PubMed · 13288775
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J G SCANNELL. 1956-02-09. Thoracic surgery.. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm195602092540606
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Pharyngeal acid reflux events may be significant in the pathogenesis of various supraesophageal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Intragroup variation and an extensive overlap among subject groups and normal controls make proximal esophageal 24-hour pH monitoring studies unreliable for the diagnosis of pharyngeal reflux. However, the clinical value of pharyngeal pH monitoring still remains uncertain. A 24-hour pharyngeal pH monitoring study has shown that at least some pharyngeal reflux events occur in most healthy subjects, mainly in the upright position. Based on these data, values for the upper limits of normal for total pharyngeal acid exposure time and pharyngeal acid events have been determined. This study provides clinicians with reference values for physiologic pharyngeal reflux, but the parameters of abnormal pharyngeal reflux events are still unknown. More research is needed before this practice can become part of the routine evaluation of patients with pharyngeal, laryngeal, respiratory, or ear, nose, and throat symptoms or disorders.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: Laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD) can have various causes. Because LPRD differs from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), the pH monitoring has to be performed directly next to the entrance of the larynx. This is now possible using a new system called pH-RESPONSE. METHODS: The ambulatory pH was monitored using the double probe pH-RESPONSE in 20 patients with suspected LPRD. The number of refluxes, the number of long refluxes and the period in which the pH was below 4 were compared at the level of the larynx with the data from the esophageal electrode. The DeMeester score was also determined. RESULTS: The system was well tolerated by 19/20 patients. In 12 patients a GERD could be proved and ten also had LPRD. Surprisingly, these patients had no typical signs such as heart burn. The number of refluxes measured in the esophagus was a third that of the larynx. The average time of pH below 4 was 30 min. CONCLUSION: The pH-RESPONSE easily allows ambulatory 24 -h double probe pH monitoring to diagnose LPRD. Because large differences were found between data form the esophagus from the level of the larynx, 24-h double probe pH monitoring should be a standard procedure before starting any therapy for LPRD.