Clinical Implications of the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire and Reflux Symptom Index in Patients With Suspected Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Symptoms

The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease and laryngopharyngeal reflux in patients with dysphagia after radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in post-irradiated patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, 31 NPC and 12 control patients completed questionnaires for GERD/LPR before esophageal manometry and 24-h pH monitoring. The DeMeester score and reflux finding score (RFS) were used to define GERD and LPR, respectively. Risk factors were identified.

RESULTS

51.6% of NPC and 8.3% of control patients, and 77.4% of NPC and 33% of control patients, were GERD-positive and LPR-positive, respectively. The GERD/LPR questionnaire failed to identify either condition in patients with NPC. No parameter differences in esophageal manometry or pneumonia incidence were noted between GERD/LPR-positive and GERD/LPR-negative patients. Post radiotherapy duration, high BMI, lack of chemotherapy, and dysphagia were positive risk factors for GERD/LPR.

CONCLUSIONS

A high prevalence of GERD/LPR in patients with post-irradiated NPC exists, but reflux symptoms are inadequate for diagnosis.

Review article: Diagnosis and management of laryngopharyngeal reflux

BACKGROUND

Laryngopharyngeal reflux has classically referred to gastroesophageal reflux leading to chronic laryngeal symptoms such as throat clearing, dysphonia, cough, globus sensation, sore throat or mucus in the throat. Current lack of clear diagnostic criteria significantly impairs practitioners' ability to identify and manage laryngopharyngeal reflux.

AIMS

To discuss current evidence-based diagnostic and management strategies in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux.

METHODS

We selected studies primarily based on current guidelines for gastroesophageal reflux disease and laryngopharyngeal reflux, and through PubMed searches.

RESULTS

We assess the current diagnostic modalities that can be used to determine if laryngopharyngeal reflux is the cause of a patient's laryngeal symptoms, as well as review some of the common treatments that have been used for these patients. In addition, we note that the lack of a clear diagnostic gold-standard, as well as specific diagnostic criteria, significantly limit clinicians' ability to determine adequate therapies for these patients. Finally, we identify areas of future research that are needed to better manage these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with chronic laryngeal symptoms are complex due to the heterogenous nature of symptom pathology, inconsistent definitions and variable response to therapies. Further outcomes data are critically needed to help elucidate ideal diagnostic workup and therapeutic management for these challenging patients.

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and Benign Vocal Fold Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

There is a link between laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and the formation of benign vocal fold lesions (BVFLs). However, previous studies have mainly focused on LPR suggested by symptoms and signs, rather than objectively diagnosed LPR via pharyngeal pH monitoring. We, therefore, conducted a Meta-analysis to evaluate the association between pharyngeal pH monitoring diagnosed LPR and the odds of BVFLs.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant observational studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science.

REVIEW METHODS

We evaluated between-study heterogeneity using the Cochrane Q test and estimated the I2 statistic. Random-effects models were used when significant heterogeneity was observed; otherwise, fixed-effects models were used.

RESULTS

Thirteen datasets from 9 studies were included. Among them, 493 were diagnosed with LPR and 344 had BVFLs. LPR was related to a higher odds of BVFLs (odds ratio: 3.26, 95% confidence interval: 1.84-5.76, P < .001) with moderate heterogeneity (P for Cochrane Q test = .006, I2  = 57%). Subgroup analyses showed that the association was similar in studies with only pharyngeal pH monitoring (Restech), with double-probe or 3-site pH monitoring, and with 24-hour multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (P for subgroup difference = .15). In addition, subgroup analysis showed consistent results in studies from Asia and Europe (P for subgroup analysis = .12), and the association seemed to be consistent for vocal Reinke's edema, nodules, and polyps (P for subgroup difference = .09).

CONCLUSION

Pharyngeal pH monitoring diagnosed LPR is associated with the formation of BVFLs.

Assessment of the Current Knowledge and Practice of General Practitioners Towards Laryngopharyngeal Reflux in Saudi Arabia

Background General practitioners (GPs) have a significant role in the diagnosis of patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). Some published data revealed a lack of knowledge among GPs about the disease, consequently, this lack of knowledge impacted their performance. This survey aims to assess the current knowledge and practice of general practitioners regarding laryngopharyngeal reflux in Saudi Arabia. Methodology This survey study was conducted to assess the current knowledge and practice of general practitioners regarding laryngopharyngeal reflux in Saudi Arabia using an online questionnaire. The questionnaire was distributed and collected from the five regions in Saudi Arabia, which are The Central Region (Riyadh, Qassim), Eastern Region (Dammam, Al-Kharj, Al-Ahasa), Western Region (Makkah, Madinah, Jeddah), Southern Region (Asir, Najran, Jizan), and Northern Region (Tabuk, Jouf, Hail). Results In the current study, we collected data from 387 general practitioners, 61.8% of whom were aged between 21-30 years old, and 57.4% of the participants were males. Moreover, 40.6% of the participants thought that both LPR and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) share pathophysiology, however, they are two different diseases considering their clinical presentation. Moreover, it was found that heartburn was the most known symptom of LPR among the participants (Mean score 2.14 (SD=1.31), where a lower score indicated more relation). Considering the treatment of LPR, 40.6% and 40.3% of the participants reported using proton pump inhibitors once or twice daily respectively. In contrast, antihistamine/H2 blockers, alginate, and magaldrate were used to a lesser extent as reported by 27.1%, 21.7%, and 12.1%. Conclusion The current study showed limited knowledge among general practitioners considering LPR with a higher rate of referring patients to other departments depending on symptoms which may increase the pressure on other departments of mild cases.