Saliva pepsin level of laryngopharyngeal reflux patients is not correlated with reflux episodes

Elevated Saliva Pepsin Concentration as a Risk Factor for Asthma in Children with Allergic Rhinitis: A Preliminary Study

Objective

This study aimed to explore whether saliva pepsin concentration (SPC) could be regarded as a risk factor for the occurrence and unfavorable control of asthma in children with allergic rhinitis.

Methods

A prospective study was conducted on a group of 20 consecutive children newly diagnosed with allergic rhinitis and asthma (referred to as the asthma group). All these children underwent fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) measurement, lung function tests, and assessment of asthma control using the 7-item Childhood Asthma Control Test (C-ACT) score. Simultaneously, a control group consisting of 20 children with simple allergic rhinitis, matched for baseline characteristics, was included. SPC measurement was performed in the two groups.

Results

The SPC value was significantly higher in the asthma group than that in the control group (165.0 ± 82.8 ng/mL vs 68.4 ± 34.5 ng/mL) (P < 0.001). In the asthma group, SPC was independently associated with FeNO, the ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) to forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced expiratory flow at 50% and 75% of FVC (FEF50 and FEF75) (all P < 0.05). The severity of nasal symptoms evaluated by the visual analogue scale (N-VAS) was independently associated with FEF75, the maximal mid-expiratory flow (MMEF), and C-ACT score (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Direct pepsin exposure and uncontrolled nasal symptoms may play crucial roles in the pathogenesis and progression of childhood allergic asthma. The SPC value can be considered as a risk factor for asthma in children with allergic rhinitis.

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.

Salivary pepsin as an independent predictor of treatment response for laryngopharyngeal reflux: prospective cohort study with multivariate analysis

To analyze the predictive value of salivary pepsin for treatment outcomes in laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) using multivariate analysis that includes various associated factors. This prospective cohort study was conducted between August 2020 and August 2022. Patients with LPR who had symptoms lasting more than 1 month and a reflux symptom index (RSI) of 14 or higher were enrolled. The participants received a 2-month regimen of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) treatment and lifestyle modification. Salivary pepsin was checked using fasting saliva before treatment. Salivary pepsin was detected more frequently in the good treatment response group (61.1%), compared to 14.3% in the poor response group. Similarly, patients with higher compliance to lifestyle modifications (> 90%) had a higher chance of a good response (91.7%) compared to those with lower compliance, who had a 53.8% chance of a good response. Other clinical factors have no significant association with treatment response. In multivariate analysis, both pretreatment salivary pepsin and higher compliance with lifestyle modification were found to be independent factors for treatment response (OR 14.457, CI 1.075 ~ 194.37 for both). This study found that positive salivary pepsin and strict lifestyle modification are independent predictors of treatment outcomes in LPR.

Association between oropharyngeal ph-monitoring, pepsin saliva concentration and degree of apnea-hypopnea index of obstructive sleep apnea

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) through oropharyngeal pH-monitoring and pepsin saliva measurements.

DESIGN

Prospective uncontrolled study.

METHODS

Patients with sleep disturbances and reflux symptoms underwent polysomnography, 24-h oropharyngeal pH-monitoring and saliva pepsin collections. The prevalence of LPR was investigated in OSA patients according to oropharyngeal pH-monitoring and pepsin measurements. A correlation analysis was performed between pH-monitoring findings, pepsin saliva levels, reflux symptom score-12 (RSS-12), reflux sign assessment (RSA), Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Pichot and arousal findings.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients completed the evaluations. LPR was detected in 34/37 (92%) and 29/34 (85%) patients at the oropharyngeal-pH monitoring and pepsin test, respectively. OSA was detected in 30 patients (81%). Among them, LPR was detected in 28/30 (93%) cases. Pharyngeal reflux events mainly occurred nighttime/supine in OSA patients. Both Ryan score and supine reflux time at pH < 6.5 were significantly associated with BMI and the RSA sub- and total scores (p < 0.02). Tongue-base hypertrophy score was positively associated with the number of micro-arousals (p = 0.027); the supine percent of pH < 6.5 (p = 0.030); morning (p = 0.030) and bedtime pepsin saliva measurements (p = 0.037). The bedtime pepsin saliva level was significantly associated with Ryan Score (p = 0.047); AHI (p = 0.017) and the sleep saturation < 90% time (p = 0.040). The saliva level of the morning pepsin was associated with a shortest paradoxical sleep phase (p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

OSA patients may have high prevalence of pharyngeal reflux events at the oropharyngeal pH-monitoring and high pepsin saliva measurements. Oropharyngeal pH-monitoring should be useful for the correlation between reflux and sleep findings in OSA patients. Future large cohort controlled studies are needed to determine the prevalence of LPR in OSA and healthy individuals.

Variability and accuracy of multiple saliva pepsin measurements in laryngopharyngeal reflux patients

OBJECTIVE

To study the variability and diagnostic value of multiple salivary pepsin measurements in the detection of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

METHODS

Patients with LPR symptoms were consecutively recruited from December 2019 to Augustus 2022. Twenty-one asymptomatic individuals completed the study. The diagnostic was confirmed with hypopharyngeal-esophageal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH). Patients collected three saliva samples during the 24-h testing period. Symptoms and findings were studied with reflux symptom score-12 and reflux sign assessment. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values of pepsin measurements were calculated considering morning, post-lunch and post-dinner samples. The consistency and relationship between HEMII-pH, pepsin measurements, and clinical features were investigated.

RESULTS

Morning, post-lunch and post-dinner saliva pepsin concentrations were measured in 42 patients. Pepsin measurements were 64.9%, 59.5%, and 59.0% sensitive for morning, post-lunch and post-dinner collections at cutoff ≥ 16 ng/mL. Considering the highest concentration of the three pepsin saliva collections, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and PPV were 70.5%, 73.0%; 66.7% and 78.9%, respectively. Morning pepsin measurements reported higher consistency, sensitivity, and specificity than post-dinner and post-lunch pepsin measurements.

CONCLUSION

The collection of several saliva pepsin samples improves the detection rate of LPR. In case of high clinical LPR suspicion and negative pepsin test, a HEMII-pH study could provide further diagnostic information.

Diagnostic Value of Pepsin Measurements in Dysphonia Attributed to Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the diagnostic value of pepsin test in detecting laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in patients with suspected LPR-induced dysphonia.

METHODS

Dysphonic and non-dysphonic patients with LPR at the 24-hour hypopharyngeal-esophageal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH) were recruited from January 2019 to November 2022. Patients collected saliva/sputum samples to measure pepsin concentrations. Symptoms and findings were studied through reflux symptom score (RSS) and reflux sign assessment (RSA). Voice quality was assessed with maximum phonation time, GRBAS, voice handicap index (VHI), and acoustic parameters at baseline and 3-month post-treatment. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values of pepsin tests for dysphonia-related to LPR were calculated at ≥16 ng/mL cutoff. The relationship between HEMII-pH, clinical features, voice quality outcomes, and pepsin measurement was investigated.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven patients with LPR at the HEMII-pH completed the evaluations accounting for 30 patients consulting for dysphonia. Dysphonic patients reported higher RSS than non-dysphonic patients. RSS, RSA, laryngeal findings, VHI, and grade of dysphonia significantly improved from baseline to 3-month posttreatment. Pepsin test detected LPR in 73% of dysphonic cases. The pepsin test was 73.3 sensitive and 18.9 specific when considering the highest pepsin level of morning, postlunch, and postdinner sputum collections. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV varied regarding the time of sputum collections. There was a strong significant association between the concentration of the morning pepsin test and the severity of laryngeal RSA score (P = 0.018). The morning pepsin saliva test concentration was predictive of the 3-month otolaryngological RSS (P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Pepsin test is a sensitive but poorly specific diagnostic approach for patients with dysphonia attributed to LPR. Multiple pepsin measurements may increase the sensitivity and predictive value of pepsin test. Future large-cohort studies are needed to investigate the accuracy of pepsin test in this population.

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 (r_s = 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.

The diagnostic value of pepsin concentration in saliva for laryngopharyngeal reflux disease

OBJECTIVE

To explore the diagnostic efficacy of pepsin concentration in saliva for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) disease.

METHODS

In this study, we recruited 40 participants with abnormal sensation of throat into the study who visited our hospital from March 2020 to December 2020. The 24 h multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH monitoring (24 h MII-pH), reflux symptom index (RSI) and reflux finding score (RFS), pepsin concentration in saliva were collected. The Cohen's kappa test and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were performed to determine and compare the sensitivity and specificity of five diagnostic methods: RSI; RFS, pepsin concentration, RSI + RFS, RSI + RFS + pepsin concentration.

RESULTS

The area under the curve (AUC) of RSI, RFS, pepsin concentration, RSI + RFS, RSI + RFS + pepsin concentration were 0.767, 0.733, 0.870, 0.750,0.867, respectively. That is, the pepsin concentration has maximum AUC (the cutoff point is 219.47 (ng/mL); the sensitivity and 1-specificity is 0.300, 0.933, respectively.). The positive predictive value was 90.3% (28/31), and the negative predictive value was 77.8% (7/9). The Cohen's kappa coefficients of the five diagnostic subgroups were: RSI 0.486 (95% CI 0.207-0.764, P = 0.001); RFS 0.333 (95% CI 0.021-0.644, P = 0.032); RSI + RFS: 0.517 (95% CI 0.205-0.829, P = 0.001); pepsin concentration: 0.699 (95% CI 0.379-0.931, P = 0.001); RSI + RFS + pepsin concentration: 0.500 (95% CI 0.181-0.819, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The pepsin concentration has the maximum AUC area and highest consistency with the 24 h MII-pH. Therefore, it has certain value in the screening and diagnosis of diseases related to LPR disease.

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.

The Profiles of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux in Patients With Different Vocal Fold Lesions

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the profiles of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and the relationship between hypopharyngeal-proximal reflux episodes (HREs) and the positive rate of salivary pepsin testing in patients with vocal fold lesions (VFLs).

METHODS

The enrolled patients were divided into vocal fold cancer group (VFCG), vocal fold leukoplakia group (VFLG), benign vocal fold lesion group (BVFLG) and control group (CG). Patients benefited from multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (MII-pH) and multi-time point salivary pepsin testing (MTPSPT). The LPR profiles of patients with VFLs were studied by analyzing the MII-pH findings. The relationship between HREs and positive rate of MTPSPT was investigated through the nonparametric test.

RESULTS

177 patients were included. According to 24 h MII-pH, the occurrence of HREs tended to increase after meals. 55.75%, 63.98%, 66.82% and 55.77% of the HREs in the VFCG, VFLG, BVFLG and CG occurred within 3 h after meals, respectively. The overall positive rate of MTPSPT was higher in the VFCG than the remaining groups. In the VFCG, there was a significant correlation between overall positive results of MTPSPT and HREs occurring within 3 h after meals.

CONCLUSION

In the Chinese population, the occurrence of HREs tend to more frequently after meals in patients with VFLs, and most HREs occur within 3 h after meals. By analyzing the 24h MII-pH findings, we can develop a more individualized anti-reflux therapeutic strategy for LPR patients.

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.

Clinical Update Findings about pH-Impedance Monitoring Features in Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Patients

Purpose: The diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is commonly based on non-specific symptoms and findings and a positive response to an empirical therapeutic trial. The therapeutic response is, however, unpredictable, and many patients need pH-impedance monitoring to confirm the diagnosis. Methods: A review of the recent literature was conducted in PubMED, Scopus, and Embase about the pH-study features of LPR patients. A summary of last evidence was proposed. Results: The awareness of otolaryngologists about indications and interpretation of pH-impedance monitoring is low. The hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH) is the most reliable examination determining the type and composition of hypopharyngeal reflux events (HRE) and the LPR features. The use of HEMII-pH is important to confirm the diagnosis in selected patients because non-specificity of symptoms and findings. There are no international consensus guidelines for the LPR diagnosis at the HEMII-pH. However, most studies supported the occurrence of >1 acid/weakly acid/nonacid HRE as diagnostic threshold. HREs are more frequently gaseous, weakly/nonacid compared with reflux events of gastroesophageal reflux. HREs occurred as daytime and upright, which does not support the value of double proton pump inhibitors or bedtime alginate. Oropharyngeal pH-monitoring is another approach reporting different sensitivity and specificity outcomes from HEMII-pH. The use of Ryan score for the LPR diagnosis at the oropharyngeal pH monitoring may be controversial regarding the low consideration of alkaline HREs. Conclusions: The awareness of otolaryngologists about HEMII-pH indication, features, and interpretation is an important issue regarding the high prevalence of LPR in outpatients consulting in otolaryngology. The HEMII-pH findings may indicate a more personalized treatment considering type and occurrence time of HREs.

[Effect of proton pump inhibitort on salivary pepsin concentration in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux]

Objective:To investigate the effect of proton pump inhibitor（PPI） treatment on salivary pepsin concentration in laryngopharyngeal reflux（LPR）. Methods:152 patients with suspected LPR complaining non-specific symptoms such as foreign body sensation, dry throat, phlegm and other non-specific symptoms were enrolled， in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University from August 2019 to December 2020. According to the scores of reflux symptom index（RSI） and reflux finding score（RFS）, all the patients were divided into LPR （+） group and LPR （-） group, RSI （+） group and RSI （-） group, RFS （+） group and RFS （-） group . Patients in the LPR （+） group were reassessed after 1 month of PPI treatment. Saliva samples were collected from all the patients at initial diagnosis and follow-up diagnosis after treatment. The salivary pepsin concentration was determined by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay （ELISA）. The differences of RSI, RFS scores and salivary pepsin concentrations before and after treatment were compared. Results:The median concentration of salivary pepsin in LPR （+） group was significantly higher than that in LPR （-） group, and （73.01 ng/mL vs 25.66 ng/mL, P<0.01）, the median concentration of salivary pepsin in RFS （+） group were significantly higher than that in RFS （-） group（78.00 ng/mL vs 35.79 ng/mL, P<0.01） Furthermore, the median scores of RSI （11.00 vs 7.00, P<0.05） and RFS （9.00 vs 7.00, P<0.01） of LPR （+） patients notably decreased after PPI treatment for 1 month, and the salivary pepsin median concentration was memorably lower than that before treatment（53.60 ng/mL vs 46.49 ng/mL, P<0.05）. Meanwhile, the scores of symptoms such as pharyngeal paraesthesia, heartburn, chest pain, stomachache, and the scores of signs such as false vocal fold, erythema or congestion, vocal fold edema, posterior commissure hypertrophy and thick endolaryngeal mucus were conspicuously lower after treatment than those before treatment（P<0.05）. Conclusion:After 1 month of PPI treatment, the scores of partial symptoms and signs, and the salivary pepsin concentrations of LPR patients decreased significantly, suggesting that pepsin plays an important role in the pathogenesis of LPR, and pepsin may be closely related to the symptoms and signs such as pharyngeal paraesthesia and vocal fold edema.

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.

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.

Diagnostic Value of the PeptestTM in Detecting Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

BACKGROUND

The Peptest^TM is a non-invasive diagnostic test for measuring the pepsin concentration in saliva, which is thought to correlate with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of the Peptest in detecting LPR based on 24-h multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) monitoring using several hypopharyngeal reflux episodes as criterion for LPR.

METHODS

Patients with suspected LPR were examined with the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI), Reflux Finding Score (RFS), fasting Peptest, and MII-pH monitoring. We calculated the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the Peptest, RSI, and RFS based on the threshold of one and six hypopharyngeal reflux episodes.

RESULTS

Altogether, the data from 46 patients were analyzed. When one hypopharyngeal reflux episode was used as a diagnostic threshold for LPR, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were, respectively, as follows: 35%, 33%, 100%, 100%, and 3%, for the Peptest; 39%, 40%, 0%, 95%, and 0%, for the RSI; and 57%, 58%, 0%, 96%, and 0%, for the RFS. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the Peptest for diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were 46%, 27%, 63%, 40.0%, and 48%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A positive Peptest is highly supportive of a pathological LPR diagnosis. However, a negative test could not exclude LPR.

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.

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and Inflammatory Responses in Mucosal Barrier Dysfunction of the Upper Aerodigestive Tract

The upper aerodigestive tract (UAT) is the first line of defense against environmental stresses such as antigens, microbes, inhalants, foods, etc., and mucins, intracellular junctions, epithelial cells, and immune cells are the major constituents of this defensive mucosal barrier. Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is recognized as an independent risk factor for UAT mucosal disorders, and in this review, we describe the components and functions of the mucosal barrier and the results of LPR-induced mucosal inflammation in the UAT. We discuss the interactions between the refluxate and the mucosal components and the mechanisms through which these damaging events disrupt and alter the mucosal barriers. In addition, we discuss the dynamic alterations in the mucosal barrier that might be potential therapeutic targets for LPR-induced disorders.

Laryngopharyngeal reflux: The microbiota theory

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a prevalent disease associated with non-specific symptoms and findings. Many gray areas persist in the pathogenesis of LPR, the diagnosis and the treatment. Symptoms are poorly correlated with fiberoptic signs or hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring findings. The therapeutic response remains uncertain with some resistant patients to medical or surgical treatment. The development of LPR-symptoms and findings may be related to the refluxate of a myriad of gastroduodenal enzymes, which may modify the laryngopharyngeal and oral microbiome leading to mucosa maintenance and recovery impairments. The diet of patient is important because it may impact the microbiome composition and some foods are known to increase the number of hypopharyngeal reflux events. The number of hypopharyngeal reflux events may be increased by autonomic nerve dysfunction that may have an important role in the persistence of LPR-symptoms.

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: A State-of-the-Art Algorithm Management for Primary Care Physicians

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a common disease in the general population with acute or chronic symptoms. LPR is often misdiagnosed in primary care because of the lack of typical gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms and findings on endoscopy. Depending on the physician's specialty and experience, LPR may be over- or under-diagnosed. Management of LPR is potentially entirely feasible in primary care as long as General Practitioners (GPs) are aware of certain "red flags" that will prompt referral to a Gastroenterologist or an Otolaryngologist. The use of patient-reported outcome questionnaires and the consideration of some easy ways to diagnose LPR without special instrumentation oropharyngeal findings may help the GP to diagnose and often manage LPR. In this review, we provide a practical algorithm for LPR management for GPs and other specialists that cannot perform fiberoptic examination. In this algorithm, physicians have to exclude some confounding conditions such as allergy or other causes of pharyngolaryngitis and "red flags". They may prescribe an empirical treatment based on diet and behavioral changes with or without medication, depending on the symptom severity. Proton pump inhibitors and alginates remain a popular choice in order to protect the upper aerodigestive tract mucosa from acid, weakly acid and alkaline pharyngeal reflux events.

Saliva Pepsin Concentration of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Patients Is Influenced by Meals Consumed Before the Samples

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To assess the impact of diet on the saliva pepsin concentration of patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

STUDY DESIGN

Non-controlled Prospective Study.

METHODS

Patients with positive LPR regarding hypopharyngeal-esophageal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH) were enrolled from three European Hospitals. Patients collected three saliva samples, respectively, in the morning (fasting), and 1 to 2 hour after lunch and dinner. Patients carefully detailed foods and beverages consumed during meals and before the pepsin samples. The 3-month treatment was based on the association of diet, proton pump inhibitors, alginate, or magaldrate regarding the HEMII-pH characteristics. Reflux Symptom Score (RSS) and Reflux Sign Assessment (RSA) were used for assessing the pre- to posttreatment clinical evolution. The Refluxogenic Diet Score and the Refluxogenic Score of a Dish (RESDI) were used to assess the refluxogenic potential of foods and beverages. The relationship between saliva pepsin concentration, HEMII-pH, RESDI, RSS, and RSA was investigated through multiple linear regression.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients were included. The saliva pepsin concentration of the 24-hour period of testing was significantly associated with foods and beverages consumed during the testing period and the evening dinner (r_s = 0.973, P < .001). RSS and RSA significantly improved throughout treatment. The level of saliva pepsin in the morning was a negative predictive factor of the therapeutic response regarding RSA and RSS (P < .036).

CONCLUSIONS

Foods and beverages may significantly impact the saliva pepsin concentration of patients with LPR. Patients with high-level saliva pepsin in the morning had lower therapeutic response compared with those with low-level saliva pepsin.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 131:350-359, 2021.

Hypopharyngeal-Esophageal Impedance-pH Monitoring Profiles of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Patients

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To investigate the profile of patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) at hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (HEMII-pH) monitoring and the relationship between hypopharyngeal-proximal reflux episodes (HREs) and saliva pepsin concentration.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective non-controlled.

METHODS

Patients were recruited from three European hospitals from January 2018 to October 2019. Patients benefited from HEMII-pH monitoring and saliva collections to measure saliva pepsin concentration in the same time. Saliva pepsin concentration was measured in the morning (fasting), after lunch, and after dinner. The LPR profile of patients was studied through a breakdown of the HEMII-pH findings over the 24 hours of testing. The relationship between the concentrations of saliva pepsin and 24-hour HREs was studied through linear multiple regression.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-six patients completed the study. The HEMII-pH analyses revealed that 73.99% of HREs occurred outside 1-hour postmeal times, whereas 20.49% and 5.52% of HREs occurred during the 1-hour postmeal and nighttime, respectively. Seventy-four patients (58.73%) did not have nighttime HREs. Patients with both daytime and nighttime HREs had more severe HEMII-pH parameters and reflux symptom score compared with patients with only daytime HREs. There were no significant associations between HREs and saliva pepsin concentration.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike gastroesophageal reflux disease, HREs occur less frequently after meals and nighttime. The analysis of the HEMII-pH profile of the LPR patients has to be considered to develop future personalized therapeutic strategies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 131:268-276, 2021.

Gastroesophageal reflux in laryngopharyngeal reflux patients: Clinical features and therapeutic response

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical features and the therapeutic response of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) patients with or without gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

Patients with LPR symptoms were enrolled from three European Hospitals. The diagnosis of LPR and GERD was made through impedance-pH monitoring (MII-pH). A gastrointestinal endoscopy was realized in patients with digestive complaints or ≥60 years old. The 3- to 6-month treatment was based on the association of diet, pantoprazole, alginate, and magaldrate regarding the MII-pH characteristics. Reflux Symptom Score (RSS) and Reflux Sign Assessment (RSA) were used to evaluate the clinical evolution throughout treatment. The gastrointestinal endoscopy findings, clinical features, and therapeutic response were compared between patients with LPR and GERD (LPR/GERD) and patients with LPR.

RESULTS

One hundred and eleven LPR patients were included, 54 being LPR/GERD. LPR/GERD patients had a higher number of proximal reflux episodes compared with LPR patients. The prevalence of esophagitis, hernia hiatal, and lower esophageal sphincter insufficiency did not differ between groups. The presence of GERD was strongly associated with acid LPR. Patients without GERD had a higher proportion of nonacid and mixed LPR compared with LPR/GERD patients. The pre- to posttreatment evolutions of RSS and RSA were quite similar in both groups, with the exception of the 3- to 6-month improvement of digestive symptoms, which was better in LPR/GERD group. The therapeutic success rates were 79.6% and 77.2% in GERD/LPR and LPR group, respectively.

CONCLUSION

GERD is predictive of acid LPR. The clinical evolution and the therapeutic response rates were quite similar in both groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 130: E479-E489, 2020.

Validity and Reliability of the Reflux Sign Assessment

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate the Reflux Sign Assessment (RSA), a clinical instrument evaluating the physical findings of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

METHODS

A total of 106 patients completed a 3-month treatment based on the association of diet, pantoprazole, alginate, or magaldrate with the LPR characteristics (acid, nonacid, mixed). Forty-two asymptomatic individuals completed the study (control group). The RSA results and reflux finding score (RFS) were documented for the LPR patients at baseline and after treatment. Intrarater reliability was assessed through a test-retest blinded evaluation of signs (7-day intervals). Interrater reliability was assessed by comparing the RSA evaluations of three blinded otolaryngologists through Kendall's W. Responsiveness to change was evaluated through a comparison of the baseline and 3-month posttreatment findings. The RSA cutoffs for determining the presence and absence of LPR were examined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 102 LPR patients completed the study (68 females). The mean age was 53 years. The mean RSA at baseline was 25.95 ± 9.58; it significantly improved to 18.96 ± 7.58 after 3 months of therapy (P < .001). RSA exhibited good intra- (r = 0.813) and interrater (Kendall's W = 0.663) reliabilities (N = 56). There was no significant association between the RSA, gastrointestinal endoscopy findings, and the types of reflux (acid, nonacid, or mixed) according to impedance-pH monitoring. An RSA >14 may be suggestive of LPR.

CONCLUSION

The RSA is a complete clinical instrument evaluating both laryngeal and extralaryngeal findings associated with LPR. The RSA demonstrated high intra- and interrater reliabilities and responsiveness to change.