An International Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Clinics

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 3 ( September-December, 2023 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Revisiting the Clinical Practices in Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease; Measures that Decrease the Duration of Treatment

Ram Kumar, Preethi Umamaheswaran, Deepakraj Venkatesan, Sriram Ramamurthy

Keywords : Gastroesophageal reflux disease, Laryngoscopy, Laryngopharyngeal reflux

Citation Information : Kumar R, Umamaheswaran P, Venkatesan D, Ramamurthy S. Revisiting the Clinical Practices in Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease; Measures that Decrease the Duration of Treatment. Int J Otorhinolaryngol Clin 2023; 15 (3):107-110.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10003-1473

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 09-01-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Abstract

Introduction: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a very common disease seen in the ENT outpatient department. Reflux symptom index (RSI) and Reflux findings score (RFS) are used to diagnose LPR clinically. The treatment of LPR includes dietary and behavioral modifications for all patients in addition to pharmacotherapy. This study aims to revisit the clinical practices followed in the treatment of LPR and to find out measures that decrease the duration of treatment. Materials and methods: An interventional study was conducted on 50 patients who presented with reflux symptoms. Reflux symptom index and RFS were used to diagnose LPR. Patients started on treatment with the tablet rabeprazole 20 mg twice daily for 6 weeks along with proper counseling regarding lifestyle modification (LSM). Patients were asked to review after 3 weeks and divided into two groups. They were reviewed again at the end of 6 weeks and treatment response was assessed. Patients were divided into two groups with group A having patients who followed the pharmacotherapy and LSM advice without deviation, group B having patients with poor treatment compliance by not following LSM measures. Treatment response was assessed using RSI and RFS. An independent sample t-test was applied to compare the pretreatment and posttreatment RSI and RFS and the results were tabulated. Results: The mean RSI was found to be 12.23 in group A and 12.41 in group B before starting treatment. The mean posttreatment RSI was found to be 6.27 in group A and 8.36 in group B. The mean difference in RSI between the pretreatment and posttreatment values was found to be 5.95 in group A and 4.05 in group B. Independent t-test was applied for the mean difference in RSI and the p-value was found to be 0.002. The mean RFS was 6.73 in group A and 6.77 in group B before starting treatment. The mean posttreatment RFS was 4.09 in group A and 4.55 in group B. The mean difference in RFS was found to be 2.64 in group A and 2.23 in group B. Independent sample t-test was applied for the mean difference in RFS and the p-value was found to be 0.372. Conclusion: Reflux symptom index is found to be a sensitive index of prognosis of LPR and it can be used in monitoring the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment in the outpatient clinic. From our study, we have observed that patients who followed LSM measures effectively had a significant improvement in reflux symptoms sooner than patients who did not follow LSM measures. Lifestyle modifications alone do not suffice in the treatment of LPR. A combination of both, with effective counseling, is needed for the successful treatment of LPR.


PDF Share
  1. El-Serag HB. Time trends of gastroesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007;5(1):17–26. DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2006.09.016.
  2. Vaezi MF, Hicks DM, Abelson TI, et al. Laryngeal signs and symptoms and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD): A critical assessment of cause and effect association. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2003;1(5):333–344. DOI: 10.1053/s1542-3565(03)00177-0.
  3. Belafsky PC, Postma GN, Koufman JA. Validity and reliability of the reflux symptom index (RSI). J Voice 2002;16(2):274–277. DOI: 10.1016/s0892-1997(02)00097-8.
  4. Richter JE, Kahrilas PJ, Sontag SJ, et al. Comparing lansoprazole and omeprazole in onset of heartburn relief: Results of a randomized, controlled trial in erosive esophagitis patients. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96(11):3089–3098. DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2001.05263.x.
  5. Belafsky PC, Postma GN, Amin MR, et al. Symptoms and findings of laryngopharyngeal reflux. ENT Ear Nose Throat J 2004;(Suppl): Article ID: 3 0209.
  6. Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, et al. Global consensus group. The montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: A global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101(8):1900–1920. DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00630.x.
  7. Ness-Jensen E, Lindam A, Lagergren J, et al. Weight loss and reduction in gastroesophageal reflux. A prospective population-based cohort study: The HUNT study. Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108(3):376–382. DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2012.466.
  8. Ludemann JP, Manoukian J, Shaw K, et al. Effects of simulated gastro-oesophageal reflux on the untraumatized rabbit larynx. J Otolaryngol 1998;27(3):127–131. PMID: 9664240.
  9. Kahrilas PJ, Shaheen NJ, Vaezi MF. American gastroenterology association institute technical review on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterology 2008;135(4):1392–1413. DOI: 10.1053/j. gastro.2008.08.044.
  10. Koufman JA. Low-acid diet for recalcitrant laryngopharyngeal reflux: Therapeutic benefits and their implications. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2011;120(5):281–287. DOI: 10.1177/000348941112000501.
  11. Koufman JA, Johnston N. Potential benefits of pH 8.8 alkaline drinking water as an adjunct in the treatment of reflux disease. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2012;121(7):431–434. DOI: 10.1177/000348941212100702.
  12. Zalvan CH, Hu S, Greenberg B, et al. A comparison of alkaline water and Mediterranean diet vs proton pump inhibition for treatment of laryngopharyngeal reflux. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017;143(10):1023–1029. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2017.1454.
  13. Mattoo O, Yousuf A, Mir A, et al. Laryngopharyngeal reflux: Prospective study analyzing various non surgical treatment modalities for LPR. Int J Phonosurg Laryngol 2012;2(1):5–8. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10023-1026.
  14. Tsunoda K, Ishimoto S, Suzuki M, et al. An effective management for laryngeal granuloma caused by Gastroesophageal reflux: Combination therapy with suggestions for LSM. Acta Otolaryngol 2007;127(1):88–92. DOI: 10.1080/00016480600606665.
  15. Bhargava A, Faiz SM, Srivastava MR, et al. Role of proton pump inhibitors in LPR: Clinical evaluvation in a North Indian population. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck surg 2017;71(3):371–377. DOI: 10.1007/s12070-018-1493-2.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.