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.

Abilities of Oropharyngeal pH Tests and Salivary Pepsin Analysis to Discriminate Between Asymptomatic Volunteers and Subjects With Symptoms of Laryngeal Irritation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It has been a challenge to confirm the association between laryngeal symptoms and physiological reflux disease. We examined the ability of oropharyngeal pH tests (with the Restech Dx-pH system) and salivary pepsin tests (with Peptest) to discriminate between asymptomatic volunteers (controls) and subjects with a combination of laryngeal and reflux symptoms (laryngeal ± reflux).

METHODS

We performed a physician-blinded prospective cohort study of 59 subjects at a single academic institution. Adult volunteers were recruited and separated into 3 groups on the basis of GerdQ and Reflux Symptom Index scores: controls (n = 20), laryngeal symptoms (n = 20), or laryngeal + reflux symptoms (n = 19). Subjects underwent laryngoscopy and oropharyngeal pH tests and submitted saliva samples for analysis of pepsin concentration. Primary outcomes included abnormal acid exposure and composite (RYAN) score for oropharyngeal pH tests and abnormal mean salivary pepsin concentration that was based on normative data.

RESULTS

Complete oropharyngeal pH data were available from 53 subjects and complete salivary pepsin data from 35 subjects. We did not observe any significant differences between groups in percent of time spent below pH 4.0, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, or RYAN scores or percent of subjects with positive results from tests for salivary pepsin (53% vs 40% vs 75%; P = .50, respectively). The laryngeal + reflux group had a significantly higher estimated mean concentration of salivary pepsin (117.9 ± 147.4 ng/mL) than the control group (32.4 ± 41.9 ng/mL) or laryngeal symptom group (7.5 ± 11.2 ng/mL) (P = .01 and P = .04, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

By using current normative thresholds, oropharyngeal pH testing and salivary pepsin analysis are not able to distinguish between healthy volunteers and subjects with a combination of laryngeal and reflux symptoms.

Impaired upper esophageal sphincter reflexes in patients with supraesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Normal responses of the upper esophageal sphincter (UES) and esophageal body to liquid reflux events prevent esophagopharyngeal reflux and its complications, however, abnormal responses have not been characterized. We investigated whether patients with supraesophageal reflux disease (SERD) have impaired UES and esophageal body responses to simulated reflux events.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of 25 patients with SERD (age, 19-82 y; 13 women) and complaints of regurgitation and supraesophageal manifestations of reflux. We also included 10 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD; age, 32-60 y; 7 women) without troublesome regurgitation and supraesophageal symptoms and 24 healthy asymptomatic individuals (controls: age, 19-49 y; 13 women). UES and esophageal body pressure responses, along with luminal distribution of infusate during esophageal rapid and slow infusion of air or liquid, were monitored by concurrent high-resolution manometry and intraluminal impedance.

RESULTS

A significantly smaller proportion of patients with SERD had UES contractile reflexes in response to slow esophageal infusion of acid than controls or patients with GERD. Only patients with SERD had abnormal UES relaxation responses to rapid distension with saline. Diminished esophageal peristaltic contractions resulted in esophageal stasis in patients with GERD or SERD.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with SERD and complaints of regurgitation have impaired UES and esophageal responses to simulated liquid reflux events. These patterns could predispose them to esophagopharyngeal reflux.