Usefulness of Pep-Test for Laryngo-Pharyngeal Reflux: A Pilot Study in Primary Care

Scintigraphic Imaging of Extra-Esophageal Manifestation of Gastresophageal Reflux Disease

OBJECTIVES

There is currently no reference standard test for the detection of the extra-esophageal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The current suite of diagnostic tests principally assesses reflux events in the esophagus. A new scintigraphic technique has been developed and validated against reference standards. It allows direct visualization of refluxate in the laryngopharynx and lungs.

METHODS

Fifty patients were assessed by scintigraphy before and after fundoplication at a single nuclear medicine facility. Standardized reflux symptom indices (RSIs) were obtained from each patient before and after surgery. Patients were scanned after oral 99 m technetium Fyton administration with early dynamic images and delayed SPECT/CT images of the head, neck, and lungs. ANOVA, Spearman correlation, and the Student's t-test were utilized for analysis.

RESULTS

The study population (35F, 15 M) had a mean age of 63.9 years. Mean BMI was 26.8 with 67% being overweight or obese. All patients had significant reflux. SPECT/CT showed LPR events in 45/50 and pulmonary micro-aspiration (PMA) in 45/50 preoperatively and in 36/50 and 20/50 postoperatively, respectively. The RSI, cough, and throat clearing indices showed a significant fall postoperatively (p < 0.001). Frequency of scintigraphic reflux events was reduced from a mean of 4.5 in 30 min to 2.9 (t = 9.1, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

The novel scintigraphic test detects esophageal and extra-esophageal reflux events and permits direct visualization of refluxate in the head and neck structures and lungs. It correlates well with symptoms of reflux in the esophagus and extra-esophageal structures and the response to therapy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Although prospective, the study did not randomize patients and in effect each patient became their own control following an intervention (fundoplication). Thus, the study is Level 3 evidence Laryngoscope, 2024.

Knowledge, attitudes and practices of patients with chronic pharyngitis toward laryngopharyngeal reflux in Suzhou, China

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) of patients with chronic pharyngitis in Suzhou, China toward laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted in patients with chronic pharyngitis in Suzhou, China at the otolaryngology outpatient clinic of the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University between November, 2022, and May, 2023. Data was collected through a self-designed online questionnaire encompassing the sociodemographic characteristics and three dimensions of KAP. The questionnaire was administered using SoJump, and data were exported from this platform. Subsequently, statistical analysis, including Structural Equation Modeling, was performed using SPSS 22 software to evaluate the KAP scores.

RESULTS

A total of 487 valid questionnaires were collected, with 275 (56.35%) female patients. The mean score of KAP were 4.76 ± 2.93 (possible range: 0-11), 33.10 ± 4.46 (possible range: 8-40), 31.29 ± 6.04 (possible range: 8-40), respectively. Pearson's correlation analysis showed significant positive correlations between knowledge and attitude dimensions (r = 0.413, P < 0.001), knowledge and practice dimensions (r = 0.355, P < 0.001), and attitude and practice dimensions (r = 0.481, P < 0.001). Structural equation modeling revealed that education exhibited positive effect on knowledge (β = 0.476, P < 0.001) and attitude (β = 0.600, P < 0.001), and having family history of chronic pharyngitis showed positive effect on knowledge (β = 0.580, P = 0.047), experienced with reflux symptoms showed positive effect on knowledge (β = 0.838, P = 0.001) and attitude (β = 0.631, P = 0.085). Moreover, knowledge showed positive effect on attitude (β = 0.555, P < 0.001) and practice (β = 0.351, P < 0.001). Attitude, in turn, showed positive effect on practice (β = 0.511, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with chronic pharyngitis had inadequate knowledge, positive attitudes and suboptimal practices toward LPR. Education, family history of chronic pharyngitis, experienced with reflux symptoms might have effect on their KAP.

Diagnostic utility of salivary pepsin in laryngopharyngeal reflux: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Salivary pepsin has emerged as a biomarker for Laryngopharyngeal Reflux (LPR), which, however, has been questioned for its efficacy due to a lack of supporting medical data. Therefore, this study analyzed the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin for LPR and assessed a better cutoff value.

METHODS

Studies were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from their receptions to October 1, 2021. Then, RevMan 5.3 and Stata 14.0 were utilized to summarize the diagnostic indexes for further meta-analysis. Data were separately extracted by two reviewers according to the trial data extraction form of the Cochrane Handbook. The risk of bias in Randomized Control Trials (RCTs) was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies matched the criteria and were subjected to meta-analysis. The results revealed a pooled sensitivity of 61% (95% CI 50%-71%), a pooled specificity of 67% (95% CI 48%-81%), a positive likelihood ratio of 2 (95% CI 1.2-2.8), a negative likelihood ratio of 0.58 (95% CI 0.47‒0.72), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.67 (95% CI 0.63‒0.71). Subgroup analyses indicated that the cutoff value of pepsin at 50 ng/mL had a higher degree of diagnostic accuracy than that of pepsin at 16 ng/mL in cohort studies.

CONCLUSION

The review demonstrated low diagnostic performance of salivary pepsin for LPR and that the cutoff value of 50 ng/mL pepsin had superior diagnostic accuracy. Nevertheless, the diagnostic value may vary dependent on the utilized diagnostic criteria. Therefore, additional research is needed on the improved way of identifying salivary pepsin in the diagnosis of LPR, and also longer-term and more rigorous RCTs are warranted to further assess the effectiveness of salivary pepsin.

Optimal Timing of the Salivary Pepsin Test for the Diagnosis of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the optimal time point for diagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) through combining 24-h hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (24-h HEMII-pH) monitoring and the multi-time point salivary pepsin test (MTPSPT).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective uncontrolled trial.

METHOD

Patients with and without LPR symptoms were included as the test group and the control group, respectively. The patients in the test group underwent 24-h HEMII-pH and MTPSPT. The results of 24-h HEMII-pH were used as a diagnostic criterion for LPR, and the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin tests performed at different time points was compared by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 153 patients were included. Based on 24-h HEMII-pH, the positive rate of LPR in the test group of patients was 84.00%. In the control group, only one person (3.57%) had a positive salivary pepsin test result. The area under the curve (AUC) of the MTPSPT was 0.827. In addition, we separately calculated the AUC of the combined salivary pepsin test at different time points, and found good diagnostic value (AUC = 0.799) when the test was combined with the waking, 1 and 2 h after breakfast and lunch, and 1 h after dinner tests. However, when the number of tests were further increased, the diagnostic value did not improve significantly.

CONCLUSION

Salivary pepsin testing combined with waking, 1 h and 2 h after breakfast and lunch, and 1 h after dinner has almost the same diagnostic value as MTPSPT, and testing at these time points can be an effective method for diagnosing LPR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 2022.

Dental Disorders and Salivary Changes in Patients with Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

Background: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a common inflammatory condition of the upper aerodigestive tract tissues related to the effects of gastroduodenal content reflux, characterized by a wide variety of clinical manifestations. The aim of our study was to evaluate the possible association between dental disorders and LRP, focusing on the role of salivary changes. Methods: Patient’s dental status was evaluated according to Schiff Index Sensitivity Scale (SISS), Basic Erosive Wear Examination (BEWE) and Decayed, Missing, and Filled Teeth (DMFT) scores. Reflux-associated symptoms were assessed according to Reflux symptom index (RSI). A qualitative and quantitative examination of saliva was performed. Results: Patients suffering from LPR had a higher incidence of dental disorders, regardless the presence of salivary pepsin, and thus, statistically significant higher scores of RSI (p = 0.0001), SISS (p = 0.001), BEWE (p < 0.001) and VAS (p < 0.001). Moreover, they had lower salivary flow compared with healthy patients. Conclusions: The finding of demineralization and dental caries on intraoral evaluation must raise the suspicion of LRP. Reflux treatments should also be aimed at correcting salivary alterations, in order to preserve the buffering capacity and salivary pH, thus preventing mucosal and dental damage.

Multitime point pepsin testing can double the rate of the diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux

OBJECTIVE

To study the value of multitime point salivary pepsin testing (MTPSPT) for the diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective noncontrolled.

METHODS

For patients who met the enrollment criteria, the reflux symptom index (RSI) and reflux finding score (RFS) were calculated and salivary pepsin testing was performed. The pepsin test was performed every hour from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. by collecting fresh saliva samples. A single positive test result was needed for the diagnosis of LPR. The consistency in the diagnosis of LPR between the two methods was compared with the weighted Cohen's kappa statistic.

RESULTS

A total of 204 patients were included. The kappa value between the two methods was 0.566 (p = .00). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of MTPSPT were 76.43%, 85.94%, 92.24%, and 62.5%, respectively. We also compared a single pepsin measure at 7 a.m. with the screening results based on the RSI and RFS, and found a much lower kappa agreement value (0.223, p = .00). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and false-negative rate of pepsin testing at 7 a.m. (fasting) were 37.86%, 92.18%, 91.38%, 40.41%, and 58.57%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of the result of a single salivary pepsin test in the morning yields a relatively higher rate of missed diagnosis of LPR, and multitime point testing through a day increased the accuracy and sensitivity of detection of LPR twofold compared to a single morning fasting sample.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

[Effect of proton pump inhibitort on salivary pepsin concentration in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux]

Objective:To investigate the effect of proton pump inhibitor（PPI） treatment on salivary pepsin concentration in laryngopharyngeal reflux（LPR）. Methods:152 patients with suspected LPR complaining non-specific symptoms such as foreign body sensation, dry throat, phlegm and other non-specific symptoms were enrolled， in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University from August 2019 to December 2020. According to the scores of reflux symptom index（RSI） and reflux finding score（RFS）, all the patients were divided into LPR （+） group and LPR （-） group, RSI （+） group and RSI （-） group, RFS （+） group and RFS （-） group . Patients in the LPR （+） group were reassessed after 1 month of PPI treatment. Saliva samples were collected from all the patients at initial diagnosis and follow-up diagnosis after treatment. The salivary pepsin concentration was determined by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay （ELISA）. The differences of RSI, RFS scores and salivary pepsin concentrations before and after treatment were compared. Results:The median concentration of salivary pepsin in LPR （+） group was significantly higher than that in LPR （-） group, and （73.01 ng/mL vs 25.66 ng/mL, P<0.01）, the median concentration of salivary pepsin in RFS （+） group were significantly higher than that in RFS （-） group（78.00 ng/mL vs 35.79 ng/mL, P<0.01） Furthermore, the median scores of RSI （11.00 vs 7.00, P<0.05） and RFS （9.00 vs 7.00, P<0.01） of LPR （+） patients notably decreased after PPI treatment for 1 month, and the salivary pepsin median concentration was memorably lower than that before treatment（53.60 ng/mL vs 46.49 ng/mL, P<0.05）. Meanwhile, the scores of symptoms such as pharyngeal paraesthesia, heartburn, chest pain, stomachache, and the scores of signs such as false vocal fold, erythema or congestion, vocal fold edema, posterior commissure hypertrophy and thick endolaryngeal mucus were conspicuously lower after treatment than those before treatment（P<0.05）. Conclusion:After 1 month of PPI treatment, the scores of partial symptoms and signs, and the salivary pepsin concentrations of LPR patients decreased significantly, suggesting that pepsin plays an important role in the pathogenesis of LPR, and pepsin may be closely related to the symptoms and signs such as pharyngeal paraesthesia and vocal fold edema.

Diagnostic performance of salivary pepsin for gastroesophageal reflux disease

Uncertain diagnostic performance has limited clinical adoption of salivary pepsin, a noninvasive diagnostic tool for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study aimed to assess diagnostic performance of salivary pepsin, and test validity of thresholds in an external cohort of patients with or without GERD. This two-phase prospective study conducted at two centers enrolled adult asymptomatic volunteers, patients with symptoms of GERD undergoing reflux monitoring, and patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE). Fasting saliva samples were processed for pepsin concentration using Peptest. Phase 1 compared pepsin concentration between No GERD (volunteers/functional heartburn) and GERD (erosive reflux disease/nonerosive reflux disease (NERD)/BE). Phase 2 tested validity of the diagnostic thresholds identified from Phase 1 among external functional heartburn and NERD cohorts. Of 243 enrolled subjects, 156 met inclusion criteria. Phase 1 (n = 114): Pepsin concentrations were significantly higher in GERD (n = 84) versus No GERD (n = 30) (73.8 ng/mL vs. 21.1 ng/mL; P < 0.001). Area under the curve for pepsin concentration was 0.74 (95% CI 0.65, 0.83). A salivary pepsin threshold of 24.9 ng/mL optimized the true negative rate and 100.0 ng/mL optimized the true positive rate. Phase 2 (n = 42): Pepsin concentrations were significantly higher in NERD (n = 22) versus Functional Heartburn (n = 20) (176.0 ng/mL vs. 53.3 ng/mL, P < 0.001). Applying Phase 1 thresholds in this external cohort, salivary pepsin 24.9 ng/mL was 86% sensitive (64%, 97%) and 100.0 ng/mL was 72% specific for distinguishing NERD from functional heartburn. Given modest sensitivity and specificity for GERD, salivary pepsin may have clinical utility as a noninvasive office based diagnostic screening tool for GERD.