Airway Impedance: A Novel Diagnostic Tool to Predict Extraesophageal Airway Inflammation.

OBJECTIVE: To validate a novel biomarker, airway impedance for extraesophageal disease. STUDY DESIGN: We prospectively recruited patients with respiratory symptoms undergoing combined endoscopy and direct laryngoscopy for the evaluation of symptoms. The direct laryngoscopy was performed and videotaped for blinded scoring by 3 otolaryngologists and an impedance catheter was placed onto the posterior larynx to obtain measurements. Following this, an endoscopy was performed and impedance measurements and biopsies were taken at 3 esophageal heights. Impedance values were compared within and between patients. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were recruited, of which 73 had complete airway and endoscopic exams. There was no significant correlation between airway impedance values and mean reflux finding scores (r2 = 0.45, P = .07). There was no significant positive correlation between airway impedance and esophageal impedance values (r2 = 0.097-0.138, P > .2). Patients taking proton pump inhibitors had significantly lower mean airway impedance values (706 ± 450 Ω) than patients not taking them (1069 ± 809 Ω, P = .06). Patients who had evidence of aspiration on video fluoroscopic swallow studies had lower airway impedance (871 ± 615 Ω) than patients without aspiration (1247 ± 360 Ω, P = .008). Inhaled steroids did not impact airway impedance levels (P = .7). CONCLUSIONS: Airway impedance may be an important diagnostic tool to diagnose gastroesophageal reflux or aspiration, eliminating the subjectivity of airway appearance alone.

Longitudinal microbiome changes in children exposed to proton pump inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use has been associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal and upper respiratory infections in children. There are limited longitudinal data on the effect of PPI in children. The goal of this prospective observational study was to compare the stool and oropharyngeal microbiome of children before and after starting PPIs. METHODS: We prospectively recruited participants from a gastroenterology clinic. Consented pariticpants provided stool samples and oropharyngeal swabs at baseline and after eight weeks of PPI therapy. Microbiome changes were measured by analyzing 16S sequencing from both body sites at both timepoints. RESULTS: Thirty-four participants completed the study and provided samples both at baseline and after eight weeks on PPI therapy. Of those, 24 participants had sufficient sequencing from both stool and oropharyngeal samples at both time points. There were no differences between the pre- vs post-PPI samples using beta-diversity metrics in either the oropharynx or stool. There were, however, significant changes in specific taxa. There was an enrichment of Streptococcus in the stool in after PPI-use and a reduction in the relative abundance of Bifidobacterium, Peptostreptococcus and Turicibacter (p-values < 0.01). Furthermore, there was an increase in the relative abundance of oropharyngeal bacteria in the stool after PPI therapy. This enrichment of oropharyngeal bacteria in the stool was most prominent in younger participants. DISCUSSION: Further investigation is needed to determine the clinical and microbial factors that predispose or protect against microbiome changes due to PPI-use, and why young children are more susceptible to this PPI effect.