Significance and degree of reflux in patients with primary extraesophageal symptoms

Pediatric Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: Epidemiology, Clinical Presentation, Diagnosis, and Therapeutic Outcomes

Gastroesophageal reflux (GER) involves retrograde transit of gastric contents into the esophagus, a physiologic, transient, and typically benign process in infants. By contrast, GER disease arises when reflux causes troublesome symptoms or complications. Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)-a subset of extraesophageal reflux-occurs when gastric contents flow proximally to affect the larynx and pharynx. LPR in the pediatric population presents unique challenges due to incomplete understanding of its pathophysiology and overlapping signs and symptoms with other conditions. Multidisciplinary evaluation is crucial for accurate diagnosis and optimal treatment.

Potassium-competitive Acid Blockers for Treatment of Extraesophageal Symptoms and Signs

Extraesophageal symptoms and signs of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), such as throat clearing, globus sensation, hoarseness, cough, asthma, pulmonary fibrosis, otitis, sinusitis, and dental erosions, are common and pose diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the mainstay of treatment for GERD, but have demonstrated a limited effectiveness for extraesophageal symptoms and signs in several meta-analyses. Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) offer more rapid and sustained acid inhibition than PPIs; therefore, P-CABs may have the potential to be at least as good or superior to PPIs in relieving extraesophageal symptoms and signs of GERD. To date, there have been 4 prospective randomized trials demonstrating similar efficacy of P-CABs to PPIs in the treatment of extraesophageal symptoms and signs, but more rapid and greater efficacy in patients with severe symptoms. Therefore, P-CABs appear to have a treatment role in extraesophageal symptoms and signs of GERD. However, considering that P-CABs are not superior to PPIs, large-scale, multi-center studies with double dose P-CABs over a prolonged period of time may elucidate a subgroup of patients in whom P-CABs are beneficial in ameliorating extraesophageal symptoms and signs.

Baseline Impedance via Manometry Predicts Pathological Mean Nocturnal Baseline Impedance in Isolated Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Symptoms

Background/Aims

Distal mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI) measuring via pH-impedance may be valuable in diagnosing patients with suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). However, its wide adoption is hindered by cost and invasiveness. This study investigates whether baseline impedance measured during high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM-BI) can predict pathological MNBI.

Methods

A cross-sectional study in Taiwan included 74 subjects suspected of LPR, who underwent HRIM (MMS) and pH-impedance testing (Diversatek), after stopping proton pump inhibitors for more than 7 days. Subjects with grade C or D esophagitis or Barrett's esophagus were excluded. The cohort was divided into 2 groups: those with concomitant typical reflux symptoms (CTRS, n = 28) and those with isolated LPR symptoms (ILPRS, n = 46). HRIM-BI measurements focused on both distal and proximal esophagi. Pathological MNBI was identified as values below 2065 Ω, measured 3 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter.

Results

In all subjects, distal HRIM-BI values correlated weakly with distal MNBI(r = 0.34-0.39, P < 0.005). However, in patients with ILPRS, distal HRIM-BI corelated moderately with distal MNBI(r = 0.43-0.48, P < 0.005). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.78 (P = 0.001) with a sensitivity of 0.83 and a specificity of 0.68. No correlation exists between distal HRIM-BI and distal MNBI in patients with CTRS, and between proximal HRIM-BI and proximal MNBI in both groups.

Conclusions

Distal HRIM-BI from HRIM may potentially predict pathological MNBI in patients with ILPRS, but not in those with CTRS. Future outcome studies linked to the metric are warranted.

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.

Is empiric proton pump inhibition in patients with symptoms of extraesophageal gastroesophageal reflux justified?

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has had a marked increase in Western countries with a paralleling interest in extraesophageal (EE) manifestations of GERD, including laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). There are considerable differences in clinical practice between gastroenterologists, otolaryngologists and pulmonologists.

METHODS

In this narrative review we address some of these controversies concerning EE manifestations of GERD and LPR.

RESULTS

It is disputed whether there is causal relationship between reflux and the numerous symptoms and conditions suggested to be EE manifestations of GERD. Similarly, the pathophysiology is uncertain and there are disagreements concerning diagnostic criteria. Consequently, it is challenging to provide evidence-based treatment recommendations. A significant number of patients are given a trial course with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) for several months before symptoms are evaluated. In randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of RCTs PPI treatment does not seem to be advantageous over placebo, and the evidence supporting that patients without verified GERD have any benefit of PPI treatment is negligible. There is a large increase in both over the counter and prescribed PPI use in several countries and a significant proportion of this use is without any symptomatic benefit for the patients. Whereas short-term treatment has few side effects, there is concern about side-effects after long-term use. Although empiric PPI treatment for suspected EE manifestations of GERD instead of prior esophageal 24-hour pH and impedance monitoring is included in several guidelines by various societies, this practice contributes to overtreatment with PPI.

CONCLUSION

We argue that the current knowledge suggests that diagnostic testing with pH and impedance monitoring rather than empiric PPI treatment should be chosen in a higher proportion of patients presenting with symptoms possibly attributable to EE reflux.

Towards a better diagnosis of gastro esophageal reflux disease

INTRODUCTION

GERD is a common disorder and is characterized by the presence of typical or atypical symptoms. In GERD patients, the presence of mucosal alterations in endoscopy is detected in up to 30% of individuals. The clinical presentation of GERD patients may be complex and their management is challenging, due to the heterogeneous clinical presentation. The present review has been performed searching all relevant articles in this field, over the past years, using PubMed database.

AREAS COVERED

The diagnosis and management of GERD have been significantly improved in the last years due to the increasing availability of reflux monitoring techniques and the implementation of new procedures in the therapeutic armamentarium. Beside traditional impedance-pH variables, new metrics have been developed, increasing the diagnostic yield of reflux monitoring and better predicting the treatment response. Traditional pharmacological treatments include acid-suppressive-therapy and/or anti-acid. On the other hand, surgical treatment and, more recently, endoscopic procedures represent a promising field in the therapeutic approach.

EXPERT OPINION

Diagnosis and treatment of GERD still represent a challenging area. However, we believe that an accurate upfront evaluation is, nowadays, necessary in addressing patients with GERD to a more accurate diagnosis as well as to the best treatment options.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Diagnosis and Management of Extraesophageal Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update is to review the available evidence and expert advice regarding the clinical management of patients with suspected extraesophageal gastroesophageal reflux disease.

METHODS

This article provides practical advice based on the available published evidence including that identified from recently published reviews from leading investigators in the field, prospective and population studies, clinical trials, and recent clinical guidelines and technical reviews. This best practice document is not based on a formal systematic review. The best practice advice as presented in this document applies to patients with symptoms or conditions suspected to be related to extraesophageal reflux (EER). This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. These Best Practice Advice (BPA) statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and from expert opinion. Because systematic reviews were not performed, these BPA statements do not carry formal ratings of the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Gastroenterologists should be aware of potential extraesophageal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and should inquire about such disorders including laryngitis, chronic cough, asthma, and dental erosions in GERD patients to determine whether GERD may be a contributing factor to these conditions. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Development of a multidisciplinary approach to extraesophageal (EER) manifestations is an important consideration because the conditions are often multifactorial, requiring input from non-gastroenterology (GI) specialties. Results from diagnostic testing (ie, bronchoscopy, thoracic imaging, laryngoscopy, etc) from non-GI disciplines should be taken into consideration when gastroesophageal reflux (GER) is considered as a cause for extraesophageal symptoms. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Currently, there is no single diagnostic tool that can conclusively identify GER as the cause of EER symptoms. Determination of the contribution of GER to EER symptoms should be based on the global clinical impression derived from patients' symptoms, response to GER therapy, and results of endoscopy and reflux testing. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Consideration should be given toward diagnostic testing for reflux before initiation of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy in patients with potential extraesophageal manifestations of GERD, but without typical GERD symptoms. Initial single-dose PPI trial, titrating up to twice daily in those with typical GERD symptoms, is reasonable. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Symptom improvement of EER manifestations while on PPI therapy may result from mechanisms of action other than acid suppression and should not be regarded as confirmation for GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: In patients with suspected extraesophageal manifestation of GERD who have failed one trial (up to 12 weeks) of PPI therapy, one should consider objective testing for pathologic GER, because additional trials of different PPIs are low yield. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Initial testing to evaluate for reflux should be tailored to patients' clinical presentation and can include upper endoscopy and ambulatory reflux monitoring studies of acid suppressive therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Testing can be considered for those with an established objective diagnosis of GERD who do not respond to high doses of acid suppression. Testing can include pH-impedance monitoring while on acid suppression to evaluate the role of ongoing acid or non-acid reflux. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Alternative treatment methods to acid suppressive therapy (eg, lifestyle modifications, alginate-containing antacids, external upper esophageal sphincter compression device, cognitive-behavioral therapy, neuromodulators) may serve a role in management of EER symptoms. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Shared decision-making should be performed before referral for anti-reflux surgery for EER when the patient has clear, objectively defined evidence of GERD. However, a lack of response to PPI therapy predicts lack of response to anti-reflux surgery and should be incorporated into the decision process.

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.

Esophageal hypervigilance and visceral anxiety contribute to symptom severity of laryngopharyngeal reflux

OBJECTIVES

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a clinical conundrum without a diagnostic gold standard. The esophageal hypervigilance and anxiety scale (EHAS) is a questionnaire designed for cognitive-affective evaluation of visceral sensitivity. We hypothesized that esophageal hypervigilance and symptom-specific anxiety have an etiopathological role in generation of LPR symptoms, especially when gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) cannot explain these symptoms.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with LPR and/or GERD symptoms lasting >3 months were prospectively enrolled and characterized using the reflux symptom index (RSI), GERD questionnaire (GERDQ), and EHAS. Eligible patients with negative endoscopy underwent 24-hour impedance-pH monitoring off acid suppression for phenotyping GERD, and assessment of reflux burden, using conventional metrics [acid exposure time (AET) and number of reflux episodes] as well as novel metrics [mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI) and post-reflux swallow induced peristaltic wave (PSPW) index].

RESULTS

Of 269 enrolled patients (mean age 47.1 years, 21-65 years, 60.6% female), 90 patients with concomitant GERD and LPR symptoms, 32 patients with dominant LPR symptoms, 102 patients with dominant GERD symptoms, and 45 controls. Patients with concomitant GERD and LPR symptoms had higher EHAS than those with dominant GERD symptoms and controls. ( P ≤ 0.001); patients with dominant LPR symptoms had higher EHAS than controls. ( P = 0.007). On Pearson's correlation, EHAS positively correlated with RSI.

CONCLUSIONS

Esophageal hypervigilance symptom-specific anxiety may be more important than reflux burden in LPR symptom perception.

Anatomical and physiological characteristics in patients with Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Symptoms: A case-control study utilizing high-resolution impedance manometry

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

This study aimed to explore the anatomical and physiological characteristics of patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) symptoms, such as hoarseness, throat clearing, throat pain, globus, and chronic cough, with the novel high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM).

METHODS

Consecutive patients exhibited at least one LPR symptom for ≥4 weeks after 2-month proton-pump inhibitor treatment were enrolled during November 2014 and March 2018 from single tertiary medical center. All patients completed validated symptom questionnaires, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, and HRIM. Healthy volunteers were also recruited for comparison of esophageal parameters on HRIM.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine LPR patients and 63 healthy volunteers were analyzed. Compared with healthy volunteers, LPR patients had significantly shorter upper and lower esophageal sphincters (UES and LES), a shorter intraabdominal esophagus (all P < 0.01), higher 4-s integrated relaxation pressures (IRP-4s) (P = 0.011) of the LES. After adjusted for age, sex, body weight, body height and alcohol consumption, multiple regression analysis showed that age, LES IRP-4s and the UES length were independent risk factors for LPR symptoms (OR 1.056, 95% CI 1.019-1.094; OR 1.107, 95% CI 1.004-1.222; OR 0.432, 95% CI 0.254-0.736, respectively). In subgroup analysis, patients with moderate LPR symptoms had lower IRP-4s (6.64 ± 4.55 vs. 8.69 ± 5.10, P = 0.049) and more failed peristalsis (27.33 ± 29.26 vs. 11.36 ± 21.20, P = 0.004) than those with mild LPR symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that esophageal structural factors and LES IRP-4s may contribute to the occurrence of LPR symptoms. Patients with moderate LPR symptoms were more likely to present with failed peristalsis.

ACG Clinical Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) continues to be among the most common diseases seen by gastroenterologists, surgeons, and primary care physicians. Our understanding of the varied presentations of GERD, enhancements in diagnostic testing, and approach to patient management have evolved. During this time, scrutiny of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has increased considerably. Although PPIs remain the medical treatment of choice for GERD, multiple publications have raised questions about adverse events, raising doubts about the safety of long-term use and increasing concern about overprescribing of PPIs. New data regarding the potential for surgical and endoscopic interventions have emerged. In this new document, we provide updated, evidence-based recommendations and practical guidance for the evaluation and management of GERD, including pharmacologic, lifestyle, surgical, and endoscopic management. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to evaluate the evidence and the strength of recommendations. Key concepts and suggestions that as of this writing do not have sufficient evidence to grade are also provided.

Distinct Physiological Characteristics of Isolated Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Symptoms

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with isolated laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms (LPRS) defined as those without concomitant typical reflux symptoms (CTRS) are clinically challenging to manage due to unclear pathophysiology. We investigated esophageal physiology in patients with isolated LPRS and their response to proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) therapy.

METHODS

This is a multi-center observational study conducted in referral hospitals in Taiwan. Patients with predominant LPRS, but without common non-reflux causes, underwent esophageal manometry, 24-hr ambulatory esophagopharyngeal pH testing, and Bernstein test, followed by a 12-week esomeprazole 40 mg twice-daily treatment. Participants with pathological reflux were divided into the isolated LPRS group (ie, LPRS without CTRS, n = 40) and the CTRS group (ie, LPRS with CTRS, n = 66). Participants without pathological reflux or esophagitis (n = 132) served as the nonreflux controls.

RESULTS

The PPI-responsiveness was similar between the isolated LPRS group and CTRS group (63% vs 57%, P = .8), but lower in the nonreflux controls (32%, P = .005). Despite similar distal esophageal acid exposure time (P = .7) when compared to those with CTRS, the isolated LPRS group had a lower prevalence of both positive Bernstein test (P = .001) and ineffective esophageal motility disorder (P = .03), and fewer pharyngeal acid reflux episodes (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate similar distal esophageal acid exposure and PPI-responsiveness between LPRS patients with and without CTRS. The lack of CTRS in the isolated LPRS group is likely due to esophageal acid hyposensitivity and fewer pharyngeal acid reflux episodes, thus implicating distinct pathophysiology of isolated LPRS from those with CTRS.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Functional Heartburn: Expert Review

BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: A diagnosis of functional heartburn should be considered when retrosternal burning pain or discomfort persists despite maximal (double-dose) proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy taken appropriately before meals during a 3-month period. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: A diagnosis of functional heartburn requires upper endoscopy with esophageal biopsies to rule out anatomic and mucosal abnormalities, esophageal high-resolution manometry to rule out major motor disorders, and pH monitoring off PPI therapy (or pH-impedance monitoring on therapy in patients with proven gastroesophageal reflux disease [GERD]), to document physiologic levels of esophageal acid exposure in the distal esophagus with absence of reflux-symptom association (ie, negative symptom index and symptom association probability). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Overlap of functional heartburn with proven GERD is diagnosed according to Rome IV criteria when heartburn persists despite maximal PPI therapy in patients with history of proven GERD (ie, positive pH study, erosive esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, or esophageal ulcer), and pH impedance testing on PPI therapy demonstrates physiologic acid exposure without reflux-symptom association (ie, negative symptom index and symptom association probability). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: PPIs have no therapeutic value in functional heartburn, the exception being proven GERD that overlaps with functional heartburn. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Neuromodulators, including tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, tegaserod, and histamine-2 receptor antagonists have benefit as either primary therapy in functional heartburn or as add-on therapy in functional heartburn that overlaps with proven GERD. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Based on available evidence, acupuncture and hypnotherapy may have benefit as monotherapy in functional heartburn, or as adjunctive therapy combined with other therapeutic modalities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Based on available evidence, anti-reflux surgery and endoscopic GERD treatment modalities have no therapeutic benefit in functional heartburn and should not be recommended.

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and Atypical Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Laryngopharyngeal reflux and atypical manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease have a high economic and social burden in the United States. There is increasing research supporting the reflex theory and hypersensitivity syndrome underlying this disease pathophysiology. Novel diagnostic biomarkers have gained more traction in the search for a more reliable diagnostic tool, but further research is needed. Current standard-of-care treatment relies on proton pump inhibitor therapy. Antireflux surgery is usually not recommended. Neuromodulators and treatments targeting specific neuronal receptors are discussed. A diagnostic algorithm is proposed for the evaluation of laryngeal symptoms suspected to be related to extraesophageal reflux disease.

Extraesophageal Symptoms and Diseases Attributed to GERD: Where is the Pendulum Swinging Now?

The purpose of this review is to outline the recent developments in the field of extraesophageal reflux disease and provide clinically relevant recommendations. The recommendations outlined in this review are based on expert opinion and on relevant publications from PubMed and EMbase. The Clinical Practice Updates Committee of the American Gastroenterological Association proposes the following recommendations: Best Practice Advice 1: The role of a gastroenterologist in patients referred for evaluation of suspected extra esophageal symptom is to assess for gastroesophageal etiologies that could contribute to the presenting symptoms. Best Practice Advice 2: Non-GI evaluations by ENT, pulmonary and/or allergy are essential and often should be performed initially in most patients as the cause of the extraesophageal symptom is commonly multifactorial or not esophageal in origin. Best Practice Advice 3: Empiric therapy with aggressive acid suppression for 6-8 weeks with special focus on response of the extraesophageal symptoms can help in assessing association between reflux and extraesophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 4: No single testing methodology exists to definitively identify reflux as the etiology for the suspected extra esophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 5: Constellation of patient presentation, diagnostic test results and response to therapy should be employed in the determination of reflux as a possible etiology in extra esophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 6: Testing may need to be off or on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy depending on patients' presenting demographics and symptoms in assessing the likelihood of abnormal gastroesophageal reflux. A. On therapy testing may be considered in those with high probability of baseline reflux (those with previous esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus or abnormal pH). B. Off therapy testing may be considered in those with low probability of baseline reflux with the goal of identifying moderate to severe reflux at baseline. Best Practice Advice 7: Lack of response to aggressive acid suppressive therapy combined with normal pH testing off therapy or impedance-pH testing on therapy significantly reduces the likelihood that reflux is a contributing etiology in presenting extraesophageal symptoms. Best Practice Advice 8: Surgical fundoplication is discouraged in those with extra esophageal reflux symptoms unresponsive to aggressive PPI therapy. Best Practice Advice 9: Fundoplication should only be considered in those with a mechanical defect (e.g., hiatal hernia), moderate to severe reflux at baseline off PPI therapy who have continued reflux despite PPI therapy and have failed more conservative non-GI treatments.

Facts and Fantasies on Extraesophageal Reflux: A Gastroenterologist Perspective

Gastroesophageal reflux disease encompasses a wide spectrum of disorders related to the reflux of gastric contents into the esophagus. Extraesophageal reflux (EER) may be suspected in patients with unexplained chronic cough, pharyngolaryngeal symptoms, and asthma. For physicians, suspected EER is challenging as there is currently no tool that can reliably make a definitive diagnosis. Endoscopic signs are not specific, pharyngeal and proximal reflux monitoring are not reliable, and if distal pH or pH-impedance monitoring can identify patients with abnormal reflux, they cannot predict the response to therapy. Controlled randomized trials have failed to reliably demonstrate any benefit of high-dose proton-pump inhibitors over placebo in patients with laryngeal symptoms, chronic cough, and asthma. Overall, the role of gastroesophageal reflux has been largely overestimated in patients with suspected EER. Especially when proton-pump inhibitors failed to improve symptoms, other diagnosis should be considered, such as functional laryngeal disorders which are probably much more prevalent in these patients than pathologic gastroesophageal reflux.

Unmet needs in treating laryngo-pharyngeal reflux disease: where do we go from here?

INTRODUCTION

Many patients experience ear, nose and throat symptoms associated with their gastroesophageal reflux disease. These symptoms are purportedly caused by reflux of gastroduodenal contents into the larynx, which leads to laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). Various modalities are used to diagnose LPR, including ambulatory pH monitoring, laryngoscopy, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy, as well as a few new emerging diagnostic tests. However, there are still no established diagnostic criteria or gold standard methodologies that can reliably distinguish LPR from other conditions.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we will evaluate currently available diagnostic tests and therapeutic options for patients with laryngeal signs and symptoms of reflux and briefly discuss the development and emergence of new treatments. Numerous studies have investigated the role of proton pump inhibitor therapy in this patient population, but have led to disparate and often inconsistent results. Expert commentary: While a subgroup of patients with LPR appears to respond to PPI therapy, many patients show no symptomatic improvement, particularly with respect to extraesophageal symptoms. As such, there is a vital need to explore alternative treatment options, including anti-reflux surgery, lifestyle changes, and other classes of medications to better address LPR.

The suitability of the GERDyzer instrument in pH-test-proven laryngopharyngeal reflux patients

The use of validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments for the treatment outcome measure of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is crucial given the lack of objective markers. However, current symptom-based PRO instruments can only partially capture the impact of LPR. The GERD Analyzer (GERDyzer), an existing disease-specific PRO instrument, which measures multidimensional health-related quality of life (HRQL) affected by the illness rather than by any specific symptoms, has been validated in patients with erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Following the U.S. Food and Drug Administration PRO guidance, we cross-culturally adapted the GERDyzer instrument into Chinese, and examined the qualitative and quantitative psychometric properties of the Chinese version GERDyzer in pH-test-proven LPR patients.The GERDyzer comprises 10 dimensions of HRQL, including general well-being, pain/discomfort, physical health, diet, energy, activities, leisure activities, social life, mood, and sleep. To examine the content validity, we recruited 26 pH-test-proven LPR participants to conduct 4 focus group meetings for direct patient input on clinical manifestations and HRQL impacts. We also tested the quantitative psychometric properties, including reliability, validity, and responsiveness in 100 pH-test-proven LPR patients.Saturation of concept elicitation was achieved from the 4 focus groups, and a strong conceptual match was evident between the GERDyzer contents and responses from the focus group participants. Cognitive debriefing assessment showed that the Chinese version GERDyzer was adequate for use by patients as it demonstrated linguistic validation and cultural harmonization. Quantitative psychometric properties showed evidence of high internal consistency (Cronbach α: 0.96), good to excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.84-0.98). Confirmatory factor analysis supported a 2-factor structure. Convergent validity was confirmed by moderate correlation assessments referencing the Reflux Symptoms Index and the Reflux Questionnaire. The discriminant validity was supported by the ability to discriminate moderate-to-severe disease from mild disease. The responsiveness was also high in participants with and without typical GERD symptoms (effect sizes 1.20 and 1.21, respectively).In conclusion, the Chinese version GERDyzer instrument is a reliable, valid, and responsive instrument for assessing HRQL in Taiwanese patients with LPR.

An oropharyngeal pH monitoring device to evaluate patients with chronic laryngitis

BACKGROUND

Diagnostics for gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) are suboptimal because of limited sensitivity. We performed in vitro and in vivo studies to systematically assess the performance characteristics of an oropharyngeal pH probe.

METHODS

In vitro studies compared the oropharyngeal probe with a standard pH catheter in liquid and aerosolized solutions, pH 1-7. The accuracy of measurements, deviation from target pH, and time to equilibrium pH were determined. Simultaneous distal esophageal pH measurements were obtained in 11 patients with GERD. Oropharyngeal and distal esophageal reflux parameters were measured for controls (n = 20), patients with GERD (n = 17), and patients with chronic laryngitis (n = 10).

KEY RESULTS

In the liquid phase, at pH 4-5, the oropharyngeal probe had less deviation from the target value than the standard catheter; deviation in the vapor phase was similar (0.4 pH units). Median (interquartile) time to reach equilibrium pH was significantly (P < 0.001) faster with the oropharyngeal than the standard probe. In comparing simultaneous distal esophageal pH characteristics, 96% of recordings with the new and standard probes were in agreement to within ± 1.0 pH unit; 71% of recordings were in agreement within ± 0.5 pH units. Patients with chronic laryngitis had significantly higher levels of oropharyngeal acid exposure at pH <4, <5, and <6, in the upright position than patients with GERD or controls (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Oropharyngeal pH monitoring appears to be more sensitive than traditional pH monitoring in evaluation of patients with extraesophageal reflux. It is a promising tool in evaluation of this difficult group of patients.

Extraesophageal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease

This article discusses the current state of knowledge regarding the relationship between gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and pulmonary and ear/nose/throat manifestations of reflux and outlines the recent developments in the diagnostic and treatment strategies for this difficult group of patients. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and pH monitoring are poorly sensitive for diagnosing reflux in this group of patients. Instead it is recommended that in those without warning symptoms, an empiric trial of proton-pump inhibitors be the initial approach to diagnosing and treating the potential underlying cause of these extraesophageal symptoms.

Therapeutic strategies for laryngeal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is increasingly associated with ear, nose, and throat symptoms, including laryngitis. Many patients are unaware of the gastroesophageal etiology of their symptoms. A variety of criteria are used to diagnose this condition, including laryngoscopy, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, and the use of ambulatory pH and impedance monitoring. However, no test serves as the gold standard for the diagnosis given their lack of sensitivity and specificity for reflux disease. Numerous trials have assessed the role of proton pump inhibitor therapy in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux and most have revealed no benefit to acid suppression over placebo. Despite many uncertainties there has been some progress regarding the role of acid-suppressive therapy as well as other agents in this unique group of patients. In this review we explore therapeutic options and their rationale for patients with laryngeal signs and symptoms.