Management of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Around the World: An International Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate worldwide practices of otolaryngologists in the management of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). METHODS: An online survey was sent on the management of LPR to members of many otolaryngological societies. The following aspects were evaluated: LPR definition, prevalence, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment. RESULTS: A total of 824 otolaryngologists participated, spread over 65 countries. The symptoms most usually attributed to LPR are cough after lying down/meal, throat clearing and globus sensation while LPR-related findings are arytenoid erythema and posterior commissure hypertrophy. Irrespective to geography, otolaryngologists indicate lack of familiarity with impedance pH monitoring, which they attribute to lack of knowledge in result interpretation. The most common therapeutic regimens significantly vary between world regions, with a higher use of H2 blocker in North America and a lower use of alginate in South America. The duration of treatment also significantly varies between different regions, with West Asia/Africa and East Asia/Oceania otolaryngologists prescribing medication for a shorter period than the others. Only 21.1% of respondents are aware about the existence of nonacid LPR. Overall, only 43.2% of otolaryngologists believe themselves sufficiently knowledgeable about LPR. CONCLUSIONS: LPR knowledge and management significantly vary across the world. International guidelines on LPR definition, diagnosis, and treatment are needed to improve knowledge and management around the world. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N.A. Laryngoscope, 131:E1589-E1597, 2021.

Rethinking the laryngopharyngeal reflux treatment algorithm: Evaluating an alternate empiric dosing regimen and considering up-front, pH-impedance, and manometry testing to minimize cost in treating suspect laryngopharyngeal reflux disease.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Empiric proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trials for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) are common. A majority of the patients respond to acid suppression. This work intends to evaluate once-daily, 40 mg omeprazole and once-nightly, 300 mg ranitidine (QD/QHS) dosing as an alternative regimen, and use this study's cohort to evaluate empiric regimens prescribed for LPR as compared to up-front testing with pH impedance multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII) with dual pH probes and high-resolution manometry (HRM) for potential cost minimization. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort review and cost minimization study. METHODS: A chart review identified patients diagnosed with LPR. All subjects were treated sequentially and outcomes recorded. Initial QD/QHS dosing increased after 3 months to BID if no improvement and ultimately prescribed MII and HRM if they failed BID dosing. Decision tree diagrams were constructed to determine costs of two empiric regimens and up-front MII and HRM. RESULTS: Ninety-seven subjects met the criteria. Responders and nonresponders to empiric therapy were identified. Seventy-two subjects (74%) responded. Forty-eight (67% of responders and 49% of all) improved with QD/QHS dosing. Forty-nine (51%) subjects escalated to BID dosing. Twenty-four subjects (33% of responders and 25% of all) improved on BID therapy. Twenty-five subjects (26%) did not respond to acid suppression. Average weighted cost was $1,897.00 per patient for up-front testing, $3,033.00 for initial BID, and $3,366.00 for initial QD/QHS. CONCLUSIONS: An alternate QD/QHS regimen improved the majority who presented with presumed LPR. Cost estimates demonstrate that the QD/QHS regimen was more expensive than the initial BID high-dose PPI for 6 months. Overall per-patient cost appears less with up-front MII and HRM. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 127:S1-S13, 2017.