Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Symptoms Index: relation with the main symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux, voice usage level and voice screening
Índice de Sintomas do Refluxo Faringo-Laríngeo: relação com os principais sintomas de refluxo gastresofágico, nível de uso de voz e triagem vocal
Barbara Zucato; Mara Suzana Behlau
Abstract
Purpose: to determine the relation between Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Symptoms Index (LPRSI) and the main symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) – heartburn and retroesternal pain – voice usage level and voice screening.
Method: there were 179 volunteers, older than 18 years old, 107 females and 72 males divided into two groups according to the LPRSI total score: positive group (total score equals or greater than 13) and the negative group (below 13). Participants answered questions about the presence of typical GERD signs (heartburn and/or retroesternal pain), the voice usage level (high or low demand) and submitted to voice screening during the interview.
Results: for LPRSI, 35 (19.6%) subjects made up the positive group (average score of 20) and 144 (80.4%) subjects made up the negative group (average score of 4.34). The typical GER symptoms were greater in the positive group: heartburn in 54.2% (19) versus 30.5% (44), retroesternal pain in 51.4% (18) versus 20.1% (29), and 74.3% of the subjects in the positive group and only 43.1% of those in the negative group showed one of the symptoms. For voice screening, 37.1% of the positive group and only 13% of the negative one failed it. There was no difference in voice demand related by any volunteer in neither groups. Statistical relation was found between positive LPRSI, GERD symptoms and voice screening failure (p<0.0001). No relation to voice usage was found.
Conclusion: a positive LPRSI may be related to signs of GERD and to altered voice quality noticed during the screening.
Keywords
Resumo
Objetivo: relacionar o Índice de Sintomas do Refluxo Faringo-Laríngeo – ISRFL com os principais sintomas do refluxo gastresofágico – RGE (azia/queimação e dor retroesternal), com o nível de uso da voz e com uma triagem vocal.
Método: participaram deste estudo 179 voluntários maiores de 18 anos, 107 mulheres e 72 homens, classificados em dois grupos de acordo com o escore total do ISRFL, grupo positivo (escore total igual ou maior a 13 pontos) e negativo (abaixo deste). Os participantes foram questionados sobre a presença dos sinais característicos do refluxo gastresofágico (azia/queimação e/ou dor retroesternal), sobre a demanda de uso da voz (baixa/alta demanda) e submetidos à triagem vocal durante a entrevista.
Resultados: quanto ao ISRFL, 35 (19,6%) indivíduos compuseram o grupo positivo (escore médio de 20) e 144 (80,4%) o grupo negativo (média de 4,34 pontos). Os sintomas característicos do RGE foram maiores no grupo positivo: azia/queimação em 54,2% (19) verso 30,5% (44), dor retroesternal em 51,4% (18) verso 20,1% (29), sendo que 74,3% dos indivíduos do grupo positivo e apenas 43,1% do negativo apresentaram algum dos sintomas. Quanto à triagem vocal, 37,1% do grupo positivo e 13% do negativo falharam. Não houve diferença de demanda vocal auto-relatada entre os grupos. Foi encontrada associação estatística entre IRFL positivo, os sintomas de refluxo gastresofágico e fracasso na triagem vocal (p< 0,001). Não houve associação quanto ao uso da voz.
Conclusão: o ISRFL positivo pode estar relacionado com os sinais do RGE e com a alteração na qualidade vocal percebida em triagem.
Palavras-chave
Referencias
1. Koufman JA, Amin MR, Panetti M. Prevalence of reflux in 113 consecutive patients with laryngeal and voice disorders. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2000; 123:385-8.
2. Moraes Filho JPP, Cecconello I, Rodrigues JG, Castro LP, Henry MA, Meneghelli UG, Quigley E. Brazilian consensus on gastroesophageal reflux disease: Proposals for assesment, classification and management. The American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2002; 97(2): 242-3.
3. Koufman JA, Belafsky BC, Bach KK, Daniel E, Postma GN. Prevalence of esophagitis in patients with pH-documented laryngopharyngeal reflux. Laryngoscope. 2002; 112:1606-9.
4. Belafsky PC, Postma GN, Koufman JA. Laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms improve before changes in physical findings. Laryngoscope. June 2001; 111(6):979-81.
5. Belafsky PC, Postma GN, Koufman JA. Validity and reliability of the reflux symptom index (RSI). Journal of Voice. 2002; 16(2): 274-7.
6. Koufman JA. The otolaryngologic manifestations of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD): a clinical investigation of 225 patients using ambulatory 24-hour pH monitoring and an experimental investigation of the role of acid and pepsin in the development of laryngeal injury. Laryngoscope. 1991; 101 (suppl. 53):1-78.
7. Reulbach TR, Belafsky PC, Blalock PD, Koufman JA, Postma GN. Occult laryngeal pathology in a community based cohort. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2001; 124: 448-50.
8. Connor NP, Palazzi-Churas KLP, Cohen SB, Glen EL, Bless DM. Symptoms of extraesophageal reflux in a community-dwelling sample. Journal of Voice. 2007;21(2):189-202.
9. Koufman J. Gastroesophageal reflux and voice desorders. In Rubin J, Sataloff hRT, Korovin G, Gould W (eds.). Diagnosis and treatment of voice disorders. New York: Igaku-Shoin, 1995.
10. Gilson S. Laryngopharyngeal Reflux (LPR). Artigo disponível em: http://heartburn.about.com/od/gastrictractdisorders/a/whatis_LPR.htm. About.com Health's Disease and Condition content is reviewed by the Medical Review Board. Acesso em 31 mar. 2008.
11. Satalof RT, Castell D, Sataloff D, Spiegel JR, Hawkshaw M. Reflux and other gastroenterologic conditions that may affect the voice. In Sataloff RT. Professional Voice. The Science and Art to Clinical Care 1997; 2 ed. San Diego, Singular.
12. Olson NR. Effects of stomach acid on the larynx. Proc. Am. Laryngol. Assoc.1983; 104: 108-12.
13. Selby JC, Gilbert HR, Lerman JW. Perceptual and acoustic evaluation of individuals with laryngopharyngeal reflux pre-and pos-treatment. Journal of Voice. 2003; 17(4):557-70.
14. Behlau M, Feijó D, Pontes P. Disfonia por refluxo gastresofágico. In: Behlau M, organizadora. Voz do especialista volume II. Rio de Janeiro: Revinter; 2005. P. 187-212
15. Tauber S, Gross M, Issing WJ. Association of laryngopharyngeal symptoms with gastroesophageal reflux desease. Laryngoscope. 2002; 112:879-86.
16. Jin BJ, Lee YS, Jeong SW, Jeong JH, Lee SH, Tae K. Change of acoustic parameters before and after treatment in laryngopharyngeal reflux patients. Laryngoscope. 2008; 118:938-41.
17. Qadeer MA, Swoger J, Milstein, Hicks DM, Ponsky J, Richter JE, et al. Correlation between symptoms and laryngeal signs in laryngopharyngeal reflux. Laryngoscope. 2005; 115:1947-52.
18. Karkos PD, Wilson JA. Empiric treatment of laryngopharyngeal reflux with proton pump inhibitors: a systematic review. Laryngoscope. 2006; 116:144-7.
19. Mahmoud El-Sayed A. Laryngopharyngeal reflux: diagnosis and treatment of a controversial disease. Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology. February 2008; 8(1):28-33.
20. Ylitalo R, Lindestad P, Ramel S. Symptoms, laryngeal findings, and 24 hour pH monitoring in patients with suspected gastroesophago-pharyngeal reflux. Laryngoscope. 2001; 111:1735-41.
21. Ramig L, Verdolini K. Treatment efficacy: voice disorders. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res.1998; 41:S101-16.
Submitted date:
02/05/2011
Accepted date:
24/11/2011
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email