Review article: Diagnosis and management of laryngopharyngeal reflux

Link between pharyngeal acid reflux episodes and the effectiveness of proton pump inhibitor therapy

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is challenging due to overlapping symptoms. While proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly prescribed, reliable predictors of their responsiveness are unclear. Reflux monitoring technologies like dual potential of hydrogen (pH) sensors and multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) could improve diagnosis. Research suggests that a composite pH parameter, defined by ≥ 2 pharyngeal acid reflux (PAR) episodes and/or excessive esophageal acid reflux (EAR), predicts PPI efficacy. The criteria for PAR episodes, a pharyngeal pH drop of ≥ 2 units to < 5 within 30 seconds during esophageal acidification, showed strong interobserver reliability. We hypothesized that PAR episodes alone might also predict PPI responsiveness.

AIM

To investigate whether PAR episodes alone predict a positive response to PPI therapy.

METHODS

Patients suspected of having LPR were prospectively recruited from otolaryngologic clinics in three Taiwanese tertiary centers. They underwent a 24-hour esophagopharyngeal pH test using either 3-pH-sensor or hypopharyngeal MII-pH catheters while off medication, followed by a 12-week esomeprazole course (40 mg twice daily). Participants were categorized into four groups based on pH results: PAR alone, EAR alone, both pH (+), and both pH (-). The primary outcome was a ≥ 50% reduction in primary laryngeal symptoms, with observers blinded to group assignments.

RESULTS

A total of 522 patients (mean age 52.3 ± 12.8 years, 54% male) were recruited. Of these, 190 (mean age 51.5 ± 12.4 years, 61% male) completed the treatment, and 89 (47%) responded to PPI therapy. Response rates were highest in the PAR alone group (73%, n = 11), followed by EAR alone (59%, n = 68), both pH (+) (56%, n = 18), and both pH (-) (33%, n = 93). Multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, and endoscopic esophagitis showed that participants with PAR alone, EAR alone, and both pH (+) were 7.4-fold (P = 0.008), 4.2-fold (P = 0.0002), and 3.4-fold (P = 0.03) more likely to respond to PPI therapy, respectively, compared to the both pH (-) group. Secondary analyses using the definition of ≥ 1 PAR episode were less robust.

CONCLUSION

In the absence of proven hypopharyngeal predictors, this post-hoc analysis found that baseline ≥ 2 PAR episodes alone are linked to PPI responsiveness, suggesting the importance of hypopharyngeal reflux monitoring.

Psychosocial burden in patients with chronic laryngopharyngeal symptoms with and without pathologic acid reflux

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic laryngopharyngeal symptoms, with or without pathologic reflux, frequently have poor response to standard therapies, which may be a result of overlapping cognitive-affective processes. Therefore, the aims of this study included measuring psychosocial distress and laryngeal-specific cognitive distress in patients with chronic laryngopharyngeal symptoms (LPS) as well as comparing these among laryngeal symptomatic patients with and without conclusive gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

This prospective, single-center study enrolled adults with chronic LPS from 9/22 to 6/23. Patients completed eight questionnaires on quality of life, symptom burden, and psychosocial distress. The laryngeal cognitive affective tool (LCAT) assessed laryngeal-specific hypervigilance and anxiety; LCAT scores ≥33 were elevated. All patients underwent objective testing with endoscopy and/or ambulatory reflux monitoring and were categorized as proven GERD (GER+) or no proven GERD (GER-).

KEY RESULTS

One hundred twenty-nine patients were included: 66% female, mean age 54.1 (17.5) years, mean BMI 27.6 (6.8) kg/m2, 66% Caucasian, 57% with an elevated LCAT, and 53% GER+. Moderate-to-severe anxiety was found in 39% and moderate-to-severe depression in 19%. An elevated LCAT alone or with an elevated anxiety/depression score was found in 58%. Patient-reported outcomes scores, including LCAT scores (32.9 (13.8) GER- vs. 33.1 (12.6) GER+, p = 0.91), were similar between patients with and without GER+.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Patients with chronic LPS experience heightened levels of hypervigilance, symptom-specific anxiety, and psychosocial distress, regardless of the presence of pathologic GER.

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.