Atypical Clinical Presentation of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: A 5-Year Case Series

Mulberry Posterior Inferior Nasal Turbinate Is Associated with a Lower Pharyngeal pH Environment

OBJECTIVES

Mulberry-like changes of the posterior inferior nasal turbinate (MPINT) can lead to nasal obstruction. Extraesophageal reflux (EER) characterized by lower pH causes mucosal inflammation and therefore can contribute to sinonasal pathologies. No prior studies have objectively examined the possible association between acidic pH and MPINT formation. Therefore, this study is aimed to investigate the 24-h pharyngeal pH value in patients with MPINT.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective case-control multi-center study.

METHODS

Fifty-five patients with chronic EER symptoms were included in the study. They filled in questionnaires aimed at reflux and sinonasal symptoms (RSI®, SNOT-22) and underwent video endoscopy evaluating the laryngeal findings (RFS®) and the presence or absence of the MPINT. And, 24-h oropharyngeal pH monitoring was used to detect the acidic pH environment in the pharynx.

RESULTS

Out of the 55 analyzed patients, 38 had the MPINT (group 1), and in 17 patients, the MPINT was absent (group 2). Based on the pathological RYAN Score, in 29 (52.7%) patients, severe acidic pH drops were detected. In group 1, the acidic pH drops were diagnosed significantly more often (68.4%) compared with those in group 2 (p = 0.001). Moreover, in group 1, a significantly higher median total percentage of time spent below pH 5.5 (p = 0.005), as well as a higher median number of events lasting more than 5 min (p = 0.006), and higher median total number of events with pH drops (p = 0.017) were observed.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the MPINT was significantly more often present in patients with acidic pH events detected by 24-h oropharyngeal pH monitoring. Acidic pH in the pharynx might lead to MPINT formation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 134:62-68, 2024.

A Prospective Controlled Study Investigating Odor Identification in Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

OBJECTIVE

To psychophysically evaluate olfaction in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective controlled study.

SETTING

Tertiary medical center.

METHODS

From January 2021 to January 2022, patients with LPR diagnosed with hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring underwent psychophysical evaluation of the sense of smell. Reflux symptoms and findings were assessed with the Reflux Symptom Score (RSS) and Reflux Sign Assessment (RSA). Nasal symptoms were assessed through the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 (SNOT-22). From pre- to posttreatment, patients underwent identification Sniffin' Sticks test and olfactory cleft examination. Clinical outcomes were compared between LPR patients and healthy individuals.

RESULTS

In total, 107 patients and 76 healthy individuals completed the evaluations. LPR patients reported significant higher RSS, RSA, and SNOT-22 scores. Psychophysical olfactory evaluations were significantly lower in reflux patients compared with controls, while there were no significant differences in olfactory cleft score. RSS and RSA significantly improved from baseline to 3 months posttreatment. SNOT-22, olfactory cleft endoscopy scale, and psychophysical olfactory evaluations did not change throughout treatment. Patients with higher number of acid pharyngeal reflux events reported lower psychophysical olfactory scores (P = .025).

CONCLUSION

LPR disease was associated with low odor identification results in patients without olfactory cleft abnormalities. The sense of smell did not improve after 3-month therapy. Future controlled studies using threshold, discrimination, and identification testing are needed.

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.