Instruments evaluating the clinical findings of laryngopharyngeal reflux: A systematic review

Objectives: To identify the instruments for evaluating the clinical findings (ICFs) of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) designed for use with regard to diagnosis and treatment effectiveness. Methods: The PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were used to search for subject headings following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. Three investigators retrieved relevant studies published between 1990 and 2018 describing the evolution of laryngopharyngeal findings throughout LPR treatment. Issues of clinical relevance, that is, LPR diagnosis, treatments, and signs assessed for diagnosis or as therapeutic outcomes, were assessed. The investigators also evaluated the psychometric properties (conceptual model, content validity, consistency, reliability, concordance, convergent validity, known-groups validity, responsiveness to change, and interpretability) of the ICF. The risk of bias was assessed with the tool of the Clarity Group and Evidence Partners. Results: The search identified 1,227 publications with a total of 4,735 LPR patients; of these studies, 53 met the inclusion criteria. Of these 53 studies, we identified 10 unvalidated and six validated ICFs. None of the validated ICFs included all the psychometric properties. The main identified deficiencies related to ICF psychometric validation included variable construct validity, disparate and uncertain reliabilities, and a lack of interpretability. The lack of consideration of certain LPR laryngeal and extralaryngeal signs is the main weakness of ICFs, biasing content, and construct validities. Conclusion: The low specificity of LPR signs, the lack of consideration of many findings, and the absence of a gold standard for diagnosis constitute barriers to the further validation of these ICFs. Additional studies are needed to develop complete and reliable ICFs. Laryngoscope, 2018

Clinical outcomes of laryngopharyngeal reflux treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives: To investigate the therapeutic benefit of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) over placebo in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and to analyze the epidemiological factors of heterogeneity in the literature. Methods: An electronic literature search was conducted to identify articles published between 1990 and 2018 about clinical trials describing the efficiency of medical treatment(s) on LPR. First, a meta-analysis of placebo randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PPIs versus placebo was conducted according to diet. The heterogeneity, response to PPIs, and evolution of clinical scores were analyzed for aggregate results. Second, a systematic review of diagnosis methods, clinical outcome of treatment, and therapeutic regimens was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Results: The search identified 1,140 relevant publications, of which 72 studies met the inclusion criteria for a total of 5,781 patients. Ten RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The combined relative risk was 1.31 in favor of PPIs and increased to 1.42 when patients did not receive diet recommendations. Randomized controlled trials were characterized by a significant heterogeneity due to discrepancies in clinical therapeutic outcomes, diagnosis methods (lack of gold standard diagnostic tools), and therapeutic scheme. The epidemiological analysis of all articles supports the existence of these discrepancies in the entire literature. In particular, many symptoms and signs commonly encountered in LPR are not assessed in the treatment effectiveness. The lack of diagnosis precision and variability of inclusion criteria particularly create bias in all reported and included articles. Conclusion: This meta-analysis supports a mild superiority of PPIs over placebo and the importance of diet as additional treatment but demonstrates the heterogeneity between studies, limiting the elaboration of clear conclusions. International recommendations are proposed for the development of future trials

Evaluation and Management of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease: State of the Art Review

Objective: To review the current literature about the epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). Data Sources: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature on LPR epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment was conducted. Using the PRISMA statement, 3 authors selected relevant publications to provide a critical analysis of the literature. Conclusions: The important heterogeneity across studies in LPR diagnosis continues to make it difficult to summarize a single body of thought. Controversies persist concerning epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment. No recent epidemiologic study exists regarding prevalence and incidence with the use of objective diagnostic tools. There is no survey that evaluates the prevalence of symptoms and signs on a large number of patients with confirmed LPR. Regarding diagnosis, an increasing number of authors used multichannel intraluminal impedance\u2013pH monitoring, although there is no consensus regarding standardization of the diagnostic criteria. The efficiency of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy remains poorly demonstrated and misevaluated by incomplete clinical tools that do not take into consideration many symptoms and extralaryngeal findings. Despite the recent advances in knowledge about nonacid LPR, treatment protocols based on PPIs do not seem to have evolved. Implications for Practice: The development of multichannel intraluminal impedance\u2013pH monitoring and pepsin and bile salt detection should be considered for the establishment of a multiparameter diagnostic approach. LPR treatment should evolve to a more personalized regimen, including diet, PPIs, alginate, and magaldrate according to individual patient characteristics. Multicenter international studies with a standardized protocol could improve scientific knowledge about LPR