Rapid salivary pepsin test: blinded assessment of test performance in gastroesophageal reflux disease

Diagnostic value of the pepsin concentration in saliva and induced sputum for gastroesophageal reflux-induced chronic cough: a prospective clinical study

Background

Finding a simple, effective and rapid diagnostic method to improve the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux-induced chronic cough (GERC) is indicated. Our objective was to determine the diagnostic value of the pepsin concentration in saliva and induced sputum for GERC.

Methods

171 patients with chronic cough were enrolled. The diagnosis and treatment followed the chronic cough diagnosis and treatment protocol. Saliva and induced sputum were collected, and the pepsin concentration was determined using Peptest. A Gastroesophageal Reflux Diagnostic Questionnaire (GerdQ) was completed. The diagnostic value of the pepsin concentration in saliva and induced sputum for GERC was analysed and compared.

Results

The salivary pepsin concentration predicted GERC with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.845. The optimal cut-off value was 76.10 ng·mL-1, the sensitivity was 83.58% and the specificity was 82.69%. The pepsin concentration in the induced sputum supernatant for GERC had an AUC of 0.523. When GerdQ was used for GERC diagnosis, the AUC was 0.670 and the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin was better compared to GerdQ (DeLong test, p=0.0008). Salivary pepsin had a comparable diagnostic value to GerdQ (AUC 0.779 versus 0.826; p=0.4199) in acidic GERC. Salivary pepsin had superior diagnostic value compared to GerdQ (AUC 0.830 versus 0.533; p<0.0001) in non-acidic GERC.

Conclusions

A salivary pepsin concentration >76.10 ng·mL-1 is of good diagnostic value for GERC, especially in non-acidic GERC. The pepsin concentration in induced sputum has a low diagnostic value.

Latin American consensus on diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) can be challenging given varying symptom presentations, and complex multifactorial pathophysiology. The gold standard for GERD diagnosis is esophageal acid exposure time (AET) measured by pH-metry. A variety of additional diagnostic tools are available. The goal of this consensus was to assess the individual merits of GERD diagnostic tools based on current evidence, and provide consensus recommendations following discussion and voting by experts.

METHODS

This consensus was developed by 15 experts from nine countries, based on a systematic search of the literature, using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) methodology to assess the quality and strength of the evidence, and provide recommendations regarding the diagnostic utility of different GERD diagnosis tools, using AET as the reference standard.

KEY RESULTS

A proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trial is appropriate for patients with heartburn and no alarm symptoms, but nor for patients with regurgitation, chest pain, or extraesophageal presentations. Severe erosive esophagitis and abnormal reflux monitoring off PPI are clearly indicative of GERD. Esophagram, esophageal biopsies, laryngoscopy, and pharyngeal pH monitoring are not recommended to diagnose GERD. Patients with PPI-refractory symptoms and normal endoscopy require reflux monitoring by pH or pH-impedance to confirm or exclude GERD, and identify treatment failure mechanisms. GERD confounders need to be considered in some patients, pH-impedance can identify supragrastric belching, impedance-manometry can diagnose rumination.

CONCLUSIONS

Erosive esophagitis on endoscopy and abnormal pH or pH-impedance monitoring are the most appropriate methods to establish a diagnosis of GERD. Other tools may add useful complementary information.

Diagnostic Value of Fasting and Bedtime Saliva Pepsin Measurements in Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

BACKGROUND

The pepsin test is an emerging non-invasive diagnostic approach for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of multiple salivary pepsin tests for detecting LPR.

METHODS

Patients with suspected LPR and asymptomatic individuals were consecutively recruited from January 2020 to November 2022. Patients benefited from hypopharyngeal-esophageal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH) and fasting and bedtime saliva collections to measure oral pepsin. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values were calculated considering fasting, bedtime, and the highest values of the pepsin tests at ≥16, ≥36, ≥45, and ≥100 ng/mL cutoffs.

RESULTS

The pepsin test was adequately performed in 147 LPR patients and 32 controls. The pepsin tests were 81.6%, 74.8%, and 61.5% sensitive at cutoffs of ≥16, ≥45, and ≥100 ng/mL, respectively. The PPVs were 93.0%, 94.0%, and 94.8%, respectively. The highest specificity (81.8%) was found for the fasting pepsin test at a cutoff of 100 ng/mL. The highest sensitivity (81.6%) was found by considering the highest measured pepsin test at the ≥16 ng/mL threshold. The measurement of fasting saliva pepsin was associated with the highest sensitivity and specificity value. At ≥16 ng/mL, 27 patients had negative findings, indicating that 18.4% (27/147) of the true positive cases were missed by considering the highest pepsin test. The receiver operating characteristic curve reported that a cutoff of 21.5 was 76.9% sensitive and 62.5% specific, while the PPV and NPV were 91.1% and 38.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The consideration of the highest concentration of the fasting and bedtime saliva pepsin collections at a cutoff of 21.5 was associated with the best detection rate and sensitivity of the pepsin tests.

Threshold level of Peptest in diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease with extraesophageal symptoms: Evidence from Vietnam

Background and Aim

We aimed to evaluate the application of Peptest, a novel technique to detect pepsin in the saliva, and identify its threshold level for the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) with extraesophageal symptoms.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted in two groups: patients with extraesophageal GERD symptoms (symptomatic group divided into GERD and non-GERD groups according to 24-h esophageal pH-impedance monitoring [pH-I] results) and healthy controls. For the symptomatic group, endoscopy, pH 24 h, high-resolution manometry (HRM), and salivary Peptest were performed. For the healthy control group, only Peptest was done. The accuracy of Peptest was compared with that of pH-I by the Lyon consensus criteria.

Results

Chronic laryngitis was the most frequent extraesophageal symptom. On saliva testing, the GERD group had a higher prevalence of positive samples and pepsin concentration than the control group. Between GERD and non-GERD groups, the optimal threshold level was 31.2 ng/mL, with a sensitivity of 86.7% and specificity of 27.5%. The optimal threshold level was 31.4 ng/mL to differentiate GERD from healthy controls, with a sensitivity of 86.7% and specificity of 66.0%. Age, number of total refluxes, DeMeester score, post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave (PSPW) index, and mean nocturnal baseline impedence (MNBI) were associated with pepsin concentration. Regarding HRM metrics, there was no significant difference of pepsin concentration between low/normal upper esophageal sphincter (UES) resting pressure, low/normal lower esophageal sphincter (LES) resting pressure, low/normal 4-s integrated relaxation pressure (IRP4s), and hypomotility/normal motility.

Conclusion

Patients with extraesophageal symptoms had a higher prevalence of positive Peptest. The optimum threshold level of 31.4 ng/mL had high sensitivity and moderate specificity to differentiate between patients with GERD and healthy controls.

Diagnostic thresholds and optimal collection protocol of salivary pepsin for gastroesophageal reflux disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is primarily diagnosed based on symptoms and response to a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) trial. Gold standard testing requires an invasive endoscopic procedure, often with ambulatory pH monitoring. Salivary pepsin is a potential noninvasive modality for GERD diagnosis. This study aimed to assess diagnostic performance of salivary pepsin thresholds for GERD and determine optimal collection protocol of saliva in an external validation cohort. Over 10 months, adults with symptoms of GERD undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy with wireless pH-monitoring off PPI were enrolled. Saliva was self-collected by participants over 4 days across three different time points: fasting ante meridiem (AM), post-prandial, and bedtime (PM). Pepsin levels were calculated via Peptest. Pepsin variability and agreement were determined using linear mixed effects models and intraclass correlation. Validation of diagnostic threshold and performance characteristics were evaluated by receiver-operator curve analysis. Twenty participants enrolled in the study; 50% with physiologic acid exposure (acid exposure time < 4% no GERD) and 50% with elevated acid exposure (GERD). Mean pepsin concentrations were significantly lower in the AM (22.6 ± 25.2 ng/mL) compared to post-prandial (44.5 ± 36.7 ng/mL) and PM (55.4 ± 47.0 ng/mL). Agreement between pepsin concentrations across 3 days was substantial for AM samples (kappa 0.61), with lower agreement for post-prandial and PM samples. A single AM pepsin concentration of 25 ng/mL was 67% accurate for GERD with 56% sensitivity and 78% specificity. This validation study highlights fair accuracy and performance characteristics of a single fasting AM salivary pepsin concentration for the diagnosis of GERD.

Noninvasive, MultiOmic, and Multicompartmental Biomarkers of Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a prevalent gastrointestinal disorder that may complicate conditions such as obstructive airway disease. Our group has identified predictive biomarkers of GERD in particulate exposed first responders with obstructive airway disease. In addition, GERD diagnosis and treatment is costly and invasive. In light of these clinical concerns, we aimed to systematically review studies identifying noninvasive, multiOmic, and multicompartmental biomarkers of GERD.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed and Embase was performed using keywords focusing on reflux disease and biomarkers and registered with PROSPERO. We included original human studies in English, articles focusing on noninvasive biomarkers of GERD published after December 31, 2009. GERD subtypes (non-erosive reflux disease and erosive esophagitis) and related conditions (Barrett's Esophagus [BE] and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma). Predictive measures were synthesized and risk of bias assessed (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale).

RESULTS

Initial search identified n = 238 studies andn 13 articles remained after applying inclusion/exclusion criteria. Salivary pepsin was the most studied biomarker with significant sensitivity and specificity for GERD. Serum assessment showed elevated levels of Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha in both GERD and Barrett's. Exhaled breath volatile sulfur compounds and acetic acid were associated with GERD. Oral Microbiome: Models with Lautropia, Streptococcus, and Bacteroidetes showed the greatest discrimination between BE and controls vs Lautropia; ROCAUC 0.94 (95% confidence interval; 0.85-1.00).

CONCLUSION

Prior studies identified significant multiOmic, multicompartmental noninvasive biomarker risks for GERD and BE. However, studies have a high risk of bias and the reliability and accuracy of the biomarkers identified are greatly limited, which further highlights the need to discover and validate clinically relevant noninvasive biomarkers of GERD.

Changes of Pepsin Concentration in Saliva Sample According to Storage Period

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the concentration of pepsin in the saliva sample changes according to the storage period of the sample.

METHODS

Forty eight patients with suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux were included in this study. Saliva samples were collected from each patient and each sample divided into six and stored for different period of time. Pepsin concentration was measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. A comparison was made between the pepsin concentration measured immediately and the concentration measured after storage for 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months.

RESULTS

No significant difference in pepsin concentrations were detected between the sample analyzed immediately and those analyzed at 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months after saliva collection. A significant difference in pepsin concentration was observed in the sample analyzed immediately and the sample analyzed 6 months after saliva collection.

CONCLUSIONS

Pepsin concentration in saliva samples did not demonstrate a significant difference between the concentration measured immediately and the concentration measured 3 months after saliva collection, although a significant difference was observed in the concentration measured 6 months after collection.

There is a Good Consistency Between Reflux Symptom Score-12 and Reflux Symptom Index in Chinese Population

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the consistency between the Reflux Symptom Score-12 (RSS-12) and Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) in Chinese people.

METHODS

Patients with symptoms of LPR from the outpatient otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery clinic were included. All included patients completed the RSS-12 and RSI. The patient with RSS-12>11 or RSI>13 suggested possible LPR. For the patients with RSI >13 or RSS-12>11, they were treated using diet recommendations and were prescribed a twice-daily pantoprazole for 12 weeks. The consistency between the RSS-12 and RSI was compared with the weighted Cohen's kappa statistic.

RESULTS

A total of 258 patients were included. The mean scores for RSS-12 and RSI were 13.21±17.31 and 12.86±6.15, respectively. The positive rate of LPR was 17.44% based on the RSI, and 24.42% based on the RSS-12. The kappa value between the RSS-12 and RSI was 0.736 (P < 0.001). Following 12 weeks of treatment, there was a significant reduction in both RSI and RSS-12. Based on the RSI, 73% of patients had a good treatment response, whereas according to the RSS-12, 85% of patients had a good treatment response.

CONCLUSION

There is a good consistency between RSS-12 and RSI, meaning that the RSS-12 is a feasible LPR initial screening tool. The RSS-12 provides a more comprehensive evaluation of reflux symptoms and treatment effect than RSI in patients with LPR.

Diagnostic utility of salivary pepsin in laryngopharyngeal reflux: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Salivary pepsin has emerged as a biomarker for Laryngopharyngeal Reflux (LPR), which, however, has been questioned for its efficacy due to a lack of supporting medical data. Therefore, this study analyzed the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin for LPR and assessed a better cutoff value.

METHODS

Studies were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from their receptions to October 1, 2021. Then, RevMan 5.3 and Stata 14.0 were utilized to summarize the diagnostic indexes for further meta-analysis. Data were separately extracted by two reviewers according to the trial data extraction form of the Cochrane Handbook. The risk of bias in Randomized Control Trials (RCTs) was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies matched the criteria and were subjected to meta-analysis. The results revealed a pooled sensitivity of 61% (95% CI 50%-71%), a pooled specificity of 67% (95% CI 48%-81%), a positive likelihood ratio of 2 (95% CI 1.2-2.8), a negative likelihood ratio of 0.58 (95% CI 0.47‒0.72), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.67 (95% CI 0.63‒0.71). Subgroup analyses indicated that the cutoff value of pepsin at 50 ng/mL had a higher degree of diagnostic accuracy than that of pepsin at 16 ng/mL in cohort studies.

CONCLUSION

The review demonstrated low diagnostic performance of salivary pepsin for LPR and that the cutoff value of 50 ng/mL pepsin had superior diagnostic accuracy. Nevertheless, the diagnostic value may vary dependent on the utilized diagnostic criteria. Therefore, additional research is needed on the improved way of identifying salivary pepsin in the diagnosis of LPR, and also longer-term and more rigorous RCTs are warranted to further assess the effectiveness of salivary pepsin.

Optimal Timing of the Salivary Pepsin Test for the Diagnosis of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the optimal time point for diagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) through combining 24-h hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (24-h HEMII-pH) monitoring and the multi-time point salivary pepsin test (MTPSPT).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective uncontrolled trial.

METHOD

Patients with and without LPR symptoms were included as the test group and the control group, respectively. The patients in the test group underwent 24-h HEMII-pH and MTPSPT. The results of 24-h HEMII-pH were used as a diagnostic criterion for LPR, and the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin tests performed at different time points was compared by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 153 patients were included. Based on 24-h HEMII-pH, the positive rate of LPR in the test group of patients was 84.00%. In the control group, only one person (3.57%) had a positive salivary pepsin test result. The area under the curve (AUC) of the MTPSPT was 0.827. In addition, we separately calculated the AUC of the combined salivary pepsin test at different time points, and found good diagnostic value (AUC = 0.799) when the test was combined with the waking, 1 and 2 h after breakfast and lunch, and 1 h after dinner tests. However, when the number of tests were further increased, the diagnostic value did not improve significantly.

CONCLUSION

Salivary pepsin testing combined with waking, 1 h and 2 h after breakfast and lunch, and 1 h after dinner has almost the same diagnostic value as MTPSPT, and testing at these time points can be an effective method for diagnosing LPR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 2022.

Does hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring for the diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux have to be 24 h?

PURPOSE

To investigate the diagnostic value of combined multi-timepoint salivary pepsin testing (MTPSPT) and hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH) for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and whether an appropriate reduction in the duration of HEMII-pH would affect the accuracy of diagnosis of LPR.

METHODS

Recruited patients were studied with both MTPSPT and HEMII-pH. The diagnosis of LPR was based on the occurrence of > 1 reflux event and/or positive results on any of the MTPSPT. The diagnostic value of combined diagnosis was studied through combining a breakdown of the 24-h HEMII-pH finding and the results of the MTPSPT. The diagnostic value was expressed in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).

RESULTS

Based on 24-h HEMII-pH and MTPSPT, the positive rate of LPR was 83.33% and 74.69%, respectively. According to the combined diagnosis, the positive rate of LPR was 90.74%. The sensitivity and specificity of the combined diagnosis both were 89.51% and 100%, when the HEMII-pH intervals were 7 a.m.-6 p.m. and 7 a.m.-7 p.m., respectively. However, when the monitoring time was extended to 8 p.m. and bedtime, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of the combined diagnosis both were 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of MTPSPT and HEMII-pH increased the sensitivity and accuracy of diagnosis of LPR. For patients with positive MTPSPT results, the duration of HEMII-pH can be appropriately shortened to reduce patient sufferings.

Predictive Value of Laryngeal Mucosa Pepsin in Therapeutic Response of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To investigate the predictive capability of pepsin level in the laryngeal mucosa to the therapeutic effect of proton-pump inhibitors in patients with suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), so as to verify whether it can be referred to as a biomarker of LPR.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective case study.

METHODS

Sixty patients with clinical empiric LPR were enrolled, with an reflux symptom index (RSI) ≥ 13 and an reflux finding score (RFS) > 7 as screening criteria. Biopsy specimens from the interarytenoid mucosa were obtained under topical anesthesia for pepsin immunohistochemical staining. Two parameters were observed in these patients with different pepsin levels after the administration of esomeprazole for 12 weeks: the RSI and the RFS.

RESULTS

Among the 60 cases, 35 cases were negative or weakly positive for pepsin (Pepsin(-) group), and 25 cases were moderately positive or strongly positive for pepsin (Pepsin(+) group). After therapy, the RSI significantly decreased from 17.00 (15.00, 19.00) to 6.00 (5.00, 11.00) in the Pepsin(+) group (Z = -4.38, P < 0.01), but no difference was found in the RFS (T = 1.48, P > 0.05). No significant difference was observed in the RSI (T = 2.01, P > 0.05) or the RFS (T = 2.01, P > 0.05) in the Pepsin(-) group either before or after therapy. An improvement in the RSI ≥ 50% was taken as the standard of effective therapy. The effective rate in the Pepsin(+) group was 72.0% (18/25), while it was 14.3% (5/35) in the Pepsin(-) group. There was a significant difference in the effective rate between the two groups (χ2 = 20.55, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Proton-pump inhibitors exhibited better effects in patients with higher pepsin levels in the laryngeal mucosa. Laryngeal mucosa pepsin may serve as an ideal indicator to screen patients suitable for proton-pump inhibitor therapy and a reliable biomarker to identify patients with LPR.

Usefulness of matrix metalloproteinase-7 in saliva as a diagnostic biomarker for laryngopharyngeal reflux disease

Several diagnostic methods are currently being used to diagnose LPRD (laryngopharyngeal reflux disease), but have the disadvantage of being invasive, subjective, or expensive. Our purpose in this study was to investigate the correlation between pepsin and MMP-7 (Matrix Metalloproteinase-7) in pharyngeal secretions of subjects according to RSI (Reflux Symptom Index) score to find out the diagnostic value of MMP-7. We recruited 173 subjects aged between 19 and 85 years who completed the RSI scale. All samples were taken after waking up, and the amount of the pepsin and MMP-7 in saliva were measured by means of an enzyme activity assay. There was a significant increase of pepsin and MMP-7 activity in the study group with an RSI score of 13 or higher. The sensitivity and specificity of MMP-7 for predicting the possibility of an RSI of 13 or more was higher than that of pepsin. When MMP-7 and pepsin were combined, this sensitivity and specificity increased. An enzyme assay of MMP-7 in saliva may be a noninvasive and easy technique for diagnosing LPRD.

Salivary peptest for laryngopharyngeal reflux and gastroesophageal reflux disease: A systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A rapid lateral flow test (Peptest) to detect pepsin in saliva/sputum has been considered as a valuable method for diagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of this meta-analysis is to analyze the utility of Peptest for diagnosis of LPR and GERD.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochran Library (from January 1980 to 26 January 2020) were searched for pepsin in saliva for LPR/GERD diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under the curve data were summarized to examine the accuracy.

RESULTS

A total of 16 articles that included 2401 patients and 897 controls were analyzed. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of GERD/LPR with Peptest were 62% (95% confidence interval [CI] 49%-73%) and 74% (95% CI 50%-90%), respectively. The summarized diagnostic odds ratio and area under the curve were 5.0 (95% CI 2-19) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.66-0.74), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Peptest shows moderate diagnostic value for LPR and GERD. More studies with standard protocols should be done to verify its usefulness.

A simple qualitative scale for diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux: high correlations with pH measurements and disease severity. The usefulness of the Warsaw Scale in LPR diagnostics compared to other diagnostic tools

Purpose

Diagnosis and monitoring of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a constant challenge in otolaryngological practice, chiefly because there are no specific symptoms characteristic of the disease. In this paper, we present the validation of a simple, 6-level qualitative scale to gauge the clinical findings of LPR. It has been previously published in Polish as the Warsaw Scale.

Methods

In the study, we enrolled 100 patients with voice problems who had registered in our clinic, and we performed an extended battery of diagnostic tests for LPR, together with 24-h pH monitoring.

Results

The Warsaw Scale significantly outperformed other instruments in both predicting LPR status and correlating with pH measurements. Moreover, the rating provided by the scale showed a strong association with patient-reported symptoms.

Conclusion

The data indicate that the Warsaw Scale could be used as an affordable, consistent, and effective diagnostic and monitoring tool for LPR.

Narrow-band imaging combined with salivary pepsin to diagnose patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux

BACKGROUND

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a prevalent disease in the ENT outpatient department. Methods of LPR diagnosis differ much. Narrow-band imaging (NBI) and Salivary pepsin-level measurements have been considered as totally new ways for the diagnosis of LPR in recent years.

AIM

We aimed to identify the specific manifestation of LPR and assess the correlation between NBI views and pepsin levels in LPR diagnosing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

130 Patients enrolled in our study were divided into LPR group and non-LPR group according to the scores of RSI and RFS. All individuals received endoscopic NBI tests and salivary pepsin measurements. NBI views of the larynx were divided into four grades based on the existing descriptive guidelines and our clinical observations, and the correlation between NBI grading and salivary pepsin levels was calculated.

RESULTS

NBI grading and pepsin levels are significantly correlated with RFS/RSI scores. The diagnostic concentration of salivary pepsin was 33 ng/ml. There was a significant correlation between NBI grading and salivary levels.

CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE

NBI grading system was proved to provide a better diagnostic value in the diagnosis of LPR. There was a possibility that a combination of these two methods might increase the diagnostic accuracy of this disease.

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common disorder in adults and children. The global prevalence of GERD is high and increasing. Non-erosive reflux disease is the most common phenotype of GERD. Heartburn and regurgitation are considered classic symptoms but GERD may present with various atypical and extra-oesophageal manifestations. The pathophysiology of GERD is multifactorial and different mechanisms may result in GERD symptoms, including gastric composition and motility, anti-reflux barrier, refluxate characteristics, clearance mechanisms, mucosal integrity and symptom perception. In clinical practice, the diagnosis of GERD is commonly established on the basis of response to anti-reflux treatment; however, a more accurate diagnosis requires testing that includes upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy and reflux monitoring. New techniques and new reflux testing parameters help to better phenotype the condition. In children, the diagnosis of GERD is primarily based on history and physical examination and treatment vary with age. Treatment in adults includes a combination of lifestyle modifications with pharmacological, endoscopic or surgical intervention. In refractory GERD, optimization of proton-pump inhibitor treatment should be attempted before a series of diagnostic tests to assess the patient's phenotype.

Are Multiple Tests Necessary for Salivary Pepsin Detection in the Diagnosis of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux?

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the necessity of multiple salivary pepsin tests within a day when diagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary hospitals.

METHODS

A total of 138 patients with signs and/or symptoms associated with laryngopharyngeal reflux were included. Salivary pepsin was detected on the day of 24-hour pH monitoring, and the results of salivary pepsin detected once in the morning and multiple times in 1 day were compared with the results of pH monitoring.

RESULTS

Among the 138 patients, pH monitoring results were positive in 112. Salivary pepsin was positive in 47 cases in the morning, which was not consistent with the results of pH monitoring (kappa value = 0.117). With the pH monitoring results as the standard, the salivary pepsin detected once in the morning had a sensitivity of 38.4% (43/112) and a specificity of 84.6% (22/26) for the diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux. When salivary pepsin was detected multiple times per day, 102 patients tested positive. The consistency with pH monitoring was moderate (kappa value = 0.587). The sensitivity was 86.6% (97/112), and the specificity was 80.8% (21/26). Of the 97 patients with positive results from pH monitoring and salivary pepsin detected multiple times a day, 54 had negative findings for a single detection in the morning, indicating that 55.7% (54/97) of the true positive cases were missed.

CONCLUSION

Although a single detection of salivary pepsin in the morning is more economical, the sensitivity is too low, and it is necessary to detect it multiple times a day.

Association between gastroesophageal reflux disease and vocal fold polyps

The aim of this study is to explore the relationship between gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and vocal fold polyps (VFPs).This is a Case-Control study and was performed with the help of The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University.Twenty-seven patients with VFP and 20 controls without VFP were recruited between May and October 2018. All the subjects underwent a saliva pepsin test, completed the GerdQ questionnaire and 24-hour multichannel intraluminal impedance with pH (24-h MII-pH) monitoring. Twenty-five resected VFP specimens were examined with immunohistochemical (IHC) and double immunofluorescence (IF) staining.The incidence of GERD in the VFP group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P = .003). Patients with VFP had significantly higher GerdQ scores, pepsin concentrations, and pepsin-positive rates (P < .05). Moreover, the number of proximal and upright reflux events was significantly higher in the VFP group (P < .05). The pepsin concentration in saliva showed a significant positive correlation with the pepsin levels in tissues (r2 = 0.50, P = .011). Pepsin and TGF-β1-positive cells were colocalized with CD45RO-positive cells. IHC staining showed that the majority of VFP patients had a positive expression of pepsin (20/25, 80%) and pepsin-positive cells were found in both the squamous epithelium and mesenchymal tissues. IHC staining of TGF-β1 in VFP revealed findings similar to those of pepsin staining.GERD is an important risk factor for VFP. Pepsin may promote the aggregation of immune cells, increase the local cytokines, and promote inflammatory reaction, suggesting a potential new pathogenesis for VFP. The saliva pepsin test is a reliable method for GERD diagnosis.

Pepsin Promotes Activation of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor and Downstream Oncogenic Pathways, at Slightly Acidic and Neutral pH, in Exposed Hypopharyngeal Cells

Pepsin refluxate is considered a risk factor for laryngopharyngeal carcinogenesis. Non-acidic pepsin was previously linked to an inflammatory and tumorigenic effect on laryngopharyngeal cells in vitro. Yet there is no clear evidence of the pepsin-effect on a specific oncogenic pathway and the importance of pH in this process. We hypothesized that less acidic pepsin triggers the activation of a specific oncogenic factor and related-signalling pathway. To explore the pepsin-effect in vitro, we performed intermittent exposure of 15 min, once per day, for a 5-day period, of human hypopharyngeal primary cells (HCs) to pepsin (1 mg/mL), at a weakly acidic pH of 5.0, a slightly acidic pH of 6.0, and a neutral pH of 7.0. We have documented that the extracellular environment at pH 6.0, and particularly pH 7.0, vs. pH 5.0, promotes the pepsin-effect on HCs, causing increased internalized pepsin and cell viability, a pronounced activation of EGFR accompanied by NF-κB and STAT3 activation, and a significant upregulation of EGFR, AKT1, mTOR, IL1β, TNF-α, RELA(p65), BCL-2, IL6 and STAT3. We herein provide new evidence of the pepsin-effect on oncogenic EGFR activation and its related-signaling pathway at neutral and slightly acidic pH in HCs, opening a window to further explore the prevention and therapeutic approach of laryngopharyngeal reflux disease.

Analysis of Pepsin Concentration and Influencing Factors in Saliva of Elderly Nasal Feeding Patients

Background

Elderly patients receiving nasal feeding have weaker physiological function, and placement of a nasogastric tube weakens the natural barrier of the cardia-esophageal sphincter; therefore, the risk of gastroesophageal reflux (GER) is higher. Many studies have shown that pepsin is extremely sensitive in predicting GERD, so this study intends to investigate the level of pepsin in saliva of elderly patients with nasal feeding and analyze its influencing factors.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study. Patients admitted to the Chinese PLA General Hospital from April 2018 to October 2018 who received nasal feeding were included. One ml of saliva was collected from each patient in while sitting during fasting in the morning and 1 hour after lunch for 3 consecutive days. Pepsin was quantified by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The patients were predivided into two groups (≥7.75μg/ml or <7.75μg/ml) based on the median pepsin. Baseline and clinical factors were compared.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 91.09 ± 4.91 years. There were statistical differences in diabetes and feeding methods between the two groups. There was a positive correlation between the morning and postprandial pepsin levels (r = 0.442, P < 0.001), and has no statistical difference (P = 0.175). Multivariate analysis showed that the risk factors for higher pepsin levels were diabetes (odds ratio (OR): 2.67; 95% CI: 1.225-5.819, P = 0.013) and nasal feeding methods (OR: 2.475; 95% CI: 1.183-5.180, P=0.016).

Conclusions

For patients undergoing nasal feeding who are older than 80 years, the fasting and 1-hour postprandial pepsin concentration were consistent. Diabetes and feeding methods are risk factors for high pepsin levels. For the elderly over 80 years old, age has no influence on pepsin concentration.

Does Pepsin Saliva Concentration (Peptest™) Predict the Therapeutic Response of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Patients?

OBJECTIVE

To study the profile and the therapeutic response of patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) at the hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH) according to the initial pepsin saliva concentration.

METHODS

From January 2018 to January 2020, patients with positive LPR diagnosis at the HEMII-pH were consecutively recruited from 3 European Hospitals. Saliva pepsin concentration (Peptest™) was measured during the HEMII-pH testing period and patients were classified into 2 groups: negative versus positive Peptest. The clinical outcomes, that is, gastrointestinal and HEMII-pH findings, reflux symptom score-12 (RSS-12), and 3-month therapeutic response, were compared between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients completed the study. Among them, 30 patients had negative Peptest. Pharyngeal reflux events occurred outside 1-hour post-meal time in 74.0%, after the meals in 20.5% and nighttime in 5.5%. The pepsin saliva level was not significantly associated with the reflux events preceding the sample collection. Patients with positive Peptest had better improvement of RSS-12 digestive and respiratory subscores and oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal findings compared with patients with negative Peptest.

CONCLUSION

Patients with high saliva pepsin concentration had no stronger gastrointestinal, HEMII-pH, or clinical outcomes compared with those with low or undetectable saliva pepsin concentration.

The Role of Salivary Pepsin in the Diagnosis of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) Evaluated Using High-Resolution Manometry and 24-Hour Multichannel Intraluminal Impedance-pH Monitoring

BACKGROUND The Lyon Consensus classification confirms or rules out gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The refractory symptoms of patients with GERD taking proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are challenging in clinical practice. Salivary pepsin concentration was proposed as a diagnostic biomarker for GERD. We aimed to determine the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin concentration for patients with conclusive GERD, based on the Lyon classification, and the correlation of salivary pepsin concentration with parameters of high-resolution manometry and 24-h multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH in patients with PPI-refractory symptoms. MATERIAL AND METHODS Saliva samples obtained from 130 patients who were suspicious for GERD and had PPI-refractory symptoms were used for pepsin determination using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. All patients underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, high-resolution manometry, 24-h multichannel intraluminal impedance, and pH recording and were classified as conclusive GERD, inconclusive GERD, and evidence against GERD groups according to Lyon classification. RESULTS Salivary pepsin concentration was 8.2 ng/mL (3.8-17.8 ng/mL), 4.0 ng/mL (2.3-6.1 ng/mL), and 2.4 ng/mL (2.2-3.1 ng/mL) in conclusive GERD, inconclusive GERD, and evidence against GERD groups, respectively (P<0.001), and had a negative correlation with distal mean nocturnal baseline impedance and positive correlations with acid exposure time, total number of reflux events, and esophagogastric junction type. The area under the ROC curve of salivary pepsin for conclusive GERD was 0.76 (0.68-0.84), with a sensitivity of 76.36% and a specificity of 63.41% for conclusive GERD diagnosis at a cut-off value of 4.21 ng/mL. CONCLUSIONS Salivary pepsin test had moderate diagnostic value for conclusive GERD by Lyon classification in patients with PPI-refractory symptoms.

ACG Clinical Guidelines: Clinical Use of Esophageal Physiologic Testing

Esophageal symptoms are common and may indicate the presence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), structural processes, motor dysfunction, behavioral conditions, or functional disorders. Esophageal physiologic tests are often performed when initial endoscopic evaluation is unrevealing, especially when symptoms persist despite empiric management. Commonly used esophageal physiologic tests include esophageal manometry, ambulatory reflux monitoring, and barium esophagram. Functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) has recently been approved for the evaluation of esophageal pressure and dimensions using volumetric distension of a catheter-mounted balloon and as an adjunctive test for the evaluation of symptoms suggestive of motor dysfunction. Targeted utilization of esophageal physiologic tests can lead to definitive diagnosis of esophageal disorders but can also help rule out organic disorders while making a diagnosis of functional esophageal disorders. Esophageal physiologic tests can evaluate obstructive symptoms (dysphagia and regurgitation), typical and atypical GERD symptoms, and behavioral symptoms (belching and rumination). Certain parameters from esophageal physiologic tests can help guide the management of GERD and predict outcomes. In this ACG clinical guideline, we used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation process to describe performance characteristics and clinical value of esophageal physiologic tests and provide recommendations for their utilization in routine clinical practice.

Extra-Esophageal Presentation of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: 2020 Update

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is defined by the presence of symptoms induced by the reflux of the stomach contents into the esophagus. Although clinical manifestations of GERD typically involve the esophagus, extra-esophageal manifestations are widespread and less known. In this review, we discuss extra-esophageal manifestations of GERD, focusing on clinical presentations, diagnosis, and treatment. Common extra-esophageal manifestations of GERD include chronic cough, asthma, laryngitis, dental erosions, and gingivitis. Extra-esophageal involvement can be present also when classic GERD symptoms are absent, making the diagnosis more challenging. Although available clinical studies are heterogeneous and frequently of low quality, a trial with proton pump inhibitors can be suggested as a first-line diagnostic strategy in case of suspected extra-esophageal manifestations of GERD.

Pepsin and Laryngeal and Hypopharyngeal Carcinomas

Laryngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinomas are common malignant tumors of the head and neck, and the incidence of both is increasing. Laryngopharyngeal reflux refers to the retrograde flow of gastric contents into the larynx, oropharynx, and/or nasopharynx. It remains controversial whether laryngopharyngeal reflux is a risk factor for laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers. The refluxing substances mainly include hydrochloric acid, pepsin, and occasionally bile acids and bile salts, as well as bacteria that colonize the gastrointestinal tract. Loss of epithelium in the mucous membrane of the larynx and hypopharynx is thought to be caused by pepsin. Here, we review the relationships between laryngopharyngeal reflux and both laryngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinomas, as well as the significance of pepsin, methods of clinical detection, and the mechanism of carcinogenesis.

Clinical utility of salivary pepsin measurement in patients with proton pump inhibitor-refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms: a prospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

Salivary pepsin measurement has been reported to be useful for diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study aimed to clarify the usefulness of salivary pepsin measurement in patients with proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-refractory GERD symptoms without erosive esophagitis.

METHODS

One hundred and two patients were included. Over seven days after terminating PPI treatment, all patients underwent a 24-h pH-impedance test and salivary pepsin measurement. In patients whose main symptoms included laryngopharyngeal symptoms, a hypopharyngeal multichannel intraluminal impedance (HMII) test was performed, whereas in other patients, a conventional combined multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) test was performed. In the HMII tests, patients were divided into abnormal proximal exposure (APE) and non-APE groups. Salivary pepsin concentrations were compared according to acid exposure time (AET) values and were also compared between the APE and non-APE groups.

RESULTS

The median salivary pepsin concentration in patients with AET > 6% was significantly higher than that in patients with AET ≤ 6% (345.0 [170.0-469.3] ng/mL vs. 120.0 [97.0-290.1] ng/mL, p < 0.01). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of a positive test (> 109 ng/mL) to diagnose patients with AET > 6% were 75.0%, 51.3%, 32.1%, and 86.9%, respectively. There was no significant difference between concentrations in the APE group and concentrations in the non-APE group.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with PPI-refractory nonerosive reflux disease, salivary pepsin measurement may help diagnose patients who have conclusive evidence of reflux, whereas it is not adequate for identifying patients with APE.

Usefulness of Pep-Test for Laryngo-Pharyngeal Reflux: A Pilot Study in Primary Care

Background

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a digestive disorder characterized by nausea, regurgitation, and heartburn. Gastroesophageal reflux is the primary cause of laryngeal symptoms, especially chronic posterior laryngitis. The best diagnostic test for this disease is esophageal impedance-pH monitoring; however, it is poorly employed owing to its high cost and invasiveness. Salivary pepsin measured using a lateral flow device (Pep-test) has been suggested as an indirect marker of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). The present study tested the reliability of Pep-test in diagnosing LPR in uninvestigated primary care attenders presenting with chronic laryngeal symptoms, and evaluated the raw pepsin concentration in patients with LPR.

Methods

A multicenter, non-interventional pilot study was conducted on 86 suspected patients with LPR and 59 asymptomatic subjects as controls in three Italian primary care settings. A reflux symptom index questionnaire was used to differentiate patients with LPR (score >13) from controls (score <5). Two saliva samples were collected, and comparisons between the groups were performed using two-sided statistical tests, according to variable distributions.

Results

There was no statistical difference in the salivary pepsin positivity between LPR patients and controls, whereas the pepsin intensity value was higher in controls than in LPR patients.

Conclusion

A high prevalence of pepsin positivity was observed in asymptomatic controls. Pepsin measurement should not be considered as a diagnostic test for LPR in primary care patients.

Proximal reflux: biochemical mediators, markers, therapeutic targets, and clinical correlations

Airway reflux is implicated in the pathophysiology of a wide range of adult and pediatric upper and lower airway diseases. However, the diagnosis of proximal reflux-associated disease remains challenging due to evolving clinical criteria and institutional and regional variances in diagnostic practices. Evidence suggests that nonacidic contents of reflux may serve as both pathologic mediators of and biomarkers for reflux in the upper airway. Furthermore, they offer potential pharmaceutical and surgical intervention targets and are the focus of novel clinical diagnostic tools currently under investigation.

Optimization of Saliva Collection and Immunochromatographic Detection of Salivary Pepsin for Point-of-Care Testing of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

Salivary pepsin is a promising marker for the non-invasive diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). For reliable results regarding pepsin in saliva, it is critical to standardize the collection, storage, and pre-processing methods. In this study, we optimized the saliva collection protocols, including storage conditions, i.e., solution, temperature, and time, and the pre-processing filter for pepsin. Moreover, we prepared a simple immunochromatographic strip for the rapid detection of pepsin and evaluated its sensing performance. As a result, we selected a polypropylene (PP) filter as the pre-processing filter for salivary pepsin in low resource settings, such as those where point of care testing (POCT) is conducted. This filter showed a similar efficiency to the centrifuge (standard method). Finally, we detected the pepsin using gold nanoparticles conjugated with monoclonal pepsin antibody. Under optimized conditions, the lower limit of detection for pepsin test strips was determined as 0.01 μg/mL. Furthermore, we successfully detected the salivary pepsin in real saliva samples of LPR patients, which were pre-processed by the PP filter. Therefore, we expect that our saliva collection protocol and pepsin immunochromatographic strip can be utilized as useful tools for a non-invasive diagnosis/screening of LPR in POCT.

Assessing different diagnostic tests for gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of the current systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to assess the diagnostic characteristics of the gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire (GERDQ), proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) test, baseline impedance, mucosal impedance, dilated intercellular spaces (DIS), salivary pepsin, esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register database (from inception to 10 April 2018) for studies assessing the diagnostic characteristics of the GERDQ, PPI test, baseline impedance, mucosal impedance, DIS, or salivary pepsin and esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring/endoscopy in patients with GERD. Direct pairwise comparison and a NMA using Bayesian methods under random effects were performed. We also assessed the ranking probability.

RESULTS

A total of 40 studies were identified. The NMA found no significant difference among the baseline impedance, mucosal impedance, and esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy in terms of both sensitivity and specificity. It was also demonstrated that the salivary pepsin detected by the Peptest device had comparable specificity to esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy. Results of ranking probability indicated that esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy had highest sensitivity and specificity, followed by mucosal impedance and baseline impedance, whereas GERDQ had the lowest sensitivity and PPI test had the lowest specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and NMA of studies of patients with GERD, we found that baseline impedance and mucosal impedance have relatively high diagnostic performance, similar to esophageal pH/pH impedance monitoring and endoscopy.

Reflux characteristics in patients with gastroesophageal reflux-related chronic cough complicated by laryngopharyngeal reflux

Background

This study aimed to investigate the reflux characteristics in patients with gastroesophageal reflux-related chronic cough (GERC) complicated by laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

Methods

Patients with chronic cough were recruited. Reflux symptom index (RSI) scoring, cough symptom scoring, assessment of capsaicin cough sensitivity, and multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH monitoring (MII-pH) were performed.

Results

RSI score in GERC patients was significantly higher than that in patients with atopic cough (AC), cough variant asthma, eosinophilic bronchitis (EB), and upper airway cough syndrome (UACS) (P<0.05). The RSI score in non-acid GERC patients was significantly higher than that in acid GERC patients (P=0.003). The cut-off value of the RSI score was defined as 19 during diagnosis of non-acid GERC. In the RSI ≥19 group, there was more proximal reflux and more significant gas and non-acid reflux, and the efficacy of a combined use of baclofen or gabapentin was better than that of the RSI <19 group (P<0.05). The efficacy of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) at a routine dosage together with prokinetic agents in the RSI <19 group was better than that in the RSI ≥19 group (P=0.009).

Conclusions

LPR overlaps with GERC in part. GERC patients with higher RSI scores may present more proximal reflux, non-acid reflux, and gas reflux, and get better efficacy with neuromodulators (gabapentin or baclofen) used as an add-on therapy.

Validation in China of a non-invasive salivary pepsin biomarker containing two unique human pepsin monoclonal antibodies to diagnose gastroesophageal reflux disease

OBJECTIVES

Peptest is a new non-invasive reflux diagnostic test based on lateral flow technology that containing two highly specific human pepsin monoclonal antibodies for detecting pepsin, a biomarker for reflux disease. The primary aim of this multicenter clinical study was to validate the efficacy of Peptest in patients diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux and healthy controls in China.

METHODS

Patients with suspected gastroesophageal reflux underwent an endoscopy and were classified into non-erosive reflux disease and erosive esophagitis subgroups. A healthy control group was also recruited. All participants were given a reflux disease questionnaire-patients scoring greater than 12 and controls scoring zero. All participants provided a postprandial saliva sample and most patients gave an additional post-symptom sample for pepsin analysis.

RESULTS

Altogether 1032 participants aged between 19 and 78 years were recruited. They consisted of 488 patients with non-erosive reflux disease, 221 with erosive esophagitis and 323 healthy controls. The number of postprandial and post-symptom samples analyzed totaled 1031 and 692, respectively. The results across all centers showed an overall pepsin-positive sensitivity of 85%, a specificity of 60%, a positive predictive value of 82%, a negative predictive value of 65% and a positive likelihood ratio of 2.12.

CONCLUSION

The sensitivity of Peptest was high, but the specificity achieved in some centers was low, resulting overall in only a moderate specificity. Further diagnostic investigative studies are warranted.

Detection of pepsin and IL-8 in saliva of adult asthmatic patients

Objective: Asthma and gastric reflux disease are widespread and often coexisting diseases with complex interactions, leading some to suspect that asthma symptoms of patients with reflux may improve with anti-reflux therapy. The objective of this study was to determine whether pepsin in saliva, indicative of airway reflux, could be detected in patients with asthma of varying severity and test the requirement of citric acid as a pepsin preservative. Methods: Saliva samples were collected in the clinic (with/without citric acid) and upon waking the following morning from 25 asthmatic patients. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was performed for pepsin and interleukin-8 (IL-8), an inflammatory cytokine induced by pepsin in other airway epithelia. Pepsin induction of IL-8 was tested in a lung epithelial cell culture model. Results: Pepsin was detected in saliva from 14/25 patients (56%; mean concentration of pepsin in specimens where observed ±SD =80.3±87.5 ng/mL); significant agreement was found between samples collected in the presence/absence of citric acid. No significant associations were found with pepsin and clinical measures of asthma severity. IL-8 was detected in saliva from 22/25 patients (88%; mean IL-8 in all specimens where observed =3.27±3.91 ng/mL). IL-8 was significantly upregulated in human lung epithelial cells exposed to pepsin at pH7 in vitro (P=0.041). Conclusion: In summary, more than half of the asthma patients in this study were found to have pepsin in their saliva, indicative of airway reflux. These data support the use of salivary pepsin as a noninvasive tool for future investigation of airway reflux in a larger cohort. The data further suggest that collection in citric acid as a sample preservative is not warranted and that pooling of multiple saliva samples collected at various timepoints may improve sensitivity of pepsin detection and reduce costs incurred by multiple sample analysis in future studies.

Evaluation of Important Analytical Parameters of the Peptest Immunoassay that Limit its Use in Diagnosing Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

GOAL

To evaluate the analytical parameters of a lateral flow (LF) pepsin immunoassay (Peptest) and assess its suitability in the diagnostics of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

BACKGROUND

Peptest is a noninvasive assay to analyze pepsin in saliva, intended for use in GERD diagnostics. Although commercialized, fundamental studies on its performance are missing. The assay therefore requires basic analytical parameter evaluation to assess its suitability in clinical practice.

STUDY

Assay reaction's time dependence, reader device repeatability, and individual LF devices and longitudinal pepsin concentration reproducibility in individual subjects was evaluated. Salivary pepsin was analyzed in 32 GERD patients with extraesophageal reflux symptoms and 13 healthy individuals.

RESULTS

The assay's signal increase is not completed at the recommend readout time and continues to increase for another 25 minutes. The relative standard deviation of measurement was good when using the same LF device, ranging from 2.3% to 12.9%, but the reproducibility of 10 different individual LF devices was poor. The random error when analyzing the same saliva sample on 10 LF devices was as high as 36 ng/mL and this value is thus suggested as the positivity cut-off. Pepsin concentration in individual subjects during a 10-day period varied significantly. The sensitivity of the Peptest was 36.8% in the group with acid reflux and 23.1% in the group with weakly acid reflux. The specificity was 61.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

The Peptest assay's sensitivity and specificity is low, the results are highly variable and it should not be used as a near-patient diagnostic method in primary care.

Evaluation and Management of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease: State of the Art Review

OBJECTIVE

To review the current literature about the epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the literature on LPR epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment was conducted. Using the PRISMA statement, 3 authors selected relevant publications to provide a critical analysis of the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

The important heterogeneity across studies in LPR diagnosis continues to make it difficult to summarize a single body of thought. Controversies persist concerning epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment. No recent epidemiologic study exists regarding prevalence and incidence with the use of objective diagnostic tools. There is no survey that evaluates the prevalence of symptoms and signs on a large number of patients with confirmed LPR. Regarding diagnosis, an increasing number of authors used multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring, although there is no consensus regarding standardization of the diagnostic criteria. The efficiency of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy remains poorly demonstrated and misevaluated by incomplete clinical tools that do not take into consideration many symptoms and extralaryngeal findings. Despite the recent advances in knowledge about nonacid LPR, treatment protocols based on PPIs do not seem to have evolved.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The development of multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring and pepsin and bile salt detection should be considered for the establishment of a multiparameter diagnostic approach. LPR treatment should evolve to a more personalized regimen, including diet, PPIs, alginate, and magaldrate according to individual patient characteristics. Multicenter international studies with a standardized protocol could improve scientific knowledge about LPR.

Proton Pump Inhibitor Ameliorates Taste Disturbance among Patients with Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: A Randomized Controlled Study

Patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) were reported to suffer from hypogeusia that affects quality of life. Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is a useful drug in the treatment of LPR, but its effect on hypogeusia is not known. We therefore assessed the effects of PPI or a histamine H2 receptor antagonist (H2 blocker) on hypogeusia among patients with LPR. Both PPI and H2 blocker could inhibit acid reflux. LPR was diagnosed with reflux finding score and reflux symptom index. The visual analogue scale (VAS) of taste disturbance symptoms and the gustatory tests were assessed before and 8 weeks after treatment with esomeprazole, a PPI (20 patients, aged 50.0 ± 1.7 years) or famotidine, a H2 blocker (20 patients, aged 47.1 ± 1.8 years). There were no significant differences in VAS scores and recognition thresholds for four basic tastes between the two groups before treatment. Only PPI therapy significantly decreased the VAS scores, suggesting the improvement of taste perception. Moreover, PPI therapy significantly decreased recognition thresholds for bitter taste in the anterior tongue (chorda tympani nerve area) and the thresholds in the posterior tongue (glossopharyngeal nerve area) for salty, sour, and bitter tastes. By contrast, H2-blocker therapy caused no significant changes of thresholds in the anterior tongue, but improved the threshold only for bitter in the posterior tongue, the value of which was however significantly higher than that in PPI group. In conclusion, PPI could ameliorate hypogeusia by improving bitter, salty, and sour tastes among patients with LPR.

Measurement of Salivary Pepsin to Detect Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Is Not Ready for Clinical Application

A noninvasive test for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is desirable for adults and children. Salivary pepsin measurement has been proposed as such a test.^1-3 A previous study from our group demonstrated that a maximal salivary pepsin cutoff of >210 ng/mL using the PepTest device (RD Biomed, Hull, United Kingdom) had excellent specificity of 96% but modest sensitivity of 44% to diagnose GERD,⁴ leading to optimism about its potential use. In this study, we aimed to confirm the previously reported sensitivity and specificity in healthy volunteers and patients with heartburn, evaluate the association between a positive PepTest and response to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, assess if test-sensitivity can be improved for GERD when samples are taken over a 72-hour sampling period, and establish normal values of salivary pepsin in infants.

Pepsin in Saliva as a Diagnostic Marker for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is very common. Salivary pepsin detection has previously been considered as a method for GERD diagnosis. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the utility of salivary pepsin assay as a diagnostic tool of GERD. MATERIAL AND METHODS PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochran Library, and EMBASE (from January 1980 to 23 October 2018) were searched for pepsin in saliva for GERD diagnosis. We summarized the retrieved specificity, sensitivity, negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves data in the meta-analysis. RESULTS In final analysis, a total of 5 studies were included. The summary sensitivity, specificity, NLR, and PLR were 0.60 (95% CI 0.41-0.76), 0.71 (95% CI 0.51-0.86), 0.56 (95% CI 0.34-0.93), and 2.1 (95% CI 1.1-4.1), respectively. The pooled DOR was 4 (95% CI 1.0-11.0) and area under the ROC was 0.70 (95% CI 0.66-0.74). CONCLUSIONS The meta-analysis showed that pepsin in saliva has moderate diagnostic value for GERD, and is not as helpful as previously thought.

The Diagnostic Usefullness of the Salivary Pepsin Test in Symptomatic Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

OBJECTIVE

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux (LPR) is a disease characterized by the presence of symptoms, signs and tissue alterations in the aero-digestive upper tract as a consequence of the gastric contents retrograde movement. In most cases diagnosis is clinical and it is established by the presence of symptoms and endoscopic laryngeal signs. The aim of the study was to determine the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative Likelihood Ratio (LR) of the salivary pepsin assay (PEP-test, RD Biomed, Hull, UK) as diagnostic tool of LPR.

STUDY DESIGN

Diagnostic Accuracy Study.

METHOD

221 subjects aged between 26 and 68 years were recruited. All subjects completed the Reflux Symptom Index scale. PEP-test was carried out on fasting subjects, and a second test was performed one hour after the main meal, only on those subjects with a fasting negative result.

RESULTS

Fasting PEP-test showed a 98% specificity, 40% sensitivity, positive LR of 16.4 and negative LR of 0.61. The use of both PEP-test showed a 95% specificity, 48% sensitivity, positive LR of 9.61 and negative LR of 0.55.

CONCLUSIONS

The PEP-test is a simple, inexpensive, non-invasive and easily reproducible test that should be considered as an alternative diagnosis tool for LPR diagnosis. When there is a clinical suspicion of LPR disease, a positive result on the test could be considered diagnostic, but on subjects with negative results it should be complemented with more complex tests such as the 24-hour dual-channel pH-metry.

Saliva Pepsin Detection and Proton Pump Inhibitor Response in Suspected Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To evaluate the prediction value of saliva pepsin detection for an 8-week proton pump inhibitor (PPI) response in patients with a Reflux Symptoms Index (RSI) score ≥13, which indicates possible laryngopharyngeal reflux.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective individual single-cohort study.

METHODS

Patients were recruited who had experienced chronic laryngopharyngeal symptoms (RSI score ≥13) for more than 3 months after excluding other etiologies. The patients received PPI (40 mg of esomeprazole once daily) treatment for 8 weeks. Prior to treatment, the patients submitted saliva/sputum samples that were collected during the time symptoms were observed. The samples were taken for pepsin detection, and performed using the commercially available Peptest lateral flow device. The association of the Peptest results and PPI response were statistically analyzed with the χ² test.

RESULTS

Seventy-four patients completed the study, and upon completion of PPI treatment, the mean RSI score was significantly reduced from 19.22 ± 5.18 to 8.99 ± 5.69. Forty-four (59.5%) patients exhibited a good response as defined by an RSI score reduction ≥50%. The results of the Peptest were semiquantitatively graded as 0, 1, 2, 3 (negative, weak positive, moderate positive and strong positive, respectively) based upon the visual intensity of the test sample line as compared to the control line. Twenty-four patients (32.4%) exhibited grade 3 strong positive results. The Peptest strong positive results (P < .05) were significantly associated with a good PPI response, with the positive predictive value being 79.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of strong positive results for pepsin detection in saliva/sputum samples may be a useful, noninvasive method for predicting better PPI response in patients with suspected reflux induced chronic laryngopharyngeal symptoms.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2 Laryngoscope, 129:709-714, 2019.

Assessment of the Acute Effects of Carbonated Beverage Consumption on Symptoms and Objective Markers of Gastric Reflux

Previous studies have suggested that carbonated beverages may cause gastro-oesophageal reflux. Pepsin (the major enzyme secreted by the stomach) has been suggested to be an objective, acute marker of a reflux event. This pilot study aimed to investigate whether intake of carbonated beverages could affect pepsin concentration in saliva or reflux symptoms. This was assessed by a randomised, crossover trial where participants consumed 330 mL of beverage (carbonated cola, degassed cola or water) at separate visits. Saliva samples and symptom questionnaires were collected at baseline and over the 30 min postprandial period. Pepsin was detected in all saliva samples. No difference was found in the salivary pepsin concentrations between treatments at all time points. There were significantly higher scores (p > 0.05) for feelings of fullness, heartburn, urge to belch and frequency of belches after ingestion of carbonated cola than degassed cola and water. The ingestion of carbonated beverages did not appear to increase postprandial pepsin concentration in saliva compared to other beverages but did evoke higher levels of reflux-related symptoms such as fullness, heartburn and belching. This suggests carbonated beverages may cause symptoms associated with reflux but do not drive detectable levels of gastric juice to reach the oral cavity.

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease - LPRD

INTRODUCTION

Laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD) referes to an inflammatory reaction of the mucous membrane of pharynx, larynx and other associated respiratory organs, caused by a reflux of stomach contents into the esophagus. LPRD is considered to be a relatively new clinical entity with a vast number of clinical manifestations which are treated through different fields of medicine, often without a proper diagnosis. In gastroenterology it is still considered to be a manifestation of GERD, which stands for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Patients suffering from LPRD communicate firstly with their primary physicians, and since further treatment might ask for a multidisciplinary approach, it is important to have a unified approach among experts when treating these patients.

GOAL

This paper is written with the intention to assess the frequency of symptoms of LPR in family medicine, possible diagnostics and adequate treatment in primary health care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a prospective, descriptive cohort study. Authors used "The Reflux Symptom Index" (RSI) questionnaire. Examinees were all patients who reported to their family medicine office in Gracanica for the first time with new symptoms during a period of one year. Patients with positive results for LPR (over 13 points) were treated in accordance with the suggested algorithm and were monitored during the next year.

RESULTS

Out of 2123 examinees who showed symptoms of LPR, 390 tested positive according to the questionnaire. This group of examinees were treated in accordance with all suggested protocols and algorithms. 82% showed signs of improvement as a response to basic treatment provided by their physicians.

CONCLUSION

Almost every fifth patient who reports to their family medicine physician shows symptoms of LPR. On primary health care levels it is possible to establish some form of prevention, diagnostics and therapy for LPR in accordance with suggested algorithms. Only a small number of patients requires procedures which fall under other clinical fields.

Extraesophageal Symptoms and Diseases Attributed to GERD: Where is the Pendulum Swinging Now?

The purpose of this review is to outline the recent developments in the field of extraesophageal reflux disease and provide clinically relevant recommendations. The recommendations outlined in this review are based on expert opinion and on relevant publications from PubMed and EMbase. The Clinical Practice Updates Committee of the American Gastroenterological Association proposes the following recommendations: Best Practice Advice 1: The role of a gastroenterologist in patients referred for evaluation of suspected extra esophageal symptom is to assess for gastroesophageal etiologies that could contribute to the presenting symptoms. Best Practice Advice 2: Non-GI evaluations by ENT, pulmonary and/or allergy are essential and often should be performed initially in most patients as the cause of the extraesophageal symptom is commonly multifactorial or not esophageal in origin. Best Practice Advice 3: Empiric therapy with aggressive acid suppression for 6-8 weeks with special focus on response of the extraesophageal symptoms can help in assessing association between reflux and extraesophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 4: No single testing methodology exists to definitively identify reflux as the etiology for the suspected extra esophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 5: Constellation of patient presentation, diagnostic test results and response to therapy should be employed in the determination of reflux as a possible etiology in extra esophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 6: Testing may need to be off or on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy depending on patients' presenting demographics and symptoms in assessing the likelihood of abnormal gastroesophageal reflux. A. On therapy testing may be considered in those with high probability of baseline reflux (those with previous esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus or abnormal pH). B. Off therapy testing may be considered in those with low probability of baseline reflux with the goal of identifying moderate to severe reflux at baseline. Best Practice Advice 7: Lack of response to aggressive acid suppressive therapy combined with normal pH testing off therapy or impedance-pH testing on therapy significantly reduces the likelihood that reflux is a contributing etiology in presenting extraesophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 8: Surgical fundoplication is discouraged in those with extra esophageal reflux symptoms unresponsive to aggressive PPI therapy. Best Practice Advice 9: Fundoplication should only be considered in those with a mechanical defect (e.g., hiatal hernia), moderate to severe reflux at baseline off PPI therapy who have continued reflux despite PPI therapy and have failed more conservative non-GI treatments.