Dataset Information

Upper Esophageal Sphincter Compression Device as an Adjunct to Proton Pump Inhibition for Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Reflux Band, an external upper esophageal sphincter (UES) compression device, reduces esophago-pharyngeal reflux events. This study aimed to assess device efficacy as an adjunct to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

Methods

This two-phase prospective clinical trial enrolled adults with at least 8 weeks of laryngeal symptoms (sore throat, throat clearing, dysphonia) not using PPI therapy at two tertiary care centers over 26 months. Participants used double dose PPI for 4 weeks in Phase 1 and the external UES compression device nightly along with PPI for 4 weeks in Phase 2. Questionnaire scores and salivary pepsin concentration were measured throughout the study. The primary endpoint of symptom response was defined as reflux symptom index (RSI) score ≤ 13 and/or > 50% reduction in RSI.

Results

Thirty-one participants completed the study: 52% male, mean age 47.9 years (SD 14.0), and mean body mass index (BMI) 26.2 kg/m² (5.1). Primary endpoint was met in 11 (35%) participants after Phase 1 (PPI alone) and 17 (55%) after Phase 2 (Device + PPI). Compared to baseline, mean RSI score (24.1 (10.9)) decreased at end of Phase 1 (PPI alone) (21.9 (9.7); p = 0.06) and significantly decreased at end of Phase 2 (Device + PPI) (15.5 (10.3); p < 0.01). Compared to non-responders, responders to Device + PPI had a significantly lower BMI (p = 0.02) and higher salivary pepsin concentration (p = 0.01).

Conclusion

This clinical trial highlights the potential efficacy of the external UES compression device (Reflux Band) as an adjunct to PPI for patients with LPR (ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT03619811).

SUBMITTER: Yadlapati R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8286644 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:HypothesisScreening for esophageal adenocarcinoma has focused on identifying Barrett esophagus (BE) in patients with severe, long-standing symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Unfortunately, 95% of patients who develop esophageal adenocarcinoma are unaware of the presence of BE before their cancer diagnosis, which means they never had been selected for screening. One possible explanation is that no correlation exists between the severity of GERD symptoms and cancer risk. We hypothesize that severe GERD symptoms are not associated with an increase in the prevalence of BE, dysplasia, or cancer in patients undergoing primary endoscopic screening.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingUniversity hospital.PatientsA total of 769 patients with GERD.InterventionsPrimary screening endoscopy performed from November 1, 2004, through June 7, 2007.Main outcomes measuresSymptom severity, proton pump inhibitor therapy, and esophageal adenocarcinogenesis (ie, BE, dysplasia, or cancer).ResultsEndoscopy revealed adenocarcinogenesis in 122 patients. An increasing number of severe GERD symptoms correlated positively with endoscopic findings of esophagitis (odds ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.09). Conversely, an increasing number of severe GERD symptoms were associated with decreased odds of adenocarcinogenesis (odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-0.98). Patients taking proton pump inhibitors were 61.3% and 81.5% more likely to have adenocarcinogenesis if they reported no severe typical or atypical GERD symptoms, respectively, compared with patients taking proton pump inhibitors, who reported that all symptoms were severe.ConclusionsMedically treated patients with mild or absent GERD symptoms have significantly higher odds of adenocarcinogenesis compared with medically treated patients with severe GERD symptoms. This finding may explain the failure of the current screening paradigm in which the threshold for primary endoscopic examination is based on symptom severity.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:This study was conducted to investigate the current practices of Asian otolaryngologists for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). METHODS:An online survey about LPR was sent to 2,000 members of Asian otolaryngological societies, and a subgroup analysis was performed between Western and Eastern Asian otolaryngologists. The survey was conducted by the Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Study Group of Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Oto-rhino-laryngological Societies. RESULTS:Among approximately 1,600 Asian otolaryngologists, 146 completed the survey (62 from Western Asian countries, 84 from Eastern Asian countries). A substantial majority (73.3%) of the otolaryngologists considered LPR and gastroesophageal reflux disease to be different diseases. The symptoms thought to be closely related to LPR were coughing after lying down, throat clearing, and globus sensation. The findings thought to be closely related to LPR were posterior commissure granulations and hypertrophy, arytenoids, and laryngeal erythema. The respondents indicated that they mostly diagnosed LPR (70%) after an empirical therapeutic trial of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Although multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH (MII-pH) monitoring is a useful tool for diagnosing nonacid or mixed LPR, 78% of Asian otolaryngologists never or very rarely used MII-pH. Eastern Asian otolaryngologists more frequently used once-daily PPIs (64.3% vs. 45.2%, P=0.021), whereas Western Asian otolaryngologists preferred to use twice-daily PPIs (58.1% vs. 39.3%, P=0.025). The poor dietary habits of patients were considered to be the main reason for therapeutic failure by Asian otolaryngologists (53.8%). Only 48.6% of Asian otolaryngologists considered themselves to be adequately knowledgeable and skilled regarding LPR. CONCLUSION:Significant differences exist between Western and Eastern Asian otolaryngologists in the diagnosis and treatment of LPR. Future consensus statements are needed to establish diagnostic criteria and therapeutic regimens.