Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2020
Diagnostic Utility of Salivary Pepsin as Compared With 24-Hour Dual pH/Impedance Probe in Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang Michael, Chia Clemente, Stanley Claire, Phyland Debra J, Paddle Paul M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is defined as the retropulsion of gastric contents into the larynx, oropharynx, and/or nasopharynx. The 24-hour combined hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance with dual pH probe (24h-HEMII-pH) is currently the gold standard in LPR diagnosis; however, it is invasive, user dependent, and not always tolerated. This study assesses the diagnostic utility of salivary pepsin (Peptest) at different thresholds and during symptomatic periods as compared with the 24h-HEMII-pH probe in diagnosing LPR.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
SETTING: Private laryngology clinic in Melbourne, Australia.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients with a clinical history and endoscopic findings of LPR were recruited and simultaneously evaluated for LPR via 24h-HEMII-pH probe and salivary pepsin analysis at 5 key time points over the same 24-hour period.
RESULTS: Salivary pepsin was 76.9% sensitive and had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 87.0% at a threshold of 16 ng/mL when compared with the 24h-HEMII-pH probe. If the pathologic pepsin threshold was raised to 75 ng/mL, salivary pepsin had a sensitivity of 57.7%, a specificity of 75.0%, and a PPV of 93.8%. Symptomatic testing conferred a superior specificity at 16 ng/mL (66.7%) and 75 ng/mL (100.0%) and a superior PPV at 16 ng/mL (92.3%) and 75 ng/mL (100.0%).
CONCLUSION: Salivary pepsin detection is a simpler, more cost-effective, and less traumatic universal first-line alternative to 24h-HEMII-pH probe in diagnosing LPR. Superior specificities conferring greater diagnostic value may be achieved with higher thresholds and symptomatic testing. If clinical suspicion remains high following negative salivary pepsin analysis, a 24h-HEMII-pH study could provide further diagnostic information.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
SETTING: Private laryngology clinic in Melbourne, Australia.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients with a clinical history and endoscopic findings of LPR were recruited and simultaneously evaluated for LPR via 24h-HEMII-pH probe and salivary pepsin analysis at 5 key time points over the same 24-hour period.
RESULTS: Salivary pepsin was 76.9% sensitive and had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 87.0% at a threshold of 16 ng/mL when compared with the 24h-HEMII-pH probe. If the pathologic pepsin threshold was raised to 75 ng/mL, salivary pepsin had a sensitivity of 57.7%, a specificity of 75.0%, and a PPV of 93.8%. Symptomatic testing conferred a superior specificity at 16 ng/mL (66.7%) and 75 ng/mL (100.0%) and a superior PPV at 16 ng/mL (92.3%) and 75 ng/mL (100.0%).
CONCLUSION: Salivary pepsin detection is a simpler, more cost-effective, and less traumatic universal first-line alternative to 24h-HEMII-pH probe in diagnosing LPR. Superior specificities conferring greater diagnostic value may be achieved with higher thresholds and symptomatic testing. If clinical suspicion remains high following negative salivary pepsin analysis, a 24h-HEMII-pH study could provide further diagnostic information.