Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Double probe pH-monitoring findings in patients with benign lesions of the true vocal folds: comparison with typical GERD and the effect of smoking

  • Laryngology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We conducted a pH-monitoring study to determine the prevalence of pathologic gastroesophageal reflux (GER+) and laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR+) in patients with resected benign true vocal fold lesions (TVFLs) and positive reflux finding score (RFS). We compared our findings with those of patients with typical GER disease (GERD) symptoms and normal laryngoscopy. In the group of patients with TVFLs, we compared the pH-monitoring findings of smokers with those of non-smokers. Seventy-two [females 32, mean (SD) age 49.3 (13.1) years] patients with resected TVFLs (polyps: 32, nodules: 20, Reinke’s edema: 12, granulomas: 4, leukoplakia: 4) and 24 [females 14, mean (SD) age 42.2 (13.4) years] patients with typical GERD symptoms, who served as controls for the hypopharyngeal measurements, underwent 24-h double probe, hypopharyngeal and distal esophageal, ambulatory pH monitoring. Thirty-eight (52.8%) patients with TVFLs had GER+ and 52 (72.2%) had LPR+. More laryngopharyngeal reflux episodes (LPREs) were detected in patients with TVFLs compared to those with GERD (P < 0.001). With respect to the specific TVFLs, 12 (37.5%) patients with polyps had GER+ and 24 (75%) had LPR+, 6 (30%) patients with nodules had GER+ and 12 (60%) had LPR+, 6 (50%) patients with Reinke’s edema had GER+ and 8 (66.7%) had LPR+ and all the patients with granuloma or leucoplakia had both GER+ and LPR+. Twenty (55.6%) of the 36 smokers and 32 (88.9%) of the 36 non-smokers with TVFLs had LPR+ (P = 0.003), while GER+ was recorded in 16 (44.4%) smokers and 22 (61.1%) non-smokers (P = 0.238). Smokers had significantly less LPREs (P < 0.001). In conclusion, 24-h double probe pH monitoring may detect GER+ and/or LPR+ in a substantial proportion of patients with resected TVFLs and positive RFS. Our study suggests that LPR+ is more prevalent in patients with TVFLs compared with typical GERD patients and that non-smokers with TVFLs are more likely to have LPR+ than smokers with TVFLs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hammer HF (2009) Reflux-associated laryngitis and laryngopharyngeal reflux: a gastroenterologist’s point of view. Dig Dis 27:14–17. doi:10.1159/000210098

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vaezi MF (2008) Laryngeal manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 10:271–277. doi:10.1007/s11894-008-0055-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Vavricka SR, Storck CA, Wildi SM, Tutuian R, Wiegand N, Rousson V, Fruehauf H, Mullhaupt B, Fried M (2007) Limited diagnostic value of laryngopharyngeal lesions in patients with gastroesophageal reflux during routine upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 102:716–722. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01145.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Vaezi MF (2007) Are there specific laryngeal signs for gastroesophageal reflux disease? Am J Gastroenterol 102:723–724. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01143.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vaezi MF (2003) Sensitivity and specificity of reflux-attributed laryngeal lesions: experimental and clinical evidence. Am J Med 115(Suppl 3A):97S–104S. doi:10.1016/S0002-9343(03)00205-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pontes P, Tiago R (2006) Diagnosis and management of laryngopharyngeal reflux disease. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 14:138–142. doi:10.1097/01.moo.0000193193.09602.51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Vaezi MF (2006) Review article: the role of pH monitoring in extraoesophageal gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 23(Suppl 1):40–49. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.02797.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kuhn J, Toohill RJ, Ulualp SO, Kulpa J, Hofmann C, Arndorfer R, Shaker R (1998) Pharyngeal acid reflux events in patients with vocal cord nodules. Laryngoscope. 108:1146–1149. doi:10.1097/00005537-199808000-00008

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ulualp SO, Toohill RJ, Shaker R (1999) Pharyngeal acid reflux in patients with single and multiple otolaryngologic disorders. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 121:725–730. doi:10.1053/hn.1999.v121.a98010

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chung JH, Tae K, Lee YS, Jeong JH, Cho SH, Kim KR, Park CW, Han DS (2009) The significance of laryngopharyngeal reflux in benign vocal mucosal lesions. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 141:369–373. doi:10.1016/j.otohns.2009.05.033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Altman KW (2007) Vocal fold masses. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 40:1091–1108. doi:10.1016/j.otc.2007.05.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Eslick GD, Talley NJ (2009) Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD): risk factors, and impact on quality of life-a population-based study. J Clin Gastroenterol 43:111–117. doi:10.1097/MCG.0b013e31815ea27b

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jamieson JR, Stein HJ, DeMeester TR, Bonavina L, Schwizer W, Hinder RA, Albertucci M (1992) Ambulatory 24-h esophageal pH monitoring: normal values, optimal thresholds, specificity, sensitivity, and reproducibility. Am J Gastroenterol 87:1102–1111

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Katsinelos P, Kountouras J, Chatzimavroudis G, Zavos C, Beltsis A, Paroutoglou G, Kamarianis N, Pournaras A, Pilpilidis I (2009) Should inspection of the laryngopharyngeal area be part of routine upper gastrointestinal endoscopy? A prospective study. Dig Liver Dis. 41:283–288. doi:10.1016/j.dld.2008.06.015

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Vardouniotis AS, Karatzanis AD, Tzortzaki E, Athanasakis E, Samara KD, Chalkiadakis G, Siafakas N, Velegrakis GA (2009) Molecular pathways and genetic factors in the pathogenesis of laryngopharyngeal reflux. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 266:795–801. doi:10.1007/s00405-009-0966-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Frye JW, Vaezi MF (2008) Extraesophageal GERD. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 37:845–858. doi:10.1016/j.gtc.2008.09.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, Dent J, Jones R, Group Global Consensus (2006) The Montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus. Am J Gastroenterol 101:1900–1920. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00630.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Koufman JA (1991) The otolaryngologic manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD): a clinical investigation of 225 patients using ambulatory 24-hour pH monitoring and an experimental investigation of the role of acid and pepsin in the development of laryngeal injury. Laryngoscope. 101(Suppl 53):1–78

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Belafsky PC (2006) PRO: empiric treatment with PPIs is not appropriate without testing. Am J Gastroenterol 101:6–8. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00448_2.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ayazi S, Lipham JC, Hagen JA, Tang AL, Zehetner J, Leers JM, Oezcelik A, Abate E, Banki F, DeMeester SR, DeMeester TR (2009) A new technique for measurement of pharyngeal pH: normal values and discriminating pH threshold. J Gastrointest Surg. 13:1422–1429. doi:10.1007/s11605-009-0915-6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Marshall RE, Anggiansah A, Anggiansah CL, Owen WA, Owen WJ (1999) Esophageal body length, lower esophageal sphincter length, position and pressure in health and disease. Dis Esophagus. 12:297–302. doi:10.1046/j.1442-2050.1999.00060.x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Byrne PJ, Power C, Lawlor P, Ravi N, Reynolds JV (2006) Laryngopharyngeal reflux in patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Dis Esophagus. 19:377–381. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2050.2006.00600.x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Williams RB, Ali GN, Wallace KL, Wilson JS, De Carle DJ, Cook IJ (1999) Esophagopharyngeal acid regurgitation: dual pH monitoring criteria for its detection and insights into mechanisms. Gastroenterology 117:1051–1061. doi:10.1016/S0016-5085(99)70389-6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Harrell SP, Koopman J, Woosley S, Wo JM (2007) Exclusion of pH artifacts is essential for hypopharyngeal pH monitoring. Laryngoscope. 117:470–474. doi:10.1097/MLG.0b013e31802d344c

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Schreiber S, Garten D, Sudhoff H (2009) Pathophysiological mechanisms of extraesophageal reflux in otolaryngeal disorders. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 266:17–24. doi:10.1007/s00405-008-0770-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kantas I, Balatsouras DG, Kamargianis N, Katotomichelakis M, Riga M, Danielidis V (2009) The influence of laryngopharyngeal reflux in the healing of laryngeal trauma. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 266:253–259. doi:10.1007/s00405-008-0744-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Smit CF, Copper MP, van Leeuwen JA, Schoots IG, Stanojcic LD (2001) Effect of cigarette smoking on gastropharyngeal and gastroesophageal reflux. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 110:190–193

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Pehl C, Pfeiffer A, Wendl B, Nagy I, Kaess H (1997) Effect of smoking on the results of esophageal pH measurement in clinical routine. J Clin Gastroenterol 25:503–506. doi:10.1097/00004836-199710000-00004

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Ahmad I, Batch AJ (2004) Acid reflux management: ENT perspective. J Laryngol Otol 118:25–30. doi:10.1258/002221504322731583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None declared.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Endoscopy and Motility Unit, Central Hospital, Ethnikis Aminis 41, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Athanasios Beltsis, Panagiotis Katsinelos, Dimitrios Kapetanos & Kostas Fasoulas

  2. Second Department of Internal Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Ippokration Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Jannis Kountouras & Christos Zavos

  3. ENT Department, Central Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Nikolaos Kamarianis & Agathoklis Pournaras

  4. Second Propedeutic Department of Internal Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Ippokration Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Chrysanthos Zamboulis & Nikolaos Eugenidis

Authors
  1. Athanasios Beltsis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Panagiotis Katsinelos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jannis Kountouras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nikolaos Kamarianis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christos Zavos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Agathoklis Pournaras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Dimitrios Kapetanos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Kostas Fasoulas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Chrysanthos Zamboulis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Nikolaos Eugenidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Athanasios Beltsis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Beltsis, A., Katsinelos, P., Kountouras, J. et al. Double probe pH-monitoring findings in patients with benign lesions of the true vocal folds: comparison with typical GERD and the effect of smoking. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 268, 1169–1174 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1572-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1572-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation