Diagnostic Yield of Ambulatory Reflux Monitoring Systems for Evaluation of Chronic Laryngeal Symptoms.

INTRODUCTION: Among patients with chronic laryngeal symptoms, ambulatory reflux monitoring off acid suppression is recommended to evaluate for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). However, reflux monitoring systems are diverse in configuration and monitoring capabilities, which present a challenge in creating a diagnostic reference standard in these patients. This study aimed to compare diagnostic yield and performance between reflux monitoring systems in patients with chronic laryngeal symptoms. METHODS: This multicenter, international study of adult patients referred for evaluation of LPR over a 5-year period (March 2018-May 2023) assessed and compared diagnostic yield of pathologic gastroesophageal reflux (GER+) on ambulatory reflux monitoring off acid suppression. RESULTS: Of 813 patients, 296 (36%) underwent prolonged wireless pH, 532 (65%) underwent 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring, and 15 (2%) underwent both tests. Overall diagnostic yield for GER+ was 36% and greater for prolonged wireless pH compared with that for 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring (50% vs 27%; P < 0.01). Among 15 patients who underwent both prolonged wireless pH and 24-h pH-impedance monitoring, concordance between systems for GER+ was 40%. The most common source of discordance was strong evidence of GER+ across multiple days on prolonged wireless pH compared with no evidence of GER+ on pH-impedance. DISCUSSION: In this multicenter international study of patients with chronic laryngeal symptoms referred for LPR evaluation, diagnostic yield of ambulatory reflux monitoring off acid suppression was 36% and rose to 50% when using wireless pH monitoring. In patients referred for chronic laryngeal symptoms, 24-hour pH-impedance monitoring may risk a low negative predictive value in patients with unproven GER+ disease.

Pepsin-mediated inflammation in laryngopharyngeal reflux via the ROS/NLRP3/IL-1ß signaling pathway.

BACKGROUND: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is one of the most common disorders in otorhinolaryngology, affecting up to 10% of outpatients visiting otolaryngology departments. In addition, 50% of hoarseness cases are related to LPR. Pepsin reflux-induced aseptic inflammation is a major trigger of LPR; however, the underlying mechanisms are unclear. The nucleotide-binding domain and leucine-rich repeat protein 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome has become an important bridge between stimulation and sterile inflammation and is activated by intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) in response to danger signals, leading to an inflammatory cascade. In this study, we aimed to determine whether pepsin causes LPR-associated inflammatory injury via mediating inflammasome activation and explore the potential mechanism. METHODS: We evaluated NLRP3 inflammasome expression and ROS in the laryngeal mucosa using immunofluorescence and immunohistochemistry. Laryngeal epithelial cells were exposed to pepsin and analyzed using flow cytometry, western blotting, and real-time quantitative PCR to determine ROS, NLRP3, and pro-inflammatorycytokine levels. RESULTS: Pepsin expression was positively correlated with ROS as well as caspase-1 and IL-1ß levels in laryngeal tissues. Intracellular ROS levels were elevated by increased pepsin concentrations, which were attenuated by apocynin (APO)-a ROS inhibitor-in vitro. Furthermore, pepsin significantly induced the mRNA and protein expression of thioredoxin-interacting protein, NLRP3, caspase-1, and IL-1ß in a dose-dependent manner. APO and the NLRP3 inhibitor, MCC950, inhibited NLRP3 inflammasome formation and suppressed laryngeal epithelial cell damage. CONCLUSION: Our findings verified that pepsin could regulate the NLRP3/IL-1ß signaling pathway through ROS activation and further induce inflammatory injury in LPR. Targeting the ROS/NLRP3 inflammasome signaling pathway may help treat patients with LPR disease.

Update on extraesophageal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Symptoms/complications related to extraesophageal reflux (EER) are increasingly prevalent presentations and pose significant challenges for clinicians. We summarize and discuss clinical advances and developments in pathophysiology, testing and treatment algorithms of upper/lower airway manifestations of EER. RECENT FINDINGS: Growing evidence supports likely multifactorial causes of laryngeal symptoms, including EER, oropharyngeal pathologies, allergic conditions, and cognitive-affective processes (brain-larynx interaction). Diagnostic paradigm for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is shifting towards a personalized approach with noninvasive strategies/prediction tools to risk-stratify patients for upfront reflux testing over empiric acid suppression trials. Management should be multipronged to include antireflux therapies and treatments targeting other causes. Lower airway complications of EER may result in lung dysfunction and poor transplant outcomes. Esophageal symptoms are often absent and routine esophageal/reflux testing to guide timely antireflux therapies may lead to improved outcomes. Modalities that leverage impedance technology may be important, given the potential role of nonacidic reflux. Novel impedance-based metrics such as mean nocturnal baseline impedance and postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index may provide adjunctive diagnostic values. SUMMARY: Standardized approach to diagnosis/management of EER should include multidisciplinary care teams and consider different phenotypes, nonreflux contributors, and the complex gut-airway relationships. Prompt antireflux therapies after careful candidate selection may improve outcomes of these airway complications.

Incidence of adverse respiratory events after adjustment of clear fluid fasting recommendations to 1 h: a prospective, observational, multi-institutional cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative fasting reduces the risk of pulmonary aspiration during anaesthesia, and 2-h fasting for clear fluids has commonly been recommended. Based on recent evidence of shorter fasting times being safe, the Swiss Society of Paediatric Anaesthesia began recommending 1-h fasting for clear fluids in 2018. This prospective, observational, multi-institutional cohort study aimed to investigate the incidence of adverse respiratory events after implementing the new national recommendation. METHODS: Eleven Swiss anaesthesia institutions joined this cohort study and included patients aged 0-15 yr undergoing anaesthesia for elective procedures after implementation of the 1-h fasting instruction. The primary outcome was the perioperative (defined as the time from anaesthesia induction to emergence) incidence of pulmonary aspiration, gastric regurgitation, and vomiting. Data are presented as median (inter-quartile range; minimum-maximum) or count (percentage). RESULTS: From June 2019 to July 2021, 22 766 anaesthetics were recorded with pulmonary aspiration occurring in 25 (0.11%), gastric regurgitation in 34 (0.15%), and vomiting in 85 (0.37%) cases. No major morbidity or mortality was associated with pulmonary aspiration. Subgroup analysis by effective fasting times (<2 h [n=7306] vs ≥2 h [n=14 660]) showed no significant difference for pulmonary aspiration between these two groups (9 [0.12%] vs 16 [0.11%], P=0.678). Median effective fasting time for clear fluids was 157 [104-314; 2-2385] min. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a national recommendation of 1-h clear fluid fasting was not associated with a higher incidence of pulmonary aspiration compared with previously reported data.

ChatGPT-4 accuracy for patient education in laryngopharyngeal reflux.

INTRODUCTION: Chatbot Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) is an artificial intelligence-powered language model chatbot able to help otolaryngologists in practice and research. The ability of ChatGPT in generating patient-centered information related to laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD) was evaluated. METHODS: Twenty-five questions dedicated to definition, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of LPRD were developed from the Dubai definition and management of LPRD consensus and recent reviews. Questions about the four aforementioned categories were entered into ChatGPT-4. Four board-certified laryngologists evaluated the accuracy of ChatGPT-4 with a 5-point Likert scale. Interrater reliability was evaluated. RESULTS: The mean scores (SD) of ChatGPT-4 answers for definition, clinical presentation, additional examination, and treatments were 4.13 (0.52), 4.50 (0.72), 3.75 (0.61), and 4.18 (0.47), respectively. Experts reported high interrater reliability for sub-scores (ICC = 0.973). The lowest performances of ChatGPT-4 were on answers about the most prevalent LPR signs, the most reliable objective tool for the diagnosis (hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH)), and the criteria for the diagnosis of LPR using HEMII-pH. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT-4 may provide adequate information on the definition of LPR, differences compared to GERD (gastroesophageal reflux disease), and clinical presentation. Information provided upon extra-laryngeal manifestations and HEMII-pH may need further optimization. Regarding the recent trends identifying increasing patient use of internet sources for self-education, the findings of the present study may help draw attention to ChatGPT-4's accuracy on the topic of LPR.

Usefulness of pepsin saliva measurement for the detection of primary burning mouth syndrome related to reflux.

OBJECTIVES: To study the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin tests for detecting laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in patients with primary burning mouth syndrome (BMS). METHODS: Patients with BMS and asymptomatic individuals were consecutively recruited from September 2018 to June 2023. Patients underwent hypopharyngeal-esophageal impedance pH-monitoring (HEMII-pH) and saliva collections to measure pepsin. Stomatology evaluation was carried out to exclude other causes of BMS. Oral, pharyngeal and laryngeal signs and symptoms were evaluated with Reflux Sign Assessment (RSA) and Reflux Symptom Score (RSS). Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values of pepsin test were calculated considering the highest values of pepsin tests at ≥ 16, ≥ 36, and ≥ 100 ng/mL cutoffs. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients with both BMS and LPR at the HEMII-pH and 21 asymptomatic individuals were recruited. Pepsin test was 83.7%, 79.6%, and 71.4% sensitive at cutoffs ≥ 16, ≥ 36, and ≥ 100 ng/mL, respectively. The ROC analysis reported that a threshold of ≥ 21.5 ng/mL was associated with sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 81.6%, 81.0%, 90.1% and 65.4%, respectively. The severity score of burning mouth symptom was significantly associated with the saliva pepsin concentration (rs = 0.263; p = 0.029) and the oral RSA (rs = 0.474; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Pepsin test is a valuable diagnostic approach for detecting LPR in patients with BMS. Patients with high level of saliva pepsin reported more severe burning mouth symptoms. Future studies are needed to confirm the role of LPR in the primary BMS.

Incidental Laryngeal Findings in Routine Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) refers to the backflow of acidic stomach content into the larynx, pharynx, and upper aerodigestive tract. The diagnosis of LPR is based on the patient's history and findings of the laryngoscopy associated with LPR. Other possible manifestations consistent with LPR symptoms include laryngeal cancer, vocal fold granulomas, Reinke's space edema, and vocal polyps. In this study, we compared the characteristics of patients with LPR symptoms and incidental laryngeal findings (ILF) in the laryngoscopic evaluation to those without ILF (WILF). OBJECTIVES: Determine the characteristics of LPR-symptomatic patients with ILF versus WILF. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we examined 160 medical charts from patients referred to the otolaryngology clinic at Galilee Medical Center for LPR evaluation 2016-2018. The reflux symptoms index (RSI), reflux finding score (RFS), and demographics of the patient were collected. All patients with a positive RSI score for LPR (RSI > 9) were included, and the profiles of patients with versus without ILF on laryngoscopy examination were compared. RESULTS: Of the 160 patients, 20 (12.5%) had ILF during laryngoscopy. Most had vocal cord findings such as leukoplakia (20%), polyps (15%), and nodules (20%). Hoarseness, throat clearing, swallowing difficulty, breathing difficulties, and total RSI score were significantly higher in patients with ILF. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of LPR symptoms may provide otolaryngologists with a tool to identify patients with other findings on fiberoptic laryngoscopy. A laryngoscopic examination should be part of the examination of every patient with LPR to enable diagnosis of incidental findings.

[Risk factors for the occurrence of laryngopharyngeal reflux disease in the aged and the clinical characteristics of patients complicated with pneumonia].

Objective: To investigate the risk factors for the occurrence of laryngopharyngeal reflux disease in the aged, and to analyze the characteristics of patients with pneumonia. Methods: Patients who underwent 24-hour laryngopharyngeal pH monitoring from June 2020 to July 2022 and the positive patients of those who underwent 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring from March 2017 to July 2022 at the Second Medical Center of the PLA General Hospital were enrolled retrospectively. Positive results of 24-hour laryngopharyngeal reflux monitoring were in the laryngopharyngeal reflux group, and the negative results were in the non-laryngopharyngeal reflux group. Patients with pneumonia and simple gastroesophageal reflux disease were in the esophageal reflux pneumonia group, and patients with pneumonia and simple laryngopharyngeal reflux disease were in the laryngopharyngeal reflux pneumonia group. Patients' basic data, co-morbidities, drug use and relevant examination and test results were collected. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the risk factors of laryngopharyngeal reflux disease in the aged and its relationship with pneumonia. Results: A total of 80 patients with 24-hour laryngopharyngeal pH monitoring were enrolled finally, including 34 cases, all male, aged (73±12) years, in the laryngopharyngeal reflux group, and 46 cases [44 males, 2 females, aged (78±11) years] in the non-laryngopharyngeal reflux group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the risk factors of laryngopharyngeal reflux disease in the aged included age ≤70 years (OR=13.07, 95%CI: 2.53-67.68), body mass index (BMI) (OR=1.37, each additional 1 kg/m2, 95%CI: 1.03-1.83), use of antipsychotic drugs (OR=8.00, 95%CI: 1.40-45.73) and calcium channel blockers (OR=5.27, 95%CI: 1.13-24.53) (all P<0.05). The protective factors of the laryngopharyngeal reflux disease in the aged included antacids (OR=0.19, 95%CI: 0.04-0.90, P=0.035). The incidence of pneumonia was higher in the laryngopharyngeal reflux group compared with the non-laryngopharyngeal reflux group [44.1% (15/34) vs 21.7% (10/46), P=0.033]. The esophageal reflux pneumonia group included 32 cases [31 males and 1 females, aged (84±12) years]. The laryngopharyngeal reflux pneumonia group included 15 cases [ 15 males, aged (79±11) years]. Compared to the patients in the laryngopharyngeal reflux pneumonia group, the patients in the esophageal reflux pneumonia group had a longer course of antibiotics [(27.7±27.0) vs (14.6±13.9) days, P=0.034], a higher frequency of seizure frequency [(4.3±3.0) vs (1.8±1.5) times/year, P<0.001] and a higher maximal body temperature [(38.2±0.9) vs (37.6±1.1) ℃, P=0.037]. Conclusions: The risk factors of laryngopharyngeal reflux disease in the aged included age ≤70 years, higher BMI, use of antipsychotic drugs and calcium channel blockers. The incidence of pneumonia in laryngopharyngeal reflux disease is higher, but the condition of pneumonia is milder.

Esophageal Hypervigilance and Visceral Anxiety Contribute to Symptom Severity of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.

INTRODUCTION: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a clinical conundrum without a diagnostic gold standard. The Esophageal Hypervigilance and Anxiety Scale (EHAS) is a questionnaire designed for cognitive-affective evaluation of visceral sensitivity. We hypothesized that esophageal hypervigilance and symptom-specific anxiety have an etiopathological role in generation of LPR symptoms, especially when gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) cannot explain these symptoms. METHODS: Consecutive patients with LPR and/or GERD symptoms lasting >3 months were prospectively enrolled and characterized using the Reflux Symptom Index, GERD questionnaire, and EHAS. Eligible patients with negative endoscopy underwent 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring off acid suppression for phenotyping GERD and assessment of reflux burden, using conventional metrics (acid exposure time and number of reflux episodes) and novel metrics (mean nocturnal baseline impedance and postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index). RESULTS: Of 269 enrolled patients (mean age 47.1 years, 21-65 years, 60.6% female), 90 patients were with concomitant GERD and LPR symptoms, 32 patients were with dominant LPR symptoms, 102 patients were with dominant GERD symptoms, and 45 were controls. Patients with concomitant GERD and LPR symptoms had higher EHAS than those with dominant GERD symptoms and controls ( P ≤ 0.001); patients with dominant LPR symptoms had higher EHAS than controls ( P = 0.007). On Pearson correlation, EHAS positively correlated with the Reflux Symptom Index. DISCUSSION: Esophageal hypervigilance and symptom-specific anxiety may be more important than reflux burden in LPR symptom perception.

Medium-term clinical efficacy of endoscopic antireflux mucosectomy on laryngopharyngeal reflux: a retrospective multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Studies on the effect of antireflux mucosectomy (ARMS) on laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD) are lacking. We conducted a multicenter retrospective study to explore the clinical efficacy of ARMS on LPRD. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients diagnosed with LPRD by oropharyngeal 24-hour Dx-pH monitoring who underwent ARMS. The effects of ARMS on LPRD were evaluated by comparing the 36-Item Short-Form Survey (SF-36), reflux symptom index (RSI), and 24-hour Dx-pH monitoring scores before and 1 year after surgery. Patients were divided into groups according to gastroesophageal flap valve (GEFV) grade to explore the effect of GEFV on prognosis. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-three patients were included in the study. The oropharyngeal pH monitoring results showed that the effective rate of ARMS was 72.1% (132/183). After surgery, the SF-36 score was higher (P = .000), RSI score was lower (P = .000), and the symptoms of constant throat clearing; difficulty swallowing food, liquids, and pills; coughing after eating or after lying down; troublesome or annoying cough; and breathing difficulties or choking episodes were significantly improved (P < .05). Upright reflux was dominant in GEFV grade I to III patients, and the SF-36, RSI, and upright Ryan index scores were significantly improved after surgery (P < .05). In GEFV grade IV patients, regurgitation was dominant in the supine position, and the above evaluation indexes were worse after surgery (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: ARMS is effective for LPRD. The GEFV grade can predict the prognosis of surgery. ARMS is effective in GEFV grade I to III patients, but the effect is not exact in GEFV grade IV patients and may even be aggravated.

Tolerability and Feasibility of the Upper Esophageal Sphincter Assist Device in Preventing Acute and Chronic Allograft Rejection Among Lung Transplant Recipients.

GOALS: We aimed to evaluate a novel upper esophageal sphincter (UES) assist device loaner program for the prevention of acute cellular rejection and chronic lung allograft dysfunction among lung transplant (LTx) recipients. BACKGROUND: Laryngopharyngeal reflux can lead to chronic microaspiration and LTx rejection. The UES assist device applies external pressure at the level of UES to decrease reflux. STUDY: We prospectively enrolled and issued UES assist devices to consecutive transplant patients referred for gastrointestinal motility testing from 2016 to 2020. Device tolerability was defined by successful utilization as a bridge to ambulatory pH monitoring and/or antireflux procedure, or as permanent therapy. Incidence of rejection was analyzed before, during, and after device implementation. RESULTS: Twenty-six participants were issued devices (15 pathologic, 5 physiological, 6 unknown reflux status), none of whom developed acute rejection episodes or chronic lung allograft dysfunction while using the device. Thirteen adopted the device promptly after transplantation (mean 1.7 mo) and remained free of rejection episodes over a mean 24.7 months of follow-up. Among those with pathologic reflux, lag time to device adoption strongly correlated with the development of rejection ( r =0.8, P =0.0006). There was no such correlation among those with physiological reflux. Five developed acute rejection after device return. CONCLUSIONS: The device was tolerated by a majority of LTx patients and appears feasible as a barrier measure in the prevention of rejection. Delayed treatment of laryngopharyngeal reflux may lead to early allograft failure; therefore, the UES assist device should be given important consideration in transplant protection.

Investigation of the potential relationship between gastroesophageal reflux disease and laryngopharyngeal reflux disease in symptomatology - a prospective study based on a multidisciplinary outpatient.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GERD-Q) and Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) scale were administered to patients attending the gastroenterology outpatient clinic at the Sixth Medical Center of the PLA General Hospital from 7 April 2021 to 10 June 2021. Patients with GERD-Q score >7 were indicated GERD, and patients with RSI >13 were indicated LPRD. The analysis of patients with pure GERD (independent GERD, iG), patients with LPRD and GERD (LPRD & GERD, L&G), patients with simple LPRD (independent LPRD, iL) and the percentage of normal group (GERDQ-negative and RSI-negative, N). RESULTS: 3060 GERD-Q and RSI questionnaires were distributed, and 2974 complete questionnaires were returned. Among them, 274 (9.20%) iL, 334 (11.23%) iG and 151 (5.10%) L&G patients and 2215 (74.48%) N patients. The positive rate of GERD in this sample was 16.31%, of which 31.13% had coexisting LPRD, and the positive rate of LPRD was 14.29%, of which 35.53% had coexisting GERD. Among patients with LPRD, the positive rate of concomitant GERD (χ2 = 4.157, p = 0.041) and RSI score (Z = -6.823, p = 0.000) was significantly higher in patients with the presence of respiratory symptoms than in those without respiratory symptoms. CONCLUSION: LPRD can exist alone or in conjunction with GERD. Patients with both LPRD and GERD had the most severe reflux symptoms. The need to focus on the risk of those initially screened only with GERD developing LPRD. Respiratory symptoms play an important role in reflux disease.

Is empiric proton pump inhibition in patients with symptoms of extraesophageal gastroesophageal reflux justified?

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has had a marked increase in Western countries with a paralleling interest in extraesophageal (EE) manifestations of GERD, including laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). There are considerable differences in clinical practice between gastroenterologists, otolaryngologists and pulmonologists. METHODS: In this narrative review we address some of these controversies concerning EE manifestations of GERD and LPR. RESULTS: It is disputed whether there is causal relationship between reflux and the numerous symptoms and conditions suggested to be EE manifestations of GERD. Similarly, the pathophysiology is uncertain and there are disagreements concerning diagnostic criteria. Consequently, it is challenging to provide evidence-based treatment recommendations. A significant number of patients are given a trial course with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) for several months before symptoms are evaluated. In randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs PPI treatment does not seem to be advantageous over placebo, and the evidence supporting that patients without verified GERD have any benefit of PPI treatment is negligible. There is a large increase in both over the counter and prescribed PPI use in several countries and a significant proportion of this use is without any symptomatic benefit for the patients. Whereas short-term treatment has few side effects, there is concern about side-effects after long-term use. Although empiric PPI treatment for suspected EE manifestations of GERD instead of prior esophageal 24-hour pH and impedance monitoring is included in several guidelines by various societies, this practice contributes to overtreatment with PPI. CONCLUSION: We argue that the current knowledge suggests that diagnostic testing with pH and impedance monitoring rather than empiric PPI treatment should be chosen in a higher proportion of patients presenting with symptoms possibly attributable to EE reflux.

Quality of Life and Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is characterized by the reflux of gastric contents into the pharynx or larynx and often presents with symptoms including but not limited to cough, throat clearing, sore throat, globus, and dysphonia. Unlike gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), LPR is a relatively understudied syndrome, and knowledge regarding the diagnostic and treatment strategies, as well as the psychosocial impact continues to evolve. No singular test or procedure currently exists as a gold standard for LPR diagnosis. While laryngoscopy or pH monitoring may be positive, this does not exclude the contribution of non-gastroenterological processes. Prior research into psychosocial impact demonstrates a significant increase in symptom burden when comparing patients with laryngeal symptoms to controls and those with isolated GERD symptoms. However, these data are limited by the absence of physiologic data to correlate with the reported symptoms and survey responses. This knowledge gap highlights the need for further research to investigate the relationship between symptom burden and pathologic acid reflux on quality of life (QOL), anxiety, and depression. Ultimately, future studies to directly analyze these variables will help to guide treatment strategies and improve QOL in these patients.

Best Practices in Treatment of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease: A Multidisciplinary Modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a common otolaryngologic diagnosis. Treatment of presumed LPR remains challenging, and limited frameworks exist to guide treatment. METHODS: Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Methods, a modified Delphi approach identified consensus statements to guide LPR treatment. Experts independently and blindly scored proposed statements on importance, scientific acceptability, usability, and feasibility in a four-round iterative process. Accepted measures reached scores with ≥ 80% agreement in the 7-9 range (on a 9-point Likert scale) across all four categories. RESULTS: Fifteen experts rated 36 proposed initial statements. In round one, 10 (27.8%) statements were rated as valid. In round two, 8 statements were modified based on panel suggestions, and experts subsequently rated 5 of these statements as valid. Round three's discussion refined statements not yet accepted, and in round four, additional voting identified 2 additional statements as valid. In total, 17 (47.2%) best practice statements reached consensus, touching on topics as varied as role of empiric treatment, medication use, lifestyle modifications, and indications for laryngoscopy. CONCLUSION: Using a well-tested methodology, best practice statements in the treatment of LPR were identified. The statements serve to guide physicians on LPR treatment considerations.

25 Years of the GERD-HRQL symptom severity instrument: an assessment of published applications.

BACKGROUND: The GERD-HRQL symptom severity instrument was developed and published 25 years ago. This seems like an apropos time to review how the instrument has been used in the "real-world." METHODS: Google Scholar, PubMed, and Web of Science websites search was done using the keywords "GERD-HRQL" or its author, "Velanovich." Once articles were identified, the following information was obtained from each article: first author name, country of origin, journal published, year of publications, type of study design, subject of study, category of study, disease type studied, purpose of the study, how the GERD-HRQL scores were reported, how the GERD-HRQL scores were statistically reported, and results of the study. The total and change of scores were analyzed for descriptive statistics based on disease process studied and intervention studied. RESULTS: A total of 767 articles by 562 different first authors were identified in 193 different journals from 53 different countries of study origin. After a period of steady usages, the number of publication employing the GERD-HRQL has rapidly increase over the last 5 years. There have been 8 validated translations into other languages, although there appears to be numerous, non-validated ad hoc translations. Most commonly used or studied: observational cohort study design, surgical treatment study category, GERD disease process, treatment effect study purpose, total GERD-HRQL scores reported as means or medians. However, there were a wide variety of other study designs, study categories, disease processes, and study purposes. In general, GERD and laryngopharyngeal reflux had the high pre-treatment scores (i.e., more severe symptoms), and surgical and endoscopic interventions the lowest post-treatment score (i.e., least severe symptoms) with the largest change in score (i.e., treatment impact. CONCLUSIONS: The GERD-HRQL has proven to be a reliable, responsive and versatile symptom severity instrument for studies involving GERD as a subject.

Knowledge, attitudes and practices of patients with chronic pharyngitis toward laryngopharyngeal reflux in Suzhou, China.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) of patients with chronic pharyngitis in Suzhou, China toward laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in patients with chronic pharyngitis in Suzhou, China at the otolaryngology outpatient clinic of the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University between November, 2022, and May, 2023. Data was collected through a self-designed online questionnaire encompassing the sociodemographic characteristics and three dimensions of KAP. The questionnaire was administered using SoJump, and data were exported from this platform. Subsequently, statistical analysis, including Structural Equation Modeling, was performed using SPSS 22 software to evaluate the KAP scores. RESULTS: A total of 487 valid questionnaires were collected, with 275 (56.35%) female patients. The mean score of KAP were 4.76 ± 2.93 (possible range: 0-11), 33.10 ± 4.46 (possible range: 8-40), 31.29 ± 6.04 (possible range: 8-40), respectively. Pearson's correlation analysis showed significant positive correlations between knowledge and attitude dimensions (r = 0.413, P < 0.001), knowledge and practice dimensions (r = 0.355, P < 0.001), and attitude and practice dimensions (r = 0.481, P < 0.001). Structural equation modeling revealed that education exhibited positive effect on knowledge (ß = 0.476, P < 0.001) and attitude (ß = 0.600, P < 0.001), and having family history of chronic pharyngitis showed positive effect on knowledge (ß = 0.580, P = 0.047), experienced with reflux symptoms showed positive effect on knowledge (ß = 0.838, P = 0.001) and attitude (ß = 0.631, P = 0.085). Moreover, knowledge showed positive effect on attitude (ß = 0.555, P < 0.001) and practice (ß = 0.351, P < 0.001). Attitude, in turn, showed positive effect on practice (ß = 0.511, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with chronic pharyngitis had inadequate knowledge, positive attitudes and suboptimal practices toward LPR. Education, family history of chronic pharyngitis, experienced with reflux symptoms might have effect on their KAP.

Is magnetic sphincter augmentation indicated in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux?

Up to 30% of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) suffer from laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) with symptoms, as chronic cough, laryngitis, or asthma. Besides life-style modifications and medical acid suppression, laparoscopic fundoplication is an established treatment option. Treatment-related side effects after laparoscopic fundoplication have to be weighted against LPR symptom control in 30-85% of patients after surgery. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is described as an effective alternative to fundoplication for surgical treatment of GERD. However, evidence on the efficacy of MSA in patients with LPR is very limited. Preliminary data on the results of MSA treating LPR symptoms in patients with acid and weakly acid reflux are promising; showing comparable results to laparoscopic fundoplication by providing the potential of decrease side effects.

Transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation for suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux disease.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) combined with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy on symptoms and signs of patients with suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD). METHODS: This was a prospective randomized controlled study. Seventy patients with reflux symptom index (RSI) > 13 and reflux finding score (RFS) > 7 were recruited and received PPI alone (control group) or TEAS combined with PPI (experimental group) for 12 weeks. Patients in the experimental group received TEAS at Tiantu (RN22), Renying (ST9), and Neiguan (PC6) once a day, five times a week. RSI, RFS, throat pain visual analog score (VAS), and LPR-health-related quality-of-life (LPR-HRQL) scores were evaluated at baseline and after 4 and 12 weeks. RESULTS: The decreases in total RSI and RFS, along with several subscores, were significantly higher in the experimental group than in the control group after 12 weeks (P < 0.05). The throat pain VAS and LPR-HRQL scores decreased significantly at 4 and 12 weeks after treatment in both groups, with significant differences between the groups (P < 0.001). No severe adverse events occurred, and the rates of adverse events were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Compared with PPI alone, TEAS combined with PPI showed a significantly greater improvement in symptoms, signs, and quality of life in the treatment of LPRD without increasing the occurrence of adverse effects. Therefore, TEAS could serve as a useful and safe treatment method for LPRD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2100046755.

Saliva pepsin measurements in the detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in laryngopharyngeal reflux patients: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To study the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin measurement (Peptest) for detecting gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) patients. METHODS: Patients with reflux symptoms were consecutively recruited from January 2020 to November 2022. Patients benefited from hypopharyngeal-esophageal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH), fasting and bedtime saliva collections to measure pepsin. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values were evaluated for GERD and LPR patients considering the highest values of pepsin tests at ≥ 16, ≥ 75, and ≥ 216 ng/mL cutoffs. The relationship between HEMII-pH, endoscopic and clinical findings, and pepsin measurements was studied. RESULTS: Saliva was collected in 109 LPR patients and 30 individuals with both LPR and GERD. The total number of pharyngeal reflux events was significantly higher in GERD-LPR patients compared with LPR patients (p = 0.008). The mean fasting and bedtime pepsin saliva concentrations were similar between groups. The sensitivity of Peptest in LPR patients was 30.5%, 70.2%, and 84.0% at cutoffs ≥ 16, ≥ 75 and ≥ 216 ng/mL. In GERD-LPR group, Peptest was 80.0%, 70.0%, and 30.0% sensitive. At cutoff 16 ng/mL, Peptest reported PPV of 20.7% and 94.8% in LPR-GERD and LPR groups, respectively. NPV were 73.9% and 8.7% in GERD-LPR and LPR groups, respectively. The consistency analysis between Peptest and HEMII-pH was not significant. Peptest was significantly associated with the number of acid pharyngeal reflux events (rs = 0.182; p = 0.032). CONCLUSION: Pepsin saliva measurements appear to be not a reliable diagnostic tool for the detection of GERD in LPR patients. Future studies are needed to determine the place of Peptest in laryngopharyngeal reflux and gastroesophageal reflux diseases.