Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Is an Eternally Rolling Boulder

Laryngopharyngeal reflux disease: Updated examination of mechanisms, pathophysiology, treatment, and association with gastroesophageal reflux disease

Laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD) is an inflammatory condition in the laryngopharynx and upper aerodigestive tract mucosa caused by reflux of stomach contents beyond the esophagus. LPRD commonly presents with sym-ptoms such as hoarseness, cough, sore throat, a feeling of throat obstruction, excessive throat mucus. This complex condition is thought to involve both reflux and reflex mechanisms, but a clear understanding of its molecular mechanisms is still lacking. Currently, there is no standardized diagnosis or treatment protocol. Therapeutic strategies for LPRD mainly include lifestyle modifications, proton pump inhibitors and endoscopic surgery. This paper seeks to provide a comprehensive overview of the existing literature regarding the mechanisms, patho-physiology and treatment of LPRD. We also provide an in-depth exploration of the association between LPRD and gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Diagnosis of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: Past, Present, and Future-A Mini-Review

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a variant of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in which gastric refluxate irritates the lining of the aerodigestive tract and causes troublesome airway symptoms or complications. LPR is a prevalent disease that creates a significant socioeconomic burden due to its negative impact on quality of life, tremendous medical expense, and possible cancer risk. Although treatment modalities are similar between LPR and GERD, the diagnosis of LPR is more challenging than GERD due to its non-specific symptoms/signs. Due to the lack of pathognomonic features of endoscopy, mounting evidence focused on physiological diagnostic testing. Two decades ago, a dual pH probe was considered the gold standard for detecting pharyngeal acidic reflux episodes. Despite an association with LPR, the dual pH was unable to predict the treatment response in clinical practice, presumably due to frequently encountered artifacts. Currently, hypopharygneal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH catheters incorporating two trans-upper esophageal sphincter impedance sensors enable to differentiate pharyngeal refluxes from swallows. The validation of pharyngeal acid reflux episodes that are relevant to anti-reflux treatment is, therefore, crucial. Given no diagnostic gold standard of LPR, this review article aimed to discuss the evolution of objective diagnostic testing and its predictive role of treatment response.

Upper Esophageal Sphincter Compression Device as an Adjunct to Proton Pump Inhibition for Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

BACKGROUND

The Reflux Band, an external upper esophageal sphincter (UES) compression device, reduces esophago-pharyngeal reflux events. This study aimed to assess device efficacy as an adjunct to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

METHODS

This two-phase prospective clinical trial enrolled adults with at least 8 weeks of laryngeal symptoms (sore throat, throat clearing, dysphonia) not using PPI therapy at two tertiary care centers over 26 months. Participants used double dose PPI for 4 weeks in Phase 1 and the external UES compression device nightly along with PPI for 4 weeks in Phase 2. Questionnaire scores and salivary pepsin concentration were measured throughout the study. The primary endpoint of symptom response was defined as reflux symptom index (RSI) score ≤ 13 and/or > 50% reduction in RSI.

RESULTS

Thirty-one participants completed the study: 52% male, mean age 47.9 years (SD 14.0), and mean body mass index (BMI) 26.2 kg/m² (5.1). Primary endpoint was met in 11 (35%) participants after Phase 1 (PPI alone) and 17 (55%) after Phase 2 (Device + PPI). Compared to baseline, mean RSI score (24.1 (10.9)) decreased at end of Phase 1 (PPI alone) (21.9 (9.7); p = 0.06) and significantly decreased at end of Phase 2 (Device + PPI) (15.5 (10.3); p < 0.01). Compared to non-responders, responders to Device + PPI had a significantly lower BMI (p = 0.02) and higher salivary pepsin concentration (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This clinical trial highlights the potential efficacy of the external UES compression device (Reflux Band) as an adjunct to PPI for patients with LPR (ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT03619811).

Prevalence and clinical significance of esophageal motility disorders in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Esophageal motor dysfunction may underlie impaired bolus/refluxate clearance in laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). However, the prevalence of esophageal dysmotility and its correlation with reflux parameters and symptoms in LPR is not well established. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of coexisting esophageal dysmotility among patients with suspected LPR.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of 194 consecutive patients with LPR symptoms referred for high-resolution manometry (HRM) and combined hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH testing at a tertiary center in March 2018 to August 2019. Validated symptom surveys were prospectively collected at time of testing, including Reflux Symptom Index, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire, dominant symptom intensity, and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey. HRM findings were categorized using Chicago Classification v3.0.

RESULTS

Abnormal findings on HRM were identified in 84 (43.3%) patients, with ineffective esophageal motility (n = 60, 30.9%) as the most common diagnosis. A disorder of esophagogastric junction outflow or a major disorder of peristalsis was identified in 26 (13.4%) patients, including 2 (1%) with achalasia and 7 (3.6%) with jackhammer esophagus. Reflux burden (distal, proximal, or pharyngeal) on combined hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH testing did not differ across HRM findings. Patients reporting esophageal symptoms were more likely to have a primary motility disorder (odds ratio 2.34, P = 0.04). However, no significant differences in Reflux Symptom Index, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire, or 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey were noted across HRM diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

Esophageal motility disorders are prevalent among patients with LPR symptoms, including up to one in seven with esophagogastric junction outflow or major peristaltic disorder. Patients with abnormal motility more likely report esophageal symptoms. Clinicians should be aware of these coexisting conditions, particularly in those with refractory symptoms.