Review of management of laryngopharyngeal reflux disease.

This review was conducted according to the Patient/problem Intervention Comparison Outcome (PICO) Statements. Some studies reported that 10-30% of patients consulting in ENT come with presenting symptoms of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), but the exact prevalence of LPR is still unknown. Management has not changed in 20 years despite a significant increase in the number of publications on epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis and treatment. The development of hypopharyngeal-esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance pH monitoring (HEMII-pH) and saliva pepsin detection now allow a new multidimensional diagnostic approach associating clinical scores to HEMII-pH and saliva pepsin detection. This new approach may enable personalized treatment according to LPR profile on HEMII-pH (acid, non-acid, mixed; upright, recumbent reflux episodes). Updated treatment of LPR could consist in a 3-month association of dietary measures, proton pump inhibitors, alginate and magaldrate, followed by treatment adaptation.

The development of new clinical instruments in laryngopharyngeal reflux disease: The international project of young otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Oto-rhino-laryngological Societies.

INTRODUCTION: To analyze the epidemiological characteristics of placebo controlled randomized trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of medical treatments over placebo in laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). MATERIAL AND METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane database, and Scopus were assessed for subject headings using the PRISMA recommendations. Placebo RCTs published between 1990 and 2018 describing clinical evolution throughout LPR treatment were extracted and analyzed for evidence-based level, number of patients, inclusion and exclusion criteria, gender, age, symptoms and signs used as therapeutic outcomes, and treatment schemes. RESULTS: The database search identified 15 placebo RCTs with a total of 763 patients. The mean age of patients was 48.59 years and 52.68% of patients were female. Among the 15 placebo RCTs, 9 have demonstrated a partial or total superiority of a medical treatment over placebo. Most of authors based the LPR diagnosis on symptoms and signs without additional examination. Our analysis reveals an important heterogeneity between studies with regard to the diagnosis criteria, treatment schemes and signs and symptoms used as therapeutic outcomes. Many commonly reported signs and symptoms related to LPR were not used as therapeutic outcomes. Half of the authors did not prescribe diet and behavioral changes along the treatment. CONCLUSION: The controversy in the RCTs about the superiority of medical treatment over placebo in LPR disease is probably due to discrepancies in the diagnosis method, exclusion criteria, therapeutic schemes and the lack of comprehensive tools for the assessment of signs and symptoms. In this context, the LPR Study Group of Young-Otolaryngologists of the International Federations of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies developed two new instruments to precisely assess signs and symptoms throughout the treatment. These two instruments could be used in future trials comparing medical treatment over placebo in LPR disease.

Morphologic assessment of mandibular reconstruction by free fibula flap and donor-site functional impairment in a series of 23 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Micro-anastomosed free fibula flap is an attitude of choice in mandibular defect repair in oncology, enabling effective functional rehabilitation. The present study assessed donor and recipient site morphology and donor-site sequelae. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study consecutively recruited patients undergoing mandibular resection with free fibula flap reconstruction in our centre between December 2003 and September 2008. Assessment on adapted scales was performed by two independent expert physicians and patient self-assessment. RESULTS: Out of 49 mandibular reconstructions performed in the centre over the 5-year study period, 23 patients free of recurrence were included. Satisfaction rates were 73% for the recipient site and 70% for the donor-site, with patient/expert agreement of 47% and 49.5% respectively. Donor-site impact was mainly in terms of reduced ankle range of motion (43% of cases) and flexion strength (39%) and discomfort in running (35%) and walking (26%). Risk factors for dissatisfaction were more than 5% weight loss at admission for recipient site dissatisfaction (patient, P=0.012; expert, P=0.046), and skin graft for donor-site dissatisfaction (patient, P=0.04; expert, P=0.035). CONCLUSION: Free fibula flap was associated with high satisfaction rates, but non-negligible donor-site impact.