Dataset Information

Diagnostic Value of the PeptestTM in Detecting Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.

ABSTRACT: The PeptestTM is a non-invasive diagnostic test for measuring the pepsin concentration in saliva, which is thought to correlate with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of the Peptest in detecting LPR based on 24-h multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) monitoring using several hypopharyngeal reflux episodes as criterion for LPR. Patients with suspected LPR were examined with the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI), Reflux Finding Score (RFS), fasting Peptest, and MII-pH monitoring. We calculated the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the Peptest, RSI, and RFS based on the threshold of one and six hypopharyngeal reflux episodes. Altogether, the data from 46 patients were analyzed. When one hypopharyngeal reflux episode was used as a diagnostic threshold for LPR, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were, respectively, as follows: 35%, 33%, 100%, 100%, and 3%, for the Peptest; 39%, 40%, 0%, 95%, and 0%, for the RSI; and 57%, 58%, 0%, 96%, and 0%, for the RFS. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the Peptest for diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were 46%, 27%, 63%, 40.0%, and 48%, respectively. A positive Peptest is highly supportive of a pathological LPR diagnosis. However, a negative test could not exclude LPR.

SUBMITTER: Zelenik K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8268930 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Diagnostic Value of the Peptest<sup>TM</sup> in Detecting Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.

Zeleník Karol K Hránková Viktória V Vrtková Adéla A Staníková Lucia L Komínek Pavel P Formánek Martin M

Journal of clinical medicine 20210705 13

<h4>Background</h4>The Peptest<sup>TM</sup> is a non-invasive diagnostic test for measuring the pepsin concentration in saliva, which is thought to correlate with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of the Peptest in detecting LPR based on 24-h multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) monitoring using several hypopharyngeal reflux episodes as criterion for LPR.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with suspected LPR were examined with the Reflu ...[more]

PMID: 34279479

Similar Datasets

Project description: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, p < 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, p < 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, p < 0.05) or the control group (3.85 ± 0.65 vs 6.1 ± 0.81, p < 0.05). Additionally, patients with RFS ≥ 7 had significantly lower proximal baseline impedance levels than the control group (1970 ± 63 vs 2245 ± 109, p < 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.

Project description:BackgroundIt is unknown whether the reflux symptom index (RSI) can replace pH monitoring as a diagnostic tool for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in Chinese people. The relationships between reflux parameters and LPR symptoms also require further research.MethodsA total of 216 Chinese patients underwent laryngopharyngeal pH monitoring and filled out an RSI questionnaire. Laryngopharyngeal pH monitoring indicated a diagnosis of LPR for patients with 7 or more episodes of reflux or a reflex area index (RAI) of 6.3 or more. The RSI questionnaire indicated a diagnosis of LPR for patients with RSI scores of 14 or higher.ResultsOf the 216 patients, 85 were diagnosed with LPR as assessed by the RSI, and 72 were diagnosed with LPR through laryngopharyngeal pH monitoring. The Cohen's kappa coefficient comparing LPR diagnosis consistency between RSI score and laryngopharyngeal pH monitoring was 0.133 (P=0.007). This indicated the two diagnostic methods were consistent to a low degree; the total consistency rate was only 59.7% (129/216). The sensitivity of the RSI was 48.6% (35/72), and its specificity was 82.5% (94/114). For convenience, we named the nine symptom groups in the RSI sequentially as P1-P9. P1, P2, P3, P5, P6, and P7 were all correlated with at least one reflux parameter (P<0.05), but P4, P8, and P9 were not correlated with any reflux parameters (P>0.05). A total of 72 patients were diagnosed using pH monitoring, the gold standard for LPR diagnosis. The most common symptoms of LPR were found to be P9, P3, P8, P7, and P2 in these patients. The symptoms that most seriously affected patients were P9, P8, P3, P7, and P2.ConclusionsThe consistency in diagnosis of LPR between the RSI and laryngopharyngeal pH monitoring was poor, meaning the RSI is not a suitable LPR initial screening tool and cannot replace pH monitoring. Additionally, reflux symptoms P4, P8, and P9 were not correlated with any reflux parameters. The most prevalent LPR symptom was P9, followed by P3, P8, P7, and P2. The most severe symptom was also P9, followed by P8, P3, P7, and P2.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:This study was conducted to investigate the current practices of Asian otolaryngologists for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). METHODS:An online survey about LPR was sent to 2,000 members of Asian otolaryngological societies, and a subgroup analysis was performed between Western and Eastern Asian otolaryngologists. The survey was conducted by the Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Study Group of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Oto-rhino-laryngological Societies. RESULTS:Among approximately 1,600 Asian otolaryngologists, 146 completed the survey (62 from Western Asian countries, 84 from Eastern Asian countries). A substantial majority (73.3%) of the otolaryngologists considered LPR and gastroesophageal reflux disease to be different diseases. The symptoms thought to be closely related to LPR were coughing after lying down, throat clearing, and globus sensation. The findings thought to be closely related to LPR were posterior commissure granulations and hypertrophy, arytenoids, and laryngeal erythema. The respondents indicated that they mostly diagnosed LPR (70%) after an empirical therapeutic trial of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Although multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) monitoring is a useful tool for diagnosing nonacid or mixed LPR, 78% of Asian otolaryngologists never or very rarely used MII-pH. Eastern Asian otolaryngologists more frequently used once-daily PPIs (64.3% vs. 45.2%, P=0.021), whereas Western Asian otolaryngologists preferred to use twice-daily PPIs (58.1% vs. 39.3%, P=0.025). The poor dietary habits of patients were considered to be the main reason for therapeutic failure by Asian otolaryngologists (53.8%). Only 48.6% of Asian otolaryngologists considered themselves to be adequately knowledgeable and skilled regarding LPR. CONCLUSION:Significant differences exist between Western and Eastern Asian otolaryngologists in the diagnosis and treatment of LPR. Future consensus statements are needed to establish diagnostic criteria and therapeutic regimens.

Project description:BackgroundObstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) and laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) have been found to coexist in the population. OSAS and LPR also share obesity as an important risk factor. However, the relationship between LPR and OSAS remains unclear. This study aimed to correlate LPR as measured by the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) and the Reflux Finding Score (RFS) with OSAS.MethodsThis cross-sectional study included sixty-four subjects who underwent anamnesis to complete the RSI and the Epworth Sleeping Scale (ESS). The subjects were then divided into the OSAS and non-OSAS groups based on the Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) obtained through a polysomnography examination. Both groups underwent a flexible fiberoptic nasopharyngolaryngoscopy examination to determine the RFS. LPR was identified based on the RSI and RFS.ResultsThe mean BMI of the OSAS group significantly was higher than the non-OSAS group (p < 0.05). Most of the subjects in the OSAS group exhibited mild-moderate OSAS (AHI 10-29), and severe OSAS occurred in only seven subjects. The mean RSI and RFS values in the OSAS group did not differ significantly from the non-OSAS group (p = 0.34 and p = 0.36, respectively). The proportion of LPR between the mild-moderate OSAS group, the severe OSAS group, and the non-OSAS group did not differ significantly (p = 1.00). RSI and RFS did not significantly correlate with AHI. Based on RSI, the proportion of LPR between the ESS (+) and ESS (-) groups did not significantly differ (adjusted p = 0.062). The proportion of LPR based on RFS was almost equal between the ESS (+) and ESS (-) groups (p = 0.817).ConclusionsThe BMI of the OSAS group was significantly higher than the non-OSAS group. There was no significant difference in RSI and RFS between the OSAS and non-OSAS groups. There was no significant correlation between RSI and AHI, or between RFS and AHI. There was no significant difference in the proportion of RSI between the ESS (+) and the ESS (-) groups.

Dataset Information

Diagnostic Value of the PeptestTM in Detecting Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.

Publications

Diagnostic Value of the Peptest<sup>TM</sup> in Detecting Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets