咽喉反流性疾病的发病机制及诊疗进展

近年来,随着社会生活节奏的加快,人们饮食习惯的改变,出现越来越多的消化道及咽喉疾病.咽喉反流性疾病(laryngopharyngeal reflux disease,LPRD)作为耳鼻咽喉科的一类疾病,其发病率也呈现不断上升的趋势.长期以来,LPRD并未受到耳鼻咽喉科医师的重视,诊断也是建立在胃食管反流疾病(gastroesophageal reflux disease,GERD)的认识之上,常常漏诊和误诊.因此,明确LPRD的发病机制及诊疗方法并与GERD相区别有着重要的意义.     

胃食管反流对咽喉反流病患者的食管动力学影响

目的应用高分辨率食管测压的方法,通过与正常人群的比较,探讨胃食管反流对咽喉反流病(laryngopharyngeal reflux disease,LPRD)患者的食管动力学影响。方法将初筛为LPRD的患者进行诊断性治疗,治疗前后均行高分辨率食管测压检测。按胃食管反流病(gastroesophageal reflux disease,GERD)问卷评分标准,分为单纯LPRD组和LPRD伴GERD组。无咽喉不适的健康人群设为对照组。结果确诊为LPRD的患者56例,单纯LPRD组24例,LPRD伴GERD组32例,正常对照组20例。LPRD患者的年龄、性别构成比、BMI指数等较对照组差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),吸烟、饮酒及睡前3小时进食的患者构成比较对照组有统计学差异(P<0.05)。单纯LPRD食管动力参数较对照组均无统计学差异(P>0.05)。LPRD伴GERD组的UESP、LESP、DCI、DL较对照组均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论单纯咽喉反流病无明显食管动力异常,而胃食管反流病能导致咽喉反流病的食管动力障碍,一定程度上提示了单纯咽喉反流病与胃食管反流病存在不同的发病机制。     

埃索美拉唑联合伊托必利治疗咽喉反流性疾病及食管动力学分析

目的　通过埃索美拉唑联合伊托必利诊断性治疗,观察咽喉反流性疾病（laryngopharyngeal reflux disease,LPRD）患者在治疗前后反流症状体征的变化及食管动力学特点。方法　将疑似LPRD患者进行诊断性治疗,治疗前后均行反流体征评分量表（reflux finding score,RFS）和反流症状指数量表（reflux symptom index,RSI）的评分及高分辨率食管测压（high resolusion manometry,HRM）检测。按胃食管反流病（gastroesophageal ref lux disease,GERD）问卷评分标准,分为单纯LPRD组和LPRD伴GERD组。结果　确诊为LPRD患者38例,单纯LPRD组12例,LPRD伴GERD组26例。两组中患者年龄、性别构成比、BMI等差异均无统计学意义。单纯LPRD组RSI评分在治疗前后差异有统计学意义（Z =-3.009,P＜0.05）,RFS评分在治疗前后差异无统计学意义（Z =-0.976,P＞0.05）,LPRD伴GERD组RSI和RFS评分在治疗前后差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。单纯LPRD组治疗前后食管动力变化差异无统计学意义,LPRD伴GERD组食管动力参数UESP、LESP、DCI和DL在治疗前后的变化均有统计学意义。结论  单纯LPRD患者反流体征较症状的明显改善需要更长的治疗时间。埃索美拉唑联合伊托必利能改善LPRD伴GERD的食管动力,单纯的LPRD治疗前后食管动力无明显变化,一定程度上提示了单纯LPRD与GERD存在不同的发病机制。     

口咽、食管同步Dx-pH检测研究咽喉反流性疾病

采用口咽、食管同步Dx-pH检测探讨咽喉反流性疾病（LPRD）与胃食管反流病（GERD）的关系。     

问与答

问：如何诊断喉咽反流性疾病？（北京市第二医院耳鼻咽喉科副主任医师马凌霄）喉咽反流是指胃内容物反流至咽喉部，与呼吸道和消化道上部组织接触的结果。其与喉痉挛、声带接触性肉芽肿、声带白斑、喉癌等疾病关系密切。喉咽反流引起的症状及体征而造成的疾病为咽喉反流性疾病（laryngophamgeal reflux disease，LPRD）。该病与胃食管反流是不同的疾病，     

双探头24小时pH监测对咽喉反流的诊断价值及特点

目的对咽喉反流患者用食道测压定位法行双探头24小时pH监测,探讨其诊断价值及特点。方法对53例疑咽喉反流患者用食道测压定位法行双探头24小时pH监测同时用反流症状指数量表(reflux symptom index,RSI)、反流检查计分量表(reflux finding score,RFS)2个量表评估。结果 53例患者中31例咽喉反流阳性,与吸烟有相关性。RSI中以声嘶、咽异物感、持续清嗓为主要症状,RFS中以后连合增生、假声带沟、喉内黏液附着为主要体征。咽喉部酸反流主要发生在直立位,其中9例患者只有咽喉反流性疾病,10例只有胃食管反流性疾病;酸反流次数、酸暴露时间(即pH<4.0的总时间)与2个量表的评估有显著性差异。咽喉部pH监测结果与2个量表评估结果程度一致。结论咽喉反流性疾病可不伴发胃食管反流性疾病,减少酸反流次数及减少酸在咽喉部停留时间在治疗疾病中较为重要,RSI和RFS 2个量表可作为咽喉反流性疾病诊断的初筛。     

重视喉咽反流在耳鼻咽喉头颈外科中的作用

20世纪70年代喉咽反流(laryngopharyngeal reflux,LPR)这一概念被提出用以描述胃内容物反流至咽喉部所引起的疾病[1]。以往曾认为LPR是胃食管反流性疾病(gastroesophageal reflux desease,GERD)累及咽喉部的消化道外症状,近10～15年的研究揭示了LPR与GERD在流行病学、发病机制、临床特点上的差异,其作为独立疾病     

胃食管反流与慢性咽喉炎

胃食管反流(gestroesophageal renux，GER)是指胃内容物通过下食管括约肌向食管的逆行性运动。由胃食管反流引起的症状或组织病理学改变，即胃食管反流病(gastroesophageal reflux disease，GERD)。胃食管反流有复杂的病理特点，可引起多种临床症状。食管症状(典型表现)主要为胸骨后烧灼感和反酸等。食管外症状主要表现在呼吸系统，引起上呼吸道、肺、头颈等部位的症状和疾病(非典     

老年人胃食管反流性咽喉炎30例临床分析

目的 探讨老年人胃食管反流性咽喉炎的诊治方法.方法 采用喉镜、胃镜和24h食管pH值监测明确诊断,并分析30例老年人胃食管反流性咽喉炎患者经抑酸药和胃肠动力药治疗前后的症状、喉镜和胃镜检查结果的改变情况.结果 30例老年人胃食管反流性咽喉炎患者经抑酸药和胃肠动力药治疗后有效率为93.33%.结论 喉镜、胃镜和24h食管pH值监测有助于明确老年人胃食管反流性咽喉炎的诊断,采用抑酸药和胃肠动力药治疗本病有效.     

儿童咽喉反流性疾病研究进展

咽喉反流性疾病（1aryngopharyngeal reflux disease,LPRD）是指胃内容物反流至食管上括约肌以上部位,流至咽喉部,与呼吸道和消化道上部组织接触,引起一系列症状和体征的总称。据国外研究表明到耳鼻咽喉科就诊的门诊患者约10%患有LPRD。虽然最近几年,耳鼻咽喉科医师逐渐在重视LPRD的诊疗,但LPRD目前仍是一个不明确的疾病,我们对其真实的发病率及重要性知之甚少,尤其在儿童中LPRD的评估仍存在争议。目前仍有许多工作亟待开展。     

胃蛋白酶在咽喉反流疾病诊断中的应用

咽喉反流性疾病是近年来被临床医师逐渐认识并引起重视的一种疾病。美国耳鼻咽喉头颈外科学会将其定义为胃内H+和胃蛋白酶原经食管到达咽、喉、鼻、中耳、气管和支气管等部位所引起的临床症候群。随着逐渐深入的研究,学者对胃蛋白酶在咽喉反流病中的作用的认识逐渐提高,认为胃蛋白酶可以作为一种检测方法诊断咽喉反流病。     

Prevalence of laryngopharyngeal reflux in a population with gastroesophageal reflux

OBJECTIVE: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a syndrome associated with a constellation of symptoms usually treated by ENT surgeons. It is believed to be caused by the retrograde flow of stomach contents into the laryngopharynx, this being a supra-esophageal manifestation of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). It has been cited that LPR and GERD can be considered separate entities. Our hypothesis was that LPR is a supra-esophageal manifestation of GERD and therefore that patients with GERD should have a degree of symptoms suggestive of LPR because of the reflux of the gastric contents. We examined a population of patients with both upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and symptom-proven GERD and, using a questionnaire, looked at their existing symptoms to help assess the prevalence of LPR. We also looked at whether, with more severe GERD (suggestive of increased gastric content reflux), the degree of symptoms suggestive of LPR would be increased, as would be expected. METHODS: A population of patients with endoscopically proven GERD were recruited and divided into groups depending on the severity of their reflux disease. A questionnaire was then administered that examined both LPR and GERD scoring criteria. The relationship between GERD and LPR was then analyzed. RESULTS: We recruited 1,383 subjects with GERD; those with severe GERD had significantly higher LPR scores compared with those with mild (P < .01), moderate (P < .05), or inactive disease (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The condition of LPR is likely to represent a supra-esophageal manifestation of GERD. This study examined a large number of patients with endoscopically proven GERD and has demonstrated a correlation between the severity of GERD and the prevalence of LPR. LPR and GERD are common and interlinked conditions. The subsequent prevalence of LPR in the population with GERD is therefore likely to be dramatically underestimated.     

The need for 24-h double probe pH monitoring in the diagnosis of laryngo-pharyngeal reflux

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.     

咽喉反流性疾病在儿童的诊断与治疗

儿童咽喉反流性疾病(laryngopharyngeal reflux disease,LPRD)是儿科人群中一个复杂而又常见的问题,近些年来儿童LPRD与喂养困难、睡眠障碍、发声障碍、顽固性鼻炎鼻窦炎、中耳炎、慢性咳嗽等疾病的相关性已经引起多专业儿科医师的关注,但其诊断和临床表现仍存在争议.为提高对儿童LPRD的认识,...     

耳鼻咽喉科门诊患者咽喉反流性疾病、焦虑抑郁患病率及二者关系

目的获得耳鼻咽喉科门诊中咽喉反流性疾病(laryngopharyngeal reflux disease,LPRD)及焦虑、抑郁患者的患病率;探讨精神心理因素(焦虑和抑郁)在其发病中的作用。方法采用反流症状指数(reflux symptom index,RSI)量表、综合医院焦虑抑郁(hospital anxiety and depression,HAD)量表对2017年7月至2018年6月,北京大学人民医院耳鼻咽喉头颈外科门诊的1111例患者进行问卷调查(男486例,女625例,年龄18~96岁,中位年龄38[30,53]岁)。获得LPRD及焦虑、抑郁患病率。病例组选取RSI阳性患者,对照组选择RSI阴性患者,比较两组间HAD评分的差异,并对咽喉反流的危险因素进行分析。采用SPSS 20.0软件进行统计学分析。结果病例组151例,对照组960例,LPRD患病率为13.59%(151/1111)。不同性别LPRD患病率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。18~40岁年龄段患病率最高,各个年龄段(18~40岁、41~65岁、>65岁)患病率比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。吸烟、饮酒者的LPRD患病率均较非吸烟、饮酒者高,两组患病率比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。RSI量表最常见的症状为咽喉异物感(92.72%,140/151)、持续清嗓(88.74%,134/151)、痰过多或鼻涕倒流(82.12%,124/151),两组间各症状差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。焦虑患者共91例,患病率为8.19%(91/1111);抑郁患者共76例,患病率为6.84%(76/1111)。LPRD患者中,综合医院焦虑量表评分阳性占29.14%(44/151),综合医院抑郁量表评分阳性占17.22%(26/151)。LPRD组的焦虑症状、抑郁症状得分均高于非LPRD组,两组间上述各评分差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。Logistic回归分析显示吸烟、焦虑、胃食管反流病症状为咽喉反流发病的独立危险因素。结论耳鼻咽喉科门诊中LPRD患病率为13.59%,焦虑患病率为8.19%,抑郁患病率为6.84%。咽喉反流患者中,焦虑患病率为29.14%,抑郁患病率17.22%。年龄、吸烟、饮酒、文化程度、病程、胃食管反流病症状、咽部异物感等与LPRD相关。精神因素(焦虑、抑郁)可能在LPRD中发挥作用。吸烟、焦虑、胃食管反流病症状与LPRD发病有较密切的关系。     

Laryngopharyngeal reflux disease with nocturnal gastric acid breakthrough while on proton pump inhibitor therapy

Laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD) with nocturnal recovery of gastric acid secretion (nocturnal acid breakthrough: NAB) with proton pump inhibitors (PPI) was first reported. A 79-year-old Japanese woman complained of globus pharyngeus and mild heartburn was examined with the use of tetra-probe 24-h pH monitoring. She had been treated for reflux esophagitis (GERD) for 12 months prior to her visit to our office. She took Lansoprazole (30 mg/day) before dinner every day. The tetra-probe 24-h pH monitoring revealed that the recovery of gastric acid secretion occurred 6.5 h after taking the dose of PPI. The intragastric pH dropped < 4 at about 23:00 and remained below that level for 4 h and 50 min. The 24-h pH-metry at each probe showed that the nocturnal recovery of gastric acid secretion with PPI (NAB on PPI) influenced gastroesophageal and laryngopharyngeal refluxes. The symptoms of the pharynx and esophagus disappeared after taking H2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) additionally before bedtime.     

咽喉反流的初步诊断

目的 探讨咽喉反流中反流症状指数量表(The reflux symptom index,RSI)和反流检查计分量表(The reflux finding score,RFS)的作用.方法 2006年8月至2008年1月来北京大学人民医院就诊的可疑有咽喉反流的患者接受RSI及RES评估,以RSI评分>13分,RES>7分定为阳性,RSI评分≤13分和RES≤7分为阴性.均行24 h双探头pH监测.以24 h内咽喉部反流次数不小于6.9次或反流面积指数(reflux area index,RAI)不小于6.3为24 h pH监测阳性.对其中25例24 h pH监测阳性且坚持抗酸治疗的患者,服药3个月后随诊,再次接受RSI和RES评分.结果 RSI及RES评估后1个量表评估阳性25例,2个量表评估均阳性16例,2个量表均阴性的15例.1个量表评估阳性和2个量表评估均阳性的结果 与24 h双探头pH监测结果 具有中度以上的一致性(一致性为73.2%,Kappa值为0.43,u值为3.48,P<0.01).当RSI和RES两个量表均阳性时与24 h pH值监测一致性更高些(一致性为77.4%,Kappa值为0.55,u值为3.06,P<0.01).抗酸治疗前后25例患者RSI和RFS评分差异有统计学意义(配对t检验,t值分别为8.838和5.695,P值均为0.000).结论 RSI和RFS两个量表可作为临床上咽喉反流初步诊断及疗效评估的简单易行方法.