Prevalence of gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux events: An evidence-based systematic review

Seckin O. Ulualp, Peter S. Roland, Robert J. Toohill, Reza Shaker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To identify variables contributing to discrepant gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux (GEPR) findings and to critically assess the prevalence of GEPR in healthy individuals and patients with reflux laryngitis (RL). Study design: Quantitative systematic review. Methods: Pharyngeal pH monitoring studies of healthy individuals and patients with RL were identified through a MEDLINE search of publications between 1966 and 2003. Pooled results of the measured pharyngeal acid exposure characteristics and the prevalence of GEPR events were analyzed. Statistical comparisons were performed using a χ2 test. Results: The study included 181 controls and 184 RL patients. Subjects' age ranged from 19 to 85 years. Gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux events were detected at 1, 2, and 4 cm above upper esophageal sphincter (UES) and 0.5 cm below arytenoids, with varying rates. The prevalence of GEPR ranged from 0% to 83% in controls and 27% to 86% in RL. After excluding the healthy subjects with abnormal esophageal acid exposure, prevalence of GEPR decreased from 35% to 17% (P ≤ .002). Gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux in RL was significantly more prevalent than in the entire group of controls as well as in controls without abnormal esophageal acid exposure (P ≤ .001). Conclusions: The prevalence of GEPR in controls and patients with RL varies in the studied 4 areas above the UES. The percentage of the subjects with GEPR increased as the probe was located more closely to the UES. Differences in demographic characteristics of the subjects, interventions used to select subjects, and pharyngeal pH monitoring techniques were identified as factors possibly contributing to inconsistent pharyngeal pH monitoring findings. The documented differences in methodology of existing studies make comparison of the studies difficult.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)239-244
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Medicine and Surgery
Volume26
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2005

Fingerprint

Laryngitis
Acids
Upper Esophageal Sphincter
MEDLINE
Publications
Healthy Volunteers
Demography
Control Groups

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Prevalence of gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux events : An evidence-based systematic review. / Ulualp, Seckin O.; Roland, Peter S.; Toohill, Robert J.; Shaker, Reza.

In: American Journal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Medicine and Surgery, Vol. 26, No. 4, 07.2005, p. 239-244.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{95eb5e69d01e4e818d4139fbe23acc02,
title = "Prevalence of gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux events: An evidence-based systematic review",
abstract = "Objectives: To identify variables contributing to discrepant gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux (GEPR) findings and to critically assess the prevalence of GEPR in healthy individuals and patients with reflux laryngitis (RL). Study design: Quantitative systematic review. Methods: Pharyngeal pH monitoring studies of healthy individuals and patients with RL were identified through a MEDLINE search of publications between 1966 and 2003. Pooled results of the measured pharyngeal acid exposure characteristics and the prevalence of GEPR events were analyzed. Statistical comparisons were performed using a χ2 test. Results: The study included 181 controls and 184 RL patients. Subjects' age ranged from 19 to 85 years. Gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux events were detected at 1, 2, and 4 cm above upper esophageal sphincter (UES) and 0.5 cm below arytenoids, with varying rates. The prevalence of GEPR ranged from 0{\%} to 83{\%} in controls and 27{\%} to 86{\%} in RL. After excluding the healthy subjects with abnormal esophageal acid exposure, prevalence of GEPR decreased from 35{\%} to 17{\%} (P ≤ .002). Gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux in RL was significantly more prevalent than in the entire group of controls as well as in controls without abnormal esophageal acid exposure (P ≤ .001). Conclusions: The prevalence of GEPR in controls and patients with RL varies in the studied 4 areas above the UES. The percentage of the subjects with GEPR increased as the probe was located more closely to the UES. Differences in demographic characteristics of the subjects, interventions used to select subjects, and pharyngeal pH monitoring techniques were identified as factors possibly contributing to inconsistent pharyngeal pH monitoring findings. The documented differences in methodology of existing studies make comparison of the studies difficult.",
author = "Ulualp, {Seckin O.} and Roland, {Peter S.} and Toohill, {Robert J.} and Reza Shaker",
year = "2005",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjoto.2005.01.005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "239--244",
journal = "American Journal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Medicine and Surgery",
issn = "0196-0709",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prevalence of gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux events

T2 - An evidence-based systematic review

AU - Ulualp, Seckin O.

AU - Roland, Peter S.

AU - Toohill, Robert J.

AU - Shaker, Reza

PY - 2005/7

Y1 - 2005/7

N2 - Objectives: To identify variables contributing to discrepant gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux (GEPR) findings and to critically assess the prevalence of GEPR in healthy individuals and patients with reflux laryngitis (RL). Study design: Quantitative systematic review. Methods: Pharyngeal pH monitoring studies of healthy individuals and patients with RL were identified through a MEDLINE search of publications between 1966 and 2003. Pooled results of the measured pharyngeal acid exposure characteristics and the prevalence of GEPR events were analyzed. Statistical comparisons were performed using a χ2 test. Results: The study included 181 controls and 184 RL patients. Subjects' age ranged from 19 to 85 years. Gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux events were detected at 1, 2, and 4 cm above upper esophageal sphincter (UES) and 0.5 cm below arytenoids, with varying rates. The prevalence of GEPR ranged from 0% to 83% in controls and 27% to 86% in RL. After excluding the healthy subjects with abnormal esophageal acid exposure, prevalence of GEPR decreased from 35% to 17% (P ≤ .002). Gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux in RL was significantly more prevalent than in the entire group of controls as well as in controls without abnormal esophageal acid exposure (P ≤ .001). Conclusions: The prevalence of GEPR in controls and patients with RL varies in the studied 4 areas above the UES. The percentage of the subjects with GEPR increased as the probe was located more closely to the UES. Differences in demographic characteristics of the subjects, interventions used to select subjects, and pharyngeal pH monitoring techniques were identified as factors possibly contributing to inconsistent pharyngeal pH monitoring findings. The documented differences in methodology of existing studies make comparison of the studies difficult.

AB - Objectives: To identify variables contributing to discrepant gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux (GEPR) findings and to critically assess the prevalence of GEPR in healthy individuals and patients with reflux laryngitis (RL). Study design: Quantitative systematic review. Methods: Pharyngeal pH monitoring studies of healthy individuals and patients with RL were identified through a MEDLINE search of publications between 1966 and 2003. Pooled results of the measured pharyngeal acid exposure characteristics and the prevalence of GEPR events were analyzed. Statistical comparisons were performed using a χ2 test. Results: The study included 181 controls and 184 RL patients. Subjects' age ranged from 19 to 85 years. Gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux events were detected at 1, 2, and 4 cm above upper esophageal sphincter (UES) and 0.5 cm below arytenoids, with varying rates. The prevalence of GEPR ranged from 0% to 83% in controls and 27% to 86% in RL. After excluding the healthy subjects with abnormal esophageal acid exposure, prevalence of GEPR decreased from 35% to 17% (P ≤ .002). Gastroesophagopharyngeal acid reflux in RL was significantly more prevalent than in the entire group of controls as well as in controls without abnormal esophageal acid exposure (P ≤ .001). Conclusions: The prevalence of GEPR in controls and patients with RL varies in the studied 4 areas above the UES. The percentage of the subjects with GEPR increased as the probe was located more closely to the UES. Differences in demographic characteristics of the subjects, interventions used to select subjects, and pharyngeal pH monitoring techniques were identified as factors possibly contributing to inconsistent pharyngeal pH monitoring findings. The documented differences in methodology of existing studies make comparison of the studies difficult.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=21344457200&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=21344457200&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjoto.2005.01.005

DO - 10.1016/j.amjoto.2005.01.005

M3 - Article

C2 - 15991089

AN - SCOPUS:21344457200

VL - 26

SP - 239

EP - 244

JO - American Journal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Medicine and Surgery

JF - American Journal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Medicine and Surgery

SN - 0196-0709

IS - 4

ER -