SavedAdd your journal

Journals / ENT Updates / 2012 / Cilt: 2 Sayı: 3

Results of 24-hour pH monitorization in laryngopharyngeal reflux cases presenting with various symptoms

Farklı belirtilerle başvuran larengofarengeal reflü olgularında 24 saatlik pH monitörizasyon sonuçları

Murat KAR
İmran SAN
Baki KORKMAZ
Abdullah ÖZGÖNÜL
İsmail İYNEN
Pages
106–113
Publication Date
2012-09-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

With respect to our results, 24-hour double-channel pH monitorization turns out to be a reliable method in the diagnosis of LPR in cases suspected for laryngopharyngeal reflux.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), an atypical form of gastroesophageal reflux (GER), may present with non-specific symptoms of upper aerodigestive system.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, we aimed to show the LPR frequency of various symptom groups by 24-hour double-channel pH monitorization.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:With respect to our results, 24-hour double-channel pH monitorization turns out to be a reliable method in the diagnosis of LPR in cases suspected for laryngopharyngeal reflux.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Larengofarengeal reflü · gastroözefageal reflü · tanı

Abstract

Objective: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), an atypical form of gastroesophageal reflux (GER), may present with non-specific symptoms of upper aerodigestive system. In this study, we aimed to show the LPR frequency of various symptom groups by 24-hour double-channel pH monitorization. Methods: A total of 125 patients and 20 healthy controls were enrolled to this study between July 2007 and July 2008. Patients were assigned to 5 different groups with respect to their chief complaints (gastrointestinal, bronchial, laryngeal, pharyngeal and rhinologic). All patients underwent 24-hour double-channel pH monitorization and diagnosis of LPR was confirmed if one or more pH results were below 4.0 in proximal channel. Results: Laryngopharyngeal reflux was detected in 18 of 19 patients (94%) in gastrointestinal group, 24 of 25 patients (96%) in bronchial group, 26 of 31 patients (83%) in laryngeal group, 27 of 29 patients (93%) in pharyngeal group, 19 of 21 patients (90%) in rhinologic group and 2 of 20 patients (10%) in the control group. The highest incidence of LPR was encountered in the bronchial group, whereas the lowest incidence for LPR was detected in laryngeal group. Conclusion: Laryngopharyngeal reflux may present with a wide spectrum of symptoms in daily otorhinolaryngology practice. With respect to our results, 24-hour double-channel pH monitorization turns out to be a reliable method in the diagnosis of LPR in cases suspected for laryngopharyngeal reflux.

Özet

Amaç: Gastroözofageal reflünün atipik klinik şekillerinden biri olan larengofarengeal reflünün (LFR) kulak burun boğaz hastalıkları pratiğinde pek çok belirtiden sorumlu olduğu düşünülmektedir. Çalışmamızda farklı belirtiler gösteren gruplarda LFR sıklığını 24 saatlik çift kanallı pH metre monitörizasyonu ile göstermeyi amaçladık. Yöntem: Bu çalışma, Temmuz 2007–Temmuz 2008 arasında çeşitli kulak burun boğaz ve baş boyun semptomları ile başvuran olgular üzerinde yapıldı. Semptom ve bulgularına göre olgular 5 farklı grup (gastrointestinal, bronşial, larengeal, farengeal, rinolojik) ve herhangi bir yakınması olmayan bireylerden bir kontrol grubu oluşturuldu. Tüm olgulara 24 saatlik çift kanallı pH monitörizasyonu yapıldı. Proksimal kanalda bir ve daha fazla pH değerinin 4.0'ın altına düşmesi LFR pozitif olarak kabul edildi. Bulgular: Ölçüm sonuçlarına göre LFR, gastrointestinal semptom grubunda %94 (18/19), bronşial semptom grubunda %96 (24/25), larengeal semptom grubunda %83 (26/31), farengeal semptom %93 (27/29), rinolojik semptom grubunda %90 (19/21), kontrol grubunda ise %10 (2/20) sıklığında tespit edilmiştir. Semptomlara göre değerlendirildiğinde larengofarengeal reflü en sık bronşial grupta saptanırken, en düşük insidans larengeal grupta gözlenmiştir. Sonuç: Larengofarengeal reflü, klinikte oldukça farklı kulak burun boğaz semptomlarıyla karşımıza çıkabilmektedir. Larengofarengeal reflüden şüphelenilen olgularda kesin tanı için 24 saatlik çift kanallı pH monitörizasyonu etkin bir yöntem teşkil etmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KAR, M., SAN, İ., KORKMAZ, B., ÖZGÖNÜL, A., İYNEN, İ. (2012). Results of 24-hour pH monitorization in laryngopharyngeal reflux cases presenting with various symptoms. ENT Updates, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 3, 106–113. https://ajindex.com/articles/986840

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Koufman JA. The otolaryngologic manifestations of gastroe- sophageal reflux disease (GERD): a clinical investigation of 225 patients using ambulatory 24-hour ph-monitoring and an exper- imental investigation of the role of acid and pepsin in the devel- opment of laryngeal injury. Laryngoscope 1991;101(4 Pt 2 Suppl 53):1-78. Koufman JA. Laryngopharyngeal reflux is different from classic gas- troesophageal reflux disease. Ear Nose Throat J 2002;81(9 Suppl 2):7-9.
  2. Postma GN, Belafsky PC, Aviv JE, Koufman JA. Laryngopharyngeal reflux testing. Ear Nose Throat J 2002;81(9 Suppl 2):14-8.
  3. Yorulmaz I, Ozlugedik S, Kucuk B. Gastroesophageal reflux dis- ease: symptoms versus pH monitoring results. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003;129:582-6.
  4. Ylitalo R, Lindestad PA, Ramel S. Symptoms laryngeal findings and 24-hour pH monitoring in patients with suspected gastroe- sophago-pharyngeal reflux. Laryngoscope 2001;111:1735-41.
  5. Qadeer MA, Swoger J, Milstein C, et al. Correlation between symp- toms and laryngeal signs in laryngopharyngeal reflux. Laryngoscope 2005;115:1947-52.
  6. Belafsky PC, Postma GN, Koufman JA. Laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms improve before changes in physical findings. Laryngoscope 2001;111:979-81.
  7. Belafsky PC, Postma GN, Koufman JA. The validity and relia- bility of the reflux finding score (RFS). Laryngoscope 2001;111: 1313-7.
  8. Harrell S, Evans B, Goudy S, et al. Design and implementation of an ambulatory pH monitoring protocol in patients with sus- pected laryngopharyngeal reflux. Laryngoscope 2005;115:89-92. Belafsky P C. Symptoms and findings of laryngopharyngeal reflux. Ear Nose Throat J 2002;81(9 Suppl 2):10-13.
  9. Abbeele T, Couloigner V, Faure C, Narcy P. The role of 24 h pH- recording in pediatric otolaryngologic gastro-esophageal reflux disease. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2003;67 Suppl 1:S95-100. Divi V, Benninger MS Diagnosis and management of laryn- gopharyngeal reflux disease. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;14:124-7.
  10. Koufman JA, Belafsky PC, Bach KK, Daniel E, Postma GN. Prevalence of esophagitis in patients with ph-documented laryn- gopharyngeal reflux. Laryngoscope 2002;112:1606-9. Belafsky PC. Abnormal endoscopic pharyngeal and laryngeal find- ings attributable to reflux. Am J Med 2003;115 Suppl 3A:90S-96S. Belafsky PC, Postma GN, Koufman JA. The association between laryngeal pseudosulcus and laryngopharyngeal reflux. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;126:649-52.
  11. Reichel O, Keller J, Rasp G, Hagedorn H, Berghaus A. Efficacy of onc