4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Composite pH Predicts Esomeprazole Response in Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Without Typical Reflux Syndrome

期刊

LARYNGOSCOPE
卷 123, 期 6, 页码 1483-1489

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/lary.23780

关键词

Laryngopharyngeal reflux; pH parameter; proton pump inhibitors; treatment effectiveness

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives/Hypothesis: Factors predicting the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in patients with suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) are unclear. PPI treatment in patients without concomitant esophageal syndrome remains controversial. We investigated whether composite pH can predict PPI treatment response for LPR with or without concomitant typical reflux syndrome (CTRS). Study Design: Prospective, open-label therapeutic cohort study. Methods: Patients with LPR in a tertiary center divided by presence (n = 65) and absence (n = 42) of CTRS underwent 24-hour esophagopharyngeal pH test and took esomeprazole (40 mg, twice daily) for 12 weeks. Positive composite pH was defined as the presence of 1) excessive pharyngeal acid reflux, and/or 2) excessive distal esophageal acid reflux. A responder was defined as a patient with >= 50% reduction in primary laryngeal symptoms. The change in reflux symptoms was determined using the reflux symptom index (RSI) questionnaire. Logistic regression and mixed model were used to evaluate the predictability of the composite pH parameter. Results: After 8 and 12 weeks of treatment, participants with positive composite pH were 10.3-fold (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-61.5; P = .01) and 7.9-fold (95% CI, 1.4-44.8; P = .02) more likely to respond, respectively, than participants with negative composite pH among patients without CTRS. However, no difference was found in those with CTRS. Weekly repeated measures of RSI yielded similar findings. Conclusions: In patients with suspected LPR without CTRS, a composite pH parameter, which incorporates pharyngeal and distal esophageal acid reflux, may predict response to esomeprazole therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据