Sakin Yusuf S, Vardar Rukiye, Sezgin Baha, Cetin Zeynep Erdogan, Alev Yasemin, Yildirim Esra, Kirazli Tayfun, Bor Serhat
Department of Gastroenterology, Gulhane Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Department of Gastroenterology, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey.
United European Gastroenterol J. 2017 Aug;5(5):632-640. doi: 10.1177/2050640616675040. Epub 2016 Oct 12.
The diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux is currently based on a combination of the patient history of multichannel intraluminal impedance and ambulatory pH (MII-pH); however, none of these findings alone is specific for the diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux. We aimed to compare the baseline characteristics and esophageal baseline impedance values between patients with and without laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms.
We retrospectively analyzed data from two groups of patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux according to their reflux finding score (RFS) as scored by ENTs. Control patients were nonerosive reflux disease patients without laryngopharyngeal reflux. All MII-pH parameters and baseline impedance were analyzed from six levels and the proximal and distal baseline impedance and the ratio of the proximal to distal baseline impedance levels was calculated.
Altogether 123 patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux and 49 control patients were included. A total of 81 of 123 patients had RFS ≥ 7, and 42 of 123 patients had RFS < 7. Baseline impedance analysis showed that patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms had significantly lower proximal baseline impedance values (1997 ± 51 vs 2245 ± 109, < 0.05) than the control group. Additionally, patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms had a significantly lower proximal-to-distal ratio (1.28 ± 0.05 vs 1.53 ± 0.09, < 0.05). In the subgroup analysis, patients with RFS < 7 were found to have a significantly lower acid exposure time than either the patients with RFS ≥ 7 (3.85 ± 0.65 vs 8.2 ± 1.52, < 0.05) or the control group (3.85 ± 0.65 vs 6.1 ± 0.81, < 0.05). Additionally, patients with RFS ≥ 7 had significantly lower proximal baseline impedance levels than the control group (1970 ± 63 vs 2245 ± 109, < 0.05).
Patients with pathologic laryngopharyngeal reflux symptom scores had lower proximal baseline impedance levels and lower proximal-to-distal ratios, which may reflect the proximal mucosal noxious effect of the refluxate. These results may indicate that laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms may be due to chronic acid exposure in the proximal segments of the esophagus, and the proximal-to-distal ratio may be used as a new metric for diagnosis.
目前喉咽反流的诊断基于多通道腔内阻抗与动态pH值监测(MII-pH)的患者病史相结合;然而,这些发现单独来看均不具有喉咽反流诊断的特异性。我们旨在比较有和没有喉咽反流症状的患者的基线特征和食管基线阻抗值。
我们根据耳鼻喉科医生评分的反流发现评分(RFS)对两组喉咽反流患者的数据进行回顾性分析。对照患者为无喉咽反流的非糜烂性反流病患者。从六个水平分析所有MII-pH参数和基线阻抗,并计算近端和远端基线阻抗以及近端与远端基线阻抗水平之比。
共纳入123例喉咽反流患者和49例对照患者。123例患者中,共有81例RFS≥7,42例RFS<7。基线阻抗分析显示,有喉咽反流症状的患者近端基线阻抗值(1997±51 vs 2245±109,P<0.05)显著低于对照组。此外,有喉咽反流症状的患者近端与远端之比显著更低(1.28±0.05 vs 1.53±0.09,P<0.05)。在亚组分析中,发现RFS<7的患者酸暴露时间显著低于RFS≥7的患者(3.85±0.65 vs 8.2±1.52,P<0.05)或对照组(3.85±0.65 vs 6.1±0.81,P<0.05)。此外,RFS≥7的患者近端基线阻抗水平显著低于对照组(1970±63 vs 2245±109,P<0.05)。
具有病理性喉咽反流症状评分的患者近端基线阻抗水平和近端与远端之比更低,这可能反映了反流物对近端黏膜的有害作用。这些结果可能表明喉咽反流症状可能是由于食管近端的慢性酸暴露所致,近端与远端之比可作为一种新的诊断指标。