.682

5.  The validity and reliability of the reflux finding score (RFS).

Authors:  P C Belafsky; G N Postma; J A Koufman
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 3.325

6.  The role of impedance monitoring in patients with extraesophageal symptoms.

Authors:  Robert T Kavitt; Elif Saritas Yuksel; James C Slaughter; C Gaelyn Garrett; David Hagaman; Tina Higginbotham; Michael F Vaezi
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Dual pH with Multichannel Intraluminal Impedance Testing in the Evaluation of Subjective Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Symptoms.

Authors:  Evan C Cumpston; Joel H Blumin; Jonathan M Bock
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 3.497

8.  Upper esophageal sphincter function during deglutition.

Authors:  P J Kahrilas; W J Dodds; J Dent; J A Logemann; R Shaker
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 22.682

9.  A study with pharyngeal and esophageal 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring in patients with laryngopharyngeal symptoms refractory to proton pump inhibitors.

Authors:  C Dulery; A Lechot; S Roman; P-L Bastier; D Stoll; L de Gabory; F Zerbib
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 3.598

10.  Objective detection of esophagopharyngeal reflux in patients with hoarseness and endoscopic signs of laryngeal inflammation.

Authors:  Jamal O Hayat; Etsuro Yazaki; Andrew T Moore; Lucy Hicklin; Peter Dettmar; Jin-Yong Kang; Daniel Sifrim
Journal:  J Clin Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 3.062

View more
  3 in total

1.  Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: Weak Acid and Weaker Correlations.

Authors:  Steven R DeMeester
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Poor consistency between reflux symptom index and laryngopharyngeal pH monitoring in laryngopharyngeal reflux diagnosis in Chinese population.

Authors:  Jun-Yao Wang; Tao Peng; Li-Li Zhao; Gui-Jian Feng; Yu-Lan Liu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-01

3.  Role of Matrix Metalloproteinases 7 in the Pathogenesis of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: Decreased E-cadherin in Acid exposed Primary Human Pharyngeal Epithelial Cells.

Authors:  Nu-Ri Im; Doh Young Lee; Byoungjae Kim; Jian Kim; Kwang-Yoon Jung; Tae Hoon Kim; Seung-Kuk Baek
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 5.923

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.