Objectives To evaluate the necessity of multiple salivary pepsin tests within a day when diagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux. Study Design Prospective cohort study. Setting Tertiary hospitals. Methods A total of 138 patients with signs and/or symptoms associated with laryngopharyngeal reflux were included. Salivary pepsin was detected on the day of 24-hour pH monitoring, and the results of salivary pepsin detected once in the morning and multiple times in 1 day were compared with the results of pH monitoring. Results Among the 138 patients, pH monitoring results were positive in 112. Salivary pepsin was positive in 47 cases in the morning, which was not consistent with the results of pH monitoring (kappa value = 0.117). With the pH monitoring results as the standard, the salivary pepsin detected once in the morning had a sensitivity of 38.4% (43/112) and a specificity of 84.6% (22/26) for the diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux. When salivary pepsin was detected multiple times per day, 102 patients tested positive. The consistency with pH monitoring was moderate (kappa value = 0.587). The sensitivity was 86.6% (97/112), and the specificity was 80.8% (21/26). Of the 97 patients with positive results from pH monitoring and salivary pepsin detected multiple times a day, 54 had negative findings for a single detection in the morning, indicating that 55.7% (54/97) of the true positive cases were missed. Conclusion Although a single detection of salivary pepsin in the morning is more economical, the sensitivity is too low, and it is necessary to detect it multiple times a day.

Purpose: Laryngoscopy, the most common diagnostic method for vocal cord lesions (VCLs), is based mainly on the visual subjective inspection of otolaryngologists. This study aimed to establish a highly objective computer-aided VCLs diagnosis system based on deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) and transfer learning. Methods: To classify VCLs, our method combined the DCNN backbone with transfer learning on a system specifically finetuned for a laryngoscopy image dataset. Laryngoscopy image database was collected to train the proposed system. The diagnostic performance was compared with other DCNN-based models. Analysis of F1 score and receiver operating characteristic curves were conducted to evaluate the performance of the system. Results: Beyond the existing VCLs diagnosis method, the proposed system achieved an overall accuracy of 80.23%, an F1 score of 0.7836, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.9557 for four fine-grained classes of VCLs, namely, normal, polyp, keratinization, and carcinoma. It also demonstrated robust classification capacity for detecting urgent (keratinization, carcinoma) and non-urgent (normal, polyp), with an overall accuracy of 0.939, a sensitivity of 0.887, a specificity of 0.993, and an AUC of 0.9828. The proposed method also outperformed clinicians in the classification of normal, polyps, and carcinoma at an extremely low time cost. Conclusion: The VCLs diagnosis system succeeded in using DCNN to distinguish the most common VCLs and normal cases, holding a practical potential for improving the overall diagnostic efficacy in VCLs examinations. The proposed VCLs diagnosis system could be appropriately integrated into the conventional workflow of VCLs laryngoscopy as a highly objective auxiliary method.

ObjectivesTo compare the screening value of the Reflux Symptom Score (RSS) and the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).MethodsAll included patients attending the Department of Otolaryngology at the Sixth Medical Center of the PLA General Hospital from February 2022 to August 2022, completed the RSS and the RSI and underwent 24‐hour hypopharyngeal‐esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance‐pH (24 h HEMII‐pH) monitoring. The results of 24 h HEMII‐pH were used as a diagnostic criterion for LPR, consistency between two questionnaires (RSS, RSI) and 24 h HEMII‐pH was compared by the weighted Cohen's kappa statistic and the screening value of RSS and RSI for LPR was compared by receiver operating characteristics analysis.ResultsA total of 77 patients, 58 males, and 19 females, were included. The Kappa values of between RSS, RSI, and 24 h HEMII‐pH were 0.663 (p < 0.001) and 0.213 (p < 0.05), respectively. The sensitivity of RSS and RSI were 92.8% and 48.2%, respectively, the specificity was 71.4% and 80.9%. The negative predictive value and positive predictive value of RSI were 36.9%, 87.1%, and that of RSS were 78.9%, 89.6%. The area under curve of the RSS (0.783; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.75) is significantly higher than RSI (0.633; 95% CI = 0.72, 0.90).ConclusionThe RSS has a higher consistency and better screening value for LPR compared to RSI. In addition, the RSS includes more reflux symptoms, which may reduce the number of missed diagnoses in patients with LPR to some extent.Level of Evidence3 Laryngoscope, 133:2104–2109, 2023

Objective To investigate the optimal time point for diagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) through combining 24‐h hypopharyngeal‐esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance‐pH (24‐h HEMII‐pH) monitoring and the multi‐time point salivary pepsin test (MTPSPT). Study Design Prospective uncontrolled trial. Method Patients with and without LPR symptoms were included as the test group and the control group, respectively. The patients in the test group underwent 24‐h HEMII‐pH and MTPSPT. The results of 24‐h HEMII‐pH were used as a diagnostic criterion for LPR, and the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin tests performed at different time points was compared by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results A total of 153 patients were included. Based on 24‐h HEMII‐pH, the positive rate of LPR in the test group of patients was 84.00%. In the control group, only one person (3.57%) had a positive salivary pepsin test result. The area under the curve (AUC) of the MTPSPT was 0.827. In addition, we separately calculated the AUC of the combined salivary pepsin test at different time points, and found good diagnostic value (AUC = 0.799) when the test was combined with the waking, 1 and 2 h after breakfast and lunch, and 1 h after dinner tests. However, when the number of tests were further increased, the diagnostic value did not improve significantly. Conclusion Salivary pepsin testing combined with waking, 1 h and 2 h after breakfast and lunch, and 1 h after dinner has almost the same diagnostic value as MTPSPT, and testing at these time points can be an effective method for diagnosing LPR. Level of Evidence 3 Laryngoscope, 133:1706–1711, 2023

No abstract