ArticlePDF Available

Laryngopharyngeal Reflux in Pregnancy

Authors:

Abstract

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is the retrograde movement of gastric contents (acid and enzymes such as pepsin) in to the upper aerodigestive tract especially the laryngopharynx leading to symptoms referable to inflammatory diseases of larynx/ hypopharynx/throat/nose & paranasal sinuses/mouth/middle ears. Typical symptoms of LPR include hoarseness, globus pharyngeus (sensation of lump in the throat), cough, excessive mucus in the throat with throat clearing, and mild dysphagia. Sometime, the LPR patients including the pregnant women with LPR also have the excessive saliva and may occasionally complain of a sudden filling of the throat with bitter or salty saliva (water brash).LPR is related to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but is not identical to it. Patients with GERD may have no LPR, and conversely, patients with LPR may have no GERD. Most patients are relatively unaware of LPR with only 30 percent reporting heartburn.(1) There are no certain criteria that reliably demonstrate a causal link between acid reflux and LPR symptoms. In fact, the validity of reflux as a cause of LPR symptoms, in the absence of symptoms of GERD, has been called into question. Thus, it is likely that some patients are mistakenly diagnosed with LPR, and investigation of other causes of upper airway symptoms (such as allergy, sinus, or other causes of cough, etc) should be considered for patients who fail to respond to LPR management.
VOL. 19, NO. 2, APRIL 2011
40 Thai J Obstet Gynaecol
Thai Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
April 2011, Vol. 19, pp. 40-44 4216222-12
SPECIAL ARTICLE
Laryngopharyngeal Reux in Pregnancy
Worapong Vejvechaneyom MD.
Otolaryngologist-Head&Neck Surgeon, Samitivej Sukhumvit Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand
Introduction
Laryngopharyngeal reux (LPR) is the retrograde
movement of gastric contents (acid and enzymes such
as pepsin) in to the upper aerodigestive tract especially
the laryngopharynx leading to symptoms referable to
inammatory diseases of larynx/ hypopharynx/throat/
nose & paranasal sinuses/mouth/middle ears. Typical
symptoms of LPR include hoarseness, globus
pharyngeus (sensation of lump in the throat), cough,
excessive mucus in the throat with throat clearing, and
mild dysphagia. Sometime, the LPR patients including
the pregnant women with LPR also have the excessive
saliva and may occasionally complain of a sudden lling
of the throat with bitter or salty saliva (water brash).
LPR is related to gastroesophageal reux disease
(GERD), but is not identical to it. Patients with GERD
may have no LPR, and conversely, patients with LPR
may have no GERD. Most patients are relatively
unaware of LPR with only 30 percent reporting
heartburn.
(1)
There are no certain criteria that reliably
demonstrate a causal link between acid reux and LPR
symptoms. In fact, the validity of reux as a cause of
LPR symptoms, in the absence of symptoms of GERD,
has been called into question. Thus, it is likely that some
patients are mistakenly diagnosed with LPR, and
investigation of other causes of upper airway symptoms
(such as allergy, sinus, or other causes of cough, etc)
should be considered for patients who fail to respond
to LPR management.
Heartburn, the cardinal symptoms of GERD, is
a normal consequence of pregnancy. The predominant
etiology is the decrease in lower esophageal sphincter
pressure (LESP) caused by female sex hormones,
especially progesterone. Thus, GERD and LPR may be
ones of normal consequence of pregnancy. Most
patients begin to note their symptoms late in the rst
trimester or second trimester of pregnancy with
symptoms becoming more frequent and severe in the
latter months of gestation.
Epidemiology
There are relatively limited data on the prevalence
of LPR. It is difficult to determine the prevalence of LPR
in the population because there is no clear diagnostic
gold standard criteria to diagnose LPR. There are no
studies of the prevalence of LPR in pregnancy.
Pathophysiology
LPR can cause upper airway symptoms directly
or indirectly. The direct mechanism involves irritation of
upper aerodigestive mucosa by reuxate through the
action of caustic materials (ie, acid, pepsin etc.) on the
tissues. The indirect mechanism involves irritation of
distal esophagus by reuxate that does not reach the
upper aerodigestive mucosa, this irritation evokes the
vagally-mediated reexes that cause laryngeal and
bronchial reflexes (laryngospasm, apnea, cough,
asthma-like symptoms through bronchoconstriction
VOL. 19, NO. 2, APRIL 2011
41
Vejvechaneyom W. Laryngopharyngeal Reux in Pregnancy
etc.). Regardless of the pathway, factors such as the
resting tone of the upper and lower esophageal
sphincters (UES and LES) and the duration and
magnitude of increases in intraabdominal pressure are
important to the creation of the reuxate bolus.
In the rst trimester of pregnancy, basal (resting)
lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP) may not
change, but is less responsive to physiological stimuli
(i.e. pentagastrin, edrophonium chloride, methacholine
or a protein meal) that usually increase LESP
(2,3)
. In the
later two trimesters, LESP gradually falls approximately
33-50% of basal values reaching a nadir at 36 weeks
of gestation and rebounds to prepregnancy values 1-4
weeks postpartum
(4)
. Animal and human studies
reported that the increased circulating levels of
progesterone during pregnancy mediate the LES
relaxation (decreased LESP), but estrogen is
a necessary primer
(2)
. The role of increased
intraabdominal pressure because of the enlarging
gravid uterus is more controversial. All studies agreed
with the increasing intraabdominal pressure with the
increasing gestational age during pregnancy. It is
unknown whether the normal compensatory increasing
response of the LESP to these changes is impaired
during pregnancy
(2)
. Others have suggested that
abnormal gastric emptying or delayed small bowel
transit might contribute to reux in pregnancy. A limited
number of studies have examined the role of the LES,
esophageal motility, gastric emptying, and increased
intraabdominal pressure from the enlarged gravid uterus
in promoting reux during pregnancy.
Although gastric acid is common to both LPR
and GERD, there are many differences making LPR a
distinct clinical entity. The majority of GERD patients
have signs of esophagitis on biopsy, while only 25
percents of LPR patients do
(5)
. GERD is felt to be a
problem of the LES and mainly occurs in a supine
position. In contrast, LPR is seen as primarily an UES
problem that mainly occurs in the upright position during
periods of physical exertion (eg, bending over, Valsalva,
exercise)
(5)
. There appears to be a lower incidence of
esophageal dysmotility in LPR versus GERD.
CLINICAL MANIFESTATIONS
LPR is ubiquitous and associated with many
upper airway symptoms and diagnoses. In some cases,
the symptoms are the diagnosis, for example, LPR can
cause sore throat, chronic cough, globus pharyngeus,
and laryngospasm. Alternately, LPR can be associated
with specic histopathologic lesions, for example, vocal
process granulomas. LPR can be the sole cause or an
etiologic cofactor in the development of many disorders
of the upper airway.
The common LPR symptoms are dysphonia or
hoarseness, cough, globus pharyngeus, excessive
mucus in the throat/throat clearing, and mild
dysphagia. Even though the symptoms and nding of
LPR have been described, the clinical diagnosis is
sometimes elusive. Symptoms can occur in the
absence of conclusive physical ndings, and they can
be nonspecic symptoms. There are many factors
possible contributing the symptoms similar to LPR, such
as postnasal drip, allergic rhinitis, upper respiratory
infections, habitual throat clearing, tobacco or alcohol
use, excessive voice use, temperature or climate
change, emotional issues, environmental irritants, etc.
In addition to typical LPR symptoms, reflux-
induced respiratory symptoms are also common. The
association between LPR and asthma has been well
documented. Asthma can predispose a patient to have
reflux. Also, LPR can exacerbate asthma.
Microaspiration of gastric refluxate and resultant
bronchiectasis can also occur. Some investigators have
found strong associations between LPR and airway
stenosis, sleep apnea, laryngospasm, and nasal
congestion
(5)
. Although the etiology of these disorders
is multifactorial, LPR as a sole cause or as a cofactor
should be routinely considered in the differential
diagnosis of subglottic stenosis, asthma, laryngospasm,
bronchiectasis , chronic rhinitis, and sleep-disordered
breathing.
Diagonosis in The Pregnant Patients
There is significant controversy over the
appropriate way to diagnose LPR and there is no test
that is both easy to perform and highly reliable. Most
patients are diagnosed clinically based on symptoms
associated with LPR. In patients who are seeing an
VOL. 19, NO. 2, APRIL 2011
42 Thai J Obstet Gynaecol
otolaryngologist, the clinical history is generally
augmented with a laryngoscopic examination.
However, the lake of standardized criteria for the
diagnosis of LPR and the relatively poor correlation
between symptoms and endoscopic ndings of LPR
have been cited as a rationale against the use of
endoscopic techniques to diagnose LPR
(6,7)
.
The initial diagnosis of LPR in pregnancy can
reliably be made based on symptoms alone. Any
radiographs are not necessary and should be avoided
because of radiation exposure to the fetus. Esophageal
manometry and pH monitoring studies, as in the non-
pregnant patient, are rarely necessary during pregnancy
but can be performed safely. Endoscopic examination
(laryngoscopy or transnasal esophagoscopy) is the
procedure of choice to evaluate intractable LPR
symptoms.
Treatment of LPR During Pregnancy
The challenge of treatment during pregnancy is
the potential teratogenicity of common antireflux
medications. Diets and lifestyle modication is the key
for treating mild symptoms. Smaller meals, not eating
late at night, elevation of the head of the bed and sleep
by the left side, and avoiding foods and medications
causing reux usually relieve the mild symptoms seen
in early pregnancy. Chewing gum stimulates the salivary
gland can help neutralize acid by salivary bicarbonate.
Abstinence from alcohol and tobacco are encouraged
to reduce reux symptoms and to avoid fetal exposure
to these harmful substances.
For more troubling reux symptoms, the doctor
must discuss with the patient about benets versus the
risk of drug therapy. Informed consent is appropriate.
Nearly all medications are not tested in randomized-
controlled studies in pregnant women because of ethical
and medicolegal concerns. Most recommendations on
drug safety arise from case reports and cohort studies
by doctors, pharmaceutical companies or the FDA.
Voluntary reporting by the manufacturers suffers from
unknown duration of follow-up, absence of appropriate
controls and possible reporting bias
(8)
.
The incidence of major fetal malformations in the
general population ranges between 1% and 3%. The
US FDA divides the safety of drugs during pregnancy
into ve categories (A, B, C, D and X) based on systemic
absorption and reports of congenital defects in animals
or humans (Table 1)
Table 1. US FDA Classication of Drugs for Pregnancy
(2)
FDA classication Denition
Category A Well controlled studies in humans show no fetal risk
Category B
Animal studies show no risks, but human studies inadequate or animal studies show some
risk not supported by human studies
Category C
Animal studies show risk but human studies are inadequate or lacking or no studies in
humans or animals
Category D Denite fetal abnormalities in human studies but potential benets may outweigh the risks
Category X
Contraindicated in pregnancy, fetal abnormalities in animals or humans. Risks outweigh
benets
Table 2. summarizes the drugs used for reux diseases in pregnancy.
VOL. 19, NO. 2, APRIL 2011
43
Vejvechaneyom W. Laryngopharyngeal Reux in Pregnancy
Table 2. FDA Classication of Drugs Used for Reux Diseases in Pregnancy (modied from Ref.2)
Drugs FDA class Comments
Antacids
Aluminium-, calcium- or
magnesium-containing
antacids
None Most are safe for use during pregnancy and for aspiration prophylaxis
during labour because of minimal absorption
Magnesium trisilicates None Avoid long-term, high-dose therapy in pregnancy
Sodium bicarbonate None Not safe for use in pregnancy as causes uid overload and metabolic
alkalosis
Mucosal protectant
Sucralfate B No teratogenicity in animals. Generally regarded as acceptable for
human use because of minimal absorption
Histamine
2
-receptor antagonist (H
2
RA)
Ranitidine B Ranitidine is the only H
2
RA whose efficacy during pregnancy has
been established
Promotility agents
Metoclopramide B No teratogeneic effects in animals or humans reported
Proton-pump inhibitors
Omeprazole C Embryotoxic and fetotoxic in animals. Case reports in human suggest
similar concerns. Acceptable for use for aspiration prophylaxis in
labour
Lansoprazole B No fetal teratogenicity or harm. Limited human pregnancy data. Use
is acceptable for aspiration prophylaxis during pregnancy
Rabeprazole B No fetal teratogenicity or harm. Limited human pregnancy data. Use
is acceptable for aspiration prophylaxis during pregnancy
Pantoprazole B No fetal teratogenicity or harm. Limited human pregnancy data.
Use is acceptable for aspiration prophylaxis during pregnancy
Esomeprazole B No fetal teratogenicity or harm. Limited human pregnancy data.
Use is acceptable for aspiration prophylaxis during pregnancy
Alginates (Gaviscon ) from a strong, non-systemic
barrier in the stomach, preventing reux of stomachs
contents (acid, pepsin, and foods) in to the esophagus
(acts as the “antireuxant”).
The H2RAs are the most commonly used and
safest medications for the pregnant woman with reux
not responding to lifestyle modification and non-
absorbable medication. The H2RAs are category B
drugs for pregnancy. Ranitidine has no antiandrogenic
activity in animal
(10)
. Neither H2RA has reports of
human sexual defects in infants.
Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most
effective drug therapy for symptom control and healing
of reflux esophagitis. The PPIs have not been as
extensively used in pregnancy as the H2RAs, or is their
efficacy proven in pregnancy, and the data about total
safety are more limited. However, unlike the non-
pregnant patients, PPIs should only be used during
pregnancy in women with well-dened complicated
reux diseases, not responding to lifestyle modication,
antacid, mucosal protectants, promotility drugs, and
H2RAs.
VOL. 19, NO. 2, APRIL 2011
44 Thai J Obstet Gynaecol
Unlike the non-pregnant patient, step-up therapy
is preferred (diets and lifestyle modication à antacids
à mucosal protectants à alginate compoundsà
promotility drugs à H2RAs à PPIs) in pregnant patients.
CONCLUSION
There are no studies of the prevalence of LPR
in pregnancy, but LPR may be one of normal
consequence of pregnancy. The predominant cause is
a decrease in LESP caused by female sex hormones,
especially progesterone. Serious reux complications
during pregnancy are uncommon; therefore upper
endoscopy and other diagnostic tests are usually not
needed. Symptomatic pregnant patient should be
managed with a step-up algorithm beginning with diets
and lifestyle modication. Antacids or sucralfate are
considered the rst-line medical therapy. If symptoms
persist, alginate compounds or promotility drugs or any
of the H2RAs can be used. PPIs are reserved for women
with intractable symptoms or complicated reux disease.
Most drugs are excreted in breast milk. Of the systemic
absorbed agents, only ranitidine is safe to use during
lactation.
References
1. Vejvechaneyom W. Laryngopharyngeal reux. 2nd Ed.
Medinfo G.D. Bangkok.
2. Richter JE. Gastroesophageal reux disease during
pregnancy. Gastroenterol Clin North A 2003;32: 235-61.
3. Fisher RS, Roberts GS, Grabowski CJ, et al. Altered
lower esophageal sphincter function during early
pregnancy. Gastroenterology 1978; 74: 1233-7.
4. Van Thiel DH, Gavaler JS, Joshi SN, et al. Heartburn
of pregnancy. Gastroenterology 1977; 72:666-8.
5. Koufman JA, Aviv JE, Casiano RR, Shaw GY.
Laryngopharyngeal reux. Otolaryngol Head Neck
Surgy 2002; 127: 32-5.
6. Book DT, Rhee JS, Toohill RJ, Smith TL. Perspectives
in laryngopharyngeal reux: an international survey.
Laryngoscope 2002 ; 112: 1399-406.
7. Branski RC, Bhattacharyya N, Shapiro J. The reliability
of the assessment of endoscopic laryngeal ndings
associated with laryngopharyngeal reflux disease.
Laryngoscope 2002 ; 112: 1019-24.
8. Broussard CN, Richter JE. Treating gastro-oesophageal
reux disease during pregnancy and lactation: what
are the safest therapy options? Drug Saf 1998; 19: 325-
3 7.
9. Lewis JH, Weingold AB. The use of gastrointestinal drugs
during pregnancy and lactation. Am J Gastroenterol
1985; 80: 912-23.
10. Parker S, Schade RR, Pohl CR,et al . Prenatal and
neonatal exposure of male rat pups to cimetidine but not
ranitidine adversely affects subsequent adult sexual
functioning. Gastroenterology 1984;86:675-80.
Chapter
Gastro-oesophageal reflux is a condition that occurs even in normal, healthy people. It should be distinguished, however, from gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), in which the stomach contents are refluxed to an extent that troublesome signs and symptoms are produced and the patient’s quality of life suffers. Koufman wrote the first description of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in 1991 [1]. LPR refers to a situation wherein the stomach contents are refluxed back up the oesophagus to a level higher than the superior oesophageal sphincter [2]. There is a high frequency of both GORD and LPR in general populations. Pregnant women are particularly prone to GORD, especially in the last trimester of pregnancy. Up to four out of five women have this issue [3]. LPR and GORD have several features in common, but they represent separate disease entities (see Table 49.1) [4]. Ten percent of the US population are thought to suffer from heartburn each day, whilst 20% have symptoms at least once a week and between 30 and 60% report heartburn from time to time [5]. In pregnant women, the principal complaint is heartburn, which becomes increasingly frequent over the course of the pregnancy, but resolves following delivery [6]. There is an inverse correlation between the age of the mother and the likelihood of suffering heartburn whilst pregnant [7].KeywordsLaryngitisLaryngopharyngeal refluxOtolaryngologyPregnancyPostpartum period
Article
Lower esophageal sphincter pressure, basal gastric pH, fasting plasma gastrin, and plasma concentrations of estrone, estradiol, and progesterone were measured in pregnant volunteers at 12, 24, and 36 weeks of gestation, and again at 1 to 4 weeks postpartum. In addition, basal and pentagastrin-stimulated acid secretory responses at each time were measured. No differences in basal gastric pH, basal, and peak acid outputs were observed during pregnancy when compared to the postpartum values. In contrast, lower esophageal sphincter pressure was reduced at all times during pregnancy, reaching a nadir at 36 weeks. Postpartum lower esophageal pressures were normal. As expected, plasma concentrations of progesterone and both estrogens increased progressively during pregnancy. These data are consistent with earlier studies in women ingesting oral contraceptives. Moreover, they provide support for the thesis that the progressive increase in plasma progesterone alone or in combination with estrogens that occurs during pregnancy is responsible for the reduction of lower esophageal sphincter pressure which allows esophageal reflux to occur with the resultant development of symptomatic heartburn.
Article
To determine whether lower esophageal sphincter (LES) function was normal during early pregnancy, studies were performed in 8 pregnant women before and after abortion. Resting LES pressures were 22.1 +/- 2.4 and 22.6 +/- 2.3 mm Hg before and after abortion, respectively. During early pregnancy the LES pressure responses to pentagastrin were inhibited significantly. The LES responses to edrophonium and methacholine were decreased also. Finally, LES pressure responses to a protein meal were diminished in an additional 5 pregnant women. Serum concentrations of estrogen and progesterone were elevated during pregnancy, but the serum concentration of gastrin was unchanged. It can be concluded that in early pregnancy the basal LES pressure was within normal limits, but the LES pressure responses to hormonal, pharmacological and physiological stimulation were reduced (during demonstrated elevations of serum concentrations of estrogen and progesterone). These studies suggest that during early pregnancy, when no clinical symptoms of reflux are present, altered LES function may be demonstrated.
Article
Cimetidine, ranitidine, or water was administered to pregnant rats from the 12th day of pregnancy through weaning at 21 days of age. The effects of such treatments upon the male progeny were evaluated. Anogenital distance and indices, measures of masculinity, were found to be reduced (p less than 0.05) in pups of cimetidine-exposed dams but not in the pups obtained from either the ranitidine or water controls. In addition, at 55 days and 110 days of age, the testes and ventral prostate-seminal vesicles (androgen-responsive tissues) of the rats exposed to cimetidine were smaller (p less than 0.05) than those of the other two groups. Moreover, at both 55 and 110 days of age, the testosterone levels were reduced (p less than 0.05) in these same pups. Despite the fact that the cimetidine-exposed animals had reduced testosterone levels compared with the levels of the other two groups, the luteinizing hormone levels did not differ among the three groups. Finally, both before and after exogenous androgen replacement, the sexual behavior of the cimetidine-exposed animals was diminished when compared with that of the other two groups.
Article
Gastro-oesophageal reflux and heartburn are reported by 45 to 85% of women during pregnancy. Typically, the heartburn of pregnancy is new onset and is precipitated by the hormonal effects of estrogen and progesterone on lower oesophageal sphincter function. In mild cases, the patient should be reassured that reflux is commonly encountered during a normal pregnancy: lifestyle and dietary modifications may be all that are required. In a pregnant woman with moderate to severe reflux symptoms, the physician must discuss with the patient the benefits versus the risks of using drug therapy. Medications used for treating gastrooesophageal reflux are not routinely or vigorously tested in randomised, controlled trials in women who are pregnant because of ethical and medico-legal concerns. Safety data are based on animal studies, human case reports and cohort studies as offered by physicians, pharmaceutical companies and regulatory authorities. If drug therapy is required, first-line therapy should consist of nonsystemically absorbed medications, including antacids or sucralfate, which offer little, if any, risk to the fetus. Systemic therapy with histamine H2 receptor antagonists (avoiding nizatidine) or prokinetic drugs (metoclopramide, cisapride) should be reserved for patients with more severe symptoms. Proton pump inhibitors are not recommended during pregnancy except for severe intractable cases of gastrooesophageal reflux or possibly prior to anaesthesia during labour and delivery. In these rare situations, animal teratogenicity studies suggests that lansoprazole may be the best choice. Use of the least possible amount of systemic drug needed to ameliorate the patient’s symptoms is clearly the best for therapy. If reflux symptoms are intractable or atypical, endoscopy can safely be performed with conscious sedation and careful monitoring the mother and fetus.
Article
To determine the reliability of the assessment of laryngoscopic findings potentially associated with laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD). Prospective randomized blinded study. One hundred twenty video segments of rigid fiberoptic laryngeal examinations were prospectively analyzed by five otolaryngologists blinded to patient information and were scored according to several variables potentially associated with LPRD. Separate assessments of the degree of erythema and degree of edema were scored on a five-point scale for the anterior commissure, membranous vocal fold, and interarytenoid region. Similarly, interarytenoid pachydermia, likelihood of LPRD involvement, and severity of LPRD findings were assessed. For each of these scored physical findings, inter-rater and intrarater reliabilities were determined. The inter-rater reliabilities of the laryngoscopic findings associated with LPRD were poor. Intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.161 and 0.461 for edema of the arytenoids and membranous vocal folds, respectively (P <.001). Intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.181 and 0.369 for erythema of the arytenoids and membranous vocal folds, respectively (P <.001). Raters demonstrated poor agreement as to the severity of LPRD findings (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.265) and the likelihood of an LPRD component for dysphonia (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.248). Similarly, intrarater reliability was extremely variable for the various physical findings, with Kendall correlation coefficients ranging from -0.121 to 0.837. Accurate clinical assessment of laryngeal involvement with LPRD is likely to be difficult because laryngeal physical findings cannot be reliably determined from clinician to clinician. Such variability makes the precise laryngoscopic diagnosis of LPRD highly subjective.
Article
Although data exists to support the relationship between laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and laryngitis, there is variability among otolaryngologists regarding the methods and criteria used to make the diagnosis. This study was undertaken to discern the current attitudes and practices of a select cohort of otolaryngologists in regards to LPR. Four hundred fifteen surveys were mailed to members of the American Broncho-Esophagological Association. Survey recipients were asked to rate patient symptomatology and physical examination findings in terms of their relationship to LPR and their preferred laryngeal visualization procedure in terms of clinical use and diagnostic accuracy. The role and validity of adjunctive diagnostic tests were also surveyed. Survey response rate was 38%. Symptoms felt to be most related to reflux were: throat clearing (98.3%), persistent cough (96.6%), heartburn/dyspepsia (95.7%), globus sensation (94.9%), and voice quality change (94.9%). The physical examination findings felt to be most related to reflux included: arytenoid erythema (97.5%), vocal cord erythema (95.7%) and edema (95.7%), posterior commissure hypertrophy (94.9%), and arytenoid edema (94.0%). Fiberoptic laryngoscopy was the most commonly performed diagnostic visualization procedure (75.7%) and was also considered to be most sensitive and specific (45.0%). The most commonly ordered adjunctive test was a double pH probe (37.2%), which was also felt to be the most sensitive and specific adjunctive test (75.9%). A polling of a select group of otolaryngologists demonstrated agreement in the criteria used to diagnose reflux laryngitis, although some variability exists. The development of objective guidelines for the diagnosis of LPR is a critical initial step toward evaluating the manifestations and therapeutic interventions for this disease process.
Article
Approximately two thirds of pregnant patients develop heartburn. The origin is multifactorial, but the predominant factor is a decrease in LES pressure caused by female sex hormones, especially progesterone. Mechanical factors play a small role. Serious reflux complications during pregnancy are rare; therefore EGD and other diagnostic tests are infrequently needed. Symptomatic GERD during pregnancy should be managed with a step-up algorithm beginning with lifestyle modifications and dietary changes. Antacids or sucralfate are considered the first-line medical therapy. If symptoms persist, H2RAs should be used. Ranitidine is probably preferred because of its documented efficacy and safety profile in pregnancy, even in the first trimester. Proton-pump inhibitors are reserved for the woman with intractable symptoms or complicated reflux disease. Lansoprazole may be the preferred PPI because of its safety profile in animals and case reports of safety in human pregnancies.
Laryngopharyngeal reflux
  • Ja Koufman
  • Je Aviv
  • Rr Casiano
  • Shaw
Koufman JA, Aviv JE, Casiano RR, Shaw GY. Laryngopharyngeal reflux. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surgy 2002; 127: 32-5.