Comparison of Reflux Symptom Score versus Reflux Symptom Index in screening laryngopharyngeal reflux

The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease and laryngopharyngeal reflux in patients with dysphagia after radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in post-irradiated patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, 31 NPC and 12 control patients completed questionnaires for GERD/LPR before esophageal manometry and 24-h pH monitoring. The DeMeester score and reflux finding score (RFS) were used to define GERD and LPR, respectively. Risk factors were identified.

RESULTS

51.6% of NPC and 8.3% of control patients, and 77.4% of NPC and 33% of control patients, were GERD-positive and LPR-positive, respectively. The GERD/LPR questionnaire failed to identify either condition in patients with NPC. No parameter differences in esophageal manometry or pneumonia incidence were noted between GERD/LPR-positive and GERD/LPR-negative patients. Post radiotherapy duration, high BMI, lack of chemotherapy, and dysphagia were positive risk factors for GERD/LPR.

CONCLUSIONS

A high prevalence of GERD/LPR in patients with post-irradiated NPC exists, but reflux symptoms are inadequate for diagnosis.

Correlation of Dry Eye Disease and Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Based on Improved Symptoms With Combined Therapy

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the correlation between dry eye disease (DED) and laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) from the perspective of treatment response.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional studies.

SETTING

Analysis of data from patients with DED-related symptoms and LPR-related symptoms from May 2022 to January 2023 at AIER Eye Hospital (Hainan).

METHODS

The Ocular Surface Symptom Index (OSDI) scales and The Reflux Symptom Score (RSS) were investigated in patients attending China Aier Eye Hospital (Hainan) from May 2022 to January 2023, and OSDI scores >12 were categorized as DED, and RSS scores >13 were categorized as suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux (suspected LPR). Patients with DED and suspected LPR were randomly divided into three groups (group A: 0.3% sodium vitreous acid drops and 1% cyclosporine A drops only; group B: 0.3% sodium vitreous acid drops, 1% cyclosporine A drops, and Gastroftal tablets containing magnesium alginate and cimicifuga oil and esomeprazole; and group C: Gastroftal tablets and esomeprazole only orally) and were reviewed after 3 months for the RSS- and DED-related examinations.

RESULT

Two hundred and nineteen patients were enrolled. One hundred and ninety-one DED-positive and 28 DED-negative patients, 84 suspected LPR-positive and 135 LPR-negative patients, and the OSDI scores of LPR patients were significantly higher than those of LPR-negative patients (P < 0.001). Parameters related to DED and LPR were significantly lower in patients in group B than in groups A and C after treatment (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LPR and DED are closely related. For patients with both LPR and DED, treating LPR and DED at the same time may be a better option.

A Study of the Diagnostic Value of the Sign and Symptom Questionnaires for Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the diagnostic value of symptom questionnaires, sign questionnaires, and the combination of 2 questionnaires for laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, single-centered.

SETTING

Seventy-seven patients who were hospitalized in the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery from October 2022 to April 2023 were included.

METHODS

Included patients completed the RSS, RSI, RSA, and RFS questionnaires and underwent 24-hour hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (HEMII-pH). The RSS, RSI, RSA, RFS, RSS+RSA, RSS+RFS, RSI+RSA, RSI+RFS, and RSI+RFS diagnostic value were compared using Cohen's k test and receiver operating characteristic analysis.

RESULTS

Based on the 24 hours HEMII-pH results, 52 patients had LPRD, and 25 patients did not have LPRD. The Kappa values of RSS, RSI, RSA, RFS, RSS+RSA,2 RSS+RFS, RSI+RSA, and RSI+RFS with the 24 hours HEMII-pH monitoring results were 0.565, 0.442, 0.318, 0.431, 0.517, 0.631, 0.451, and 0.461, respectively. The RSS+RFS questionnaire had the highest AUC of 0.836 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.762-0.909) and the RSA questionnaire had the lowest AUC (AUC = 0.665, 95% CI 0.560-0.790). The sensitivity of RSS was the highest (98%), the specificities of RSS+RFS and RSI+RFS were the highest (96%), and the specificity of RSS was the lowest (52%). RSS+RFS had a sensitivity of 75%, second only to RSS and RFS (76%).

CONCLUSION

Among the 8 methods, the RSS combined with the RFS had the highest concordance with 24 hours HEMII-pH monitoring results and AUC values when screening for LPRD.

Consensus for voice quality assessment in clinical practice: guidelines of the European Laryngological Society and Union of the European Phoniatricians

INTRODUCTION

To update the European guidelines for the assessment of voice quality (VQ) in clinical practice.

METHODS

Nineteen laryngologists-phoniatricians of the European Laryngological Society (ELS) and the Union of the European Phoniatricians (UEP) participated to a modified Delphi process to propose statements about subjective and objective VQ assessments. Two anonymized voting rounds determined a consensus statement to be acceptable when 80% of experts agreed with a rating of at least 3/4. The statements with ≥ 3/4 score by 60-80% of experts were improved and resubmitted to voting until they were validated or rejected.

RESULTS

Of the 90 initial statements, 51 were validated after two voting rounds. A multidimensional set of minimal VQ evaluations was proposed and included: baseline VQ anamnesis (e.g., allergy, medical and surgical history, medication, addiction, singing practice, job, and posture), videolaryngostroboscopy (mucosal wave symmetry, amplitude, morphology, and movements), patient-reported VQ assessment (30- or 10-voice handicap index), perception (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, and Strain), aerodynamics (maximum phonation time), acoustics (Mean F0, Jitter, Shimmer, and noise-to-harmonic ratio), and clinical instruments associated with voice comorbidities (reflux symptom score, reflux sign assessment, eating-assessment tool-10, and dysphagia handicap index). For perception, aerodynamics and acoustics, experts provided guidelines for the methods of measurement. Some additional VQ evaluations are proposed for voice professionals or patients with some laryngeal diseases.

CONCLUSION

The ELS-UEP consensus for VQ assessment provides clinical statements for the baseline and pre- to post-treatment evaluations of VQ and to improve collaborative research by adopting common and validated VQ evaluation approach.