Ranjbar PA, Alnouri G, Vance D, Park J, Suresh A, Acharya P, Sataloff RT. The Prevalence of Esophageal Disorders Among Voice Patients With Laryngopharyngeal Reflux-A Retrospective Study.
J Voice 2020;
36:410-412. [PMID:
32873429 DOI:
10.1016/j.jvoice.2020.07.005]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2020] [Revised: 07/03/2020] [Accepted: 07/06/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
The goal of this study was to determine the prevalence of esophageal disorders among voice patients with intractable laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) who have undergone 24 pH impedance and esophageal manometry.
METHODS
A retrospective chart review was performed of patients with LPR-associated dysphonia in the absence of subjective dysphagia who presented between January 1, 2007 and June 30, 2019 and underwent 24 pH impedance and esophageal manometry studies after inadequate response to lifestyle modifications, high dose of Proton Pump Inhibitor (PPIs), H2 blockers, alkaline water, and Gaviscon (GlaxoSmithKline, Warren, NJ, USA). The comorbidities, medications, Strobovideolaryngoscopy findings, 24 pH impedance, and esophageal manometry results were analyzed.
RESULTS
The study included 109 patients ages 19 to 80 years old, with a mean age of 51.5 (SD 16.8). About 24.8% of the 109 subjects were found to have peristaltic wave abnormalities indicating esophageal dysmotility (11% with esophageal stasis). Lower esophageal sphincter pressures were normotensive in 56.9% of patients, hypertensive in 24.8%, and hypotensive in 18.4% of patients. In addition, the upper esophageal sphincter pressures were normotensive in 57.8% of patients, hypertensive in 36.7%, and hypotensive in 2.8% of patients. About 12.6% had both lower esophageal sphincter and upper esophageal sphincter dysfunction (hypertensive or hypotensive). The average total reflux events in patients exhibiting dysmotility on manometry 101.81, which was significantly higher compared with the mean total of 61.28 in the group of patients without dysmotility (P= 0.0396). In addition, there was a significantly higher prevalence of total events that were weakly acidic in the group with dysmotility compared with the group without (all patients performed the study on reflux medications, mean of total weakly acidic events 70.2 in dysmotility group vs 44.2 in normal motility group, P= 0.0427).Finally, the average number of total supine reflux events and the total acidic supine events were both significantly higher in the dysmotility group compared with the group without motility problems (P = 0.0199 and P = 0.0213, respectively).
CONCLUSION
Esophageal dysmotility may be a significant cofactor in voice patients with refractory LPR on appropriate reflux medications and lifestyle modifications. Further research is advised.
Collapse