Mucosal changes in laryngopharyngeal reflux—prevalence, sensitivity, specificity and assessment

Powell, Jason; Cocks, Helen

doi:10.1002/lary.23693

Cited by 54 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…27,28 Compared with esophageal squamous mucosa, hypopharynx mucosa is easily injured by reflux contents. 29 In the esophagus, upper limit of tolerance to GER is 50 times per day in the normal physiological condition, but in the hypopharynx, upper limit is generally below 7 times per day. 30 Many studies found that esophageal intercellular space was increased in GERD and decreased after treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Bama Minipig Model of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and the Change of Laryngopharyngeal Mucosal Ultrastructure

Feng

Zhang²,

Chun-yan

et al. 2015

J Neurogastroenterol Motil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims To establish an animal model of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and study the effect of LPR on the laryngopharyngeal mucosal ultrastructure. Methods Ten Bama minipigs were randomly divided into control group and stent group. Every pig underwent endoscope, and baseline pH was monitored for 4 hours at laryngopharynx and distal esophagus, then specimens from laryngopharyngeal mucosa were biopsied. For the control group, these procedures were repeated on the 14th day. In the stent group, a custom-designed esophageal stent suit was implanted into esophagus, laryngopharyngeal and distal esophageal pH monitoring lasted for 2 hours, then stent suit was removed 3 days later. At last, the same procedures were done as the control group on the 14th day. Specimens were observed under transmission electron microscope to measure the intercellular space and desmosome number. Results In the control group, there was no laryngopharyngeal reflux on the first day and 14th day. Before the stent was implanted, there was also no laryngopharyngeal reflux in the stent group. In both 2 hours and 14 days after stent implantation, the num -ber of reflux, reflux time, and percentage time of pH < 4.0 were significantly increased ( P < 0.05) in the stent group. There was no difference in intercellular space and desmosomes in the control group between baseline and 14th day. In the stent group, intercellular space of laryngopharyngeal mucosa was significantly increased (0.37 μm vs 0.96 μm, P = 0.008), and the number of desmosomes was significantly decreased (20.25 vs 9.5, P = 0.003). Conclusions A Bama minipig model of LPR was established by implanting a custom-designed stent suit. LPR might destroy the laryngophar yngeal mucosal barrier.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Bama Minipig Model of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and the Change of Laryngopharyngeal Mucosal Ultrastructure

Feng

Zhang²,

Chun-yan

et al. 2015

J Neurogastroenterol Motil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The three main methods for LPR diagnosis include symptoms (reflux symptom index) [3,10], laryngeal findings (reflux finding score) [3,11,12], and 24-h pH monitoring [3,13,14]. However, each of these methods has limitations, and therefore, currently, there is no gold standard for the diagnosis of LPR [3].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Successful treatment of radiation-induced mucositis with proton pump inhibitor administration: A report of two laryngeal cancer cases

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In ENT specialist practice it is commonly laryngoscopy, which may reveal posterior laryngitis, swelling of the vocal folds (Reinke's edema), vocal cord nodules, mucosal metaplasia ("white-line") or laryngeal pseudo-sulcus and ulceration [19]. These signs are summarized in reflux finding score (RFS) scale [20], but none of them is characteristic only of LPR (RFS sensitivity at most is up to 88% and specificity up to 38%) [21,22]. Similarly, esophageal mucosa damage revealed in esophagogastroduodenoscopy may also occur in other conditions (e.g.…”

Section: Diagnostic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and Asthma

DembiÅski¹,

Aleks²,

Banaszkiewicz³

et al. 2013

J Allergy Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The gastroesophageal reflux presence in asthma has been the subject of many studies indicating their frequent coexisting. The essence of this correlation is not entirely clear and several hypotheses can be found in literature. Recently defined laryngopharyngeal reflux and studies on its impact on the course of asthma seem to bring us closer to understanding this issue. In the last years we gained access to the new diagnostic methods allowing direct registration of laryngopharyngeal reflux. This paper summarizes laryngopharyngeal reflux diagnostic possibilities including the most advanced technologies. It also evaluates published clinical studies, which investigated laryngopharyngeal reflux in asthma patients, both in adults and children. Journal of Allergy & Therapy Journ a l o f A llergy & T h e ra py ISSN: 2155-6121Citation: Dembiński Ł, Banaszkiewicz A, Albrecht P (2013) Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and Asthma. J Aller Ther S11: 008.

show abstract

Mucosal changes in laryngopharyngeal reflux—prevalence, sensitivity, specificity and assessment

Abstract: The limited evidence for each mucosal finding should be considered in making the diagnosis of LPR. Further quality research in to mucosal findings in LPR is needed.

Cited by 54 publications

References 71 publications

A Bama Minipig Model of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and the Change of Laryngopharyngeal Mucosal Ultrastructure

A Bama Minipig Model of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and the Change of Laryngopharyngeal Mucosal Ultrastructure

Successful treatment of radiation-induced mucositis with proton pump inhibitor administration: A report of two laryngeal cancer cases

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux and Asthma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About