4.1 Review

Gastroesophageal reflux and carcinoma of larynx or pharynx: a meta-analysis

Journal

ACTA OTO-LARYNGOLOGICA
Volume 134, Issue 10, Pages 982-989

Publisher

INFORMA HEALTHCARE
DOI: 10.3109/00016489.2014.927592

Keywords

GERD; laryngopharyngeal reflux; esophagogastroduodenoscopy; esophageal pH monitoring

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30801283]
  2. Technology Project of Shanghai [11JC1410802, 09QA1401000, 10QA1405900]
  3. Shanghai's health system of talents training plan [XYQ2011055, XYQ2011015]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Conclusion: The meta-analysis supported the proposition that the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was associated with laryngeal cancer, particularly in the hospital-based control group and diagnosed by esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) or esophageal pH monitoring. However, no significant association was found between GERD and pharyngeal carcinoma. Objectives: A number of studies have been conducted to investigate the relationship between gastroesophageal reflux and laryngeal or pharyngeal carcinoma. The conclusions are still debated. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of studies associated with the prevalence of GERD in laryngeal or pharyngeal cancer, published up to November 2013. Odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using random effects models or fixed effects models, according to heterogeneity I-2. Results: Ten studies were included in this meta-analysis. On average, GERD was significantly higher in the tumor tissue of the study group compared with normal tissue of the control group (OR = 2.17, 95% CI = 1.50, 3.14; random effects analysis). The pooled ORs for laryngeal carcinoma were 2.21 (95% CI = 1.53-3.19; I-2 = 97, random effects model) and 3.76 (95% CI = 0.21-67.48; I-2 = 94, random effects model) for pharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available