Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
, 11 (2), 141-145

Comparison of Characteristics According to Reflux Type in Patients With Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

Affiliations

Comparison of Characteristics According to Reflux Type in Patients With Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

Jun Seok Lee et al. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol.

Abstract

Objectives: To analyze laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) as an acidic, nonacidic, or mixed type according to 24-hour multi-channel intraluminal impedance (MII) pH monitoring and the clinical characteristics of each type.

Methods: Ninety patients were prospectively enrolled in this study. All patients underwent 24-hour MII pH monitoring as a diagnostic tool. Eighty-three patients were diagnosed with LPR. The patients were classified into three groups according to the pH of the hypopharyngeal probe: the acid reflux group, nonacid reflux group, and mixed reflux group. Subjective symptoms and objective findings were evaluated based on patients' responses to the Short Form 12 Survey (SF-12), LPR health-related quality of life (LPR-HRQOL), reflux symptom index, and reflux finding score.

Results: The results of each group were compared. As a result, 34 patients were classified into the nonacid reflux group and 49 into the mixed reflux group. There were no patients classified as having acid reflux alone. There was no significant difference between the two groups when comparing the reflux symptom index, reflux finding score, LPR-HRQOL, or the mental component score of the SF-12. However, the physical component score of the SF-12 was higher in the nonacid reflux group (P=0.018). The DeMeester composite score (P=0.015) and total number of LPR events (P=0.001) were lower in the nonacid reflux group than in the mixed reflux group.

Conclusion: In conclusion, no LPR patient had only acid reflux. The nonacid reflux LPR patients showed similar clinical characteristics and findings compared to the mixed reflux group, but exhibited significantly fewer LPR episodes.

Keywords: 24-Hour Multichannel Intraluminal Impedance pH Monitoring; Laryngopharyngeal Reflux; Reflux Type.

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Flow chart of this study. MII, multichannel intraluminal impedance; LPR, laryngopharyngeal reflux.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 2 PubMed Central articles

References

    1. Koufman JA, Aviv JE, Casiano RR, Shaw GY. Laryngopharyngeal reflux: position statement of the committee on speech, voice, and swallowing disorders of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002 Jul;127(1):32–5. - PubMed
    1. Hicks DM, Ours TM, Abelson TI, Vaezi MF, Richter JE. The prevalence of hypopharynx findings associated with gastroesophageal reflux in normal volunteers. J Voice. 2002 Dec;16(4):564–79. - PubMed
    1. Hoppo T, Sanz AF, Nason KS, Carroll TL, Rosen C, Normolle DP, et al. How much pharyngeal exposure is “normal”? Normative data for laryngopharyngeal reflux events using hypopharyngeal multichannel intraluminal impedance (HMII) J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Jan;16(1):16–24. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sifrim D, Castell D, Dent J, Kahrilas PJ. Gastro-oesophageal reflux monitoring: review and consensus report on detection and definitions of acid, non-acid, and gas reflux. Gut. 2004 Jul;53(7):1024–31. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ford CN. Evaluation and management of laryngopharyngeal reflux. JAMA. 2005 Sep;294(12):1534–40. - PubMed
Feedback