The Importance of LPR Diagnosis

Oct 13, 2025 by thesweetdesigns.com 145 views

Differences in Salivary Pepsin Levels in Patients with Laryngopharyngeal Reflux (LPR) and Non-LPR: A Review

Introduction

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a condition in which stomach acid rises to the esophagus and reaches the larynx, causing symptoms such as dry coughing, hoarseness, and discomfort in the throat. The current LPR diagnosis still relies on a monitoring pH examination, but this method has several limitations. Its sensitivity is only 50% to 80% and the inability of some ENT patients to tolerate this procedure, making the search for new diagnosis methods very important. Recent research shows the potential for LPR detection through the existence of pepsin in the larynx using the Immunoasssay (ELISA) method. Pepsin is a digestive enzyme that plays an important role in the digestive process of protein. In this study, the research team wanted to reveal the difference in levels of pepsin in saliva sufferers of LPR and Non-LPR.

The Importance of LPR Diagnosis

LPR diagnosis is crucial for improving the quality of life of LPR sufferers. The condition can cause various complications if left untreated, such as chronic coughing, hoarseness, and throat discomfort. Early detection and appropriate treatment can help alleviate these symptoms and prevent further complications. However, the current LPR diagnosis methods have limitations, making it essential to explore new and more effective methods.

Research Methods

This cross-sectional analytic research involves 20 LPR patients with a reflux symptom index (RSI) value of more than 13 and reflux Finding Score (RFS) of more than 7. As a control group, 20 non-LPR patients with RSI values of less than 13 and RFS are less Of the 7 also included in this study. The study was conducted during the period February 2016 to December 2016. All participants underwent clinical examinations and laboratory tests to measure pepsin levels in saliva.

Pepsin Levels in Saliva

Pepsin is a digestive enzyme that plays an important role in the digestive process of protein. In the context of LPR, pepsin levels in saliva can be a potential indicator for LPR diagnosis. The research team measured pepsin levels in saliva using the Immunoasssay (ELISA) method. The results showed a significant relationship between pepsin and LPR levels.

Research Results

The results showed a significant relationship between pepsin and LPR levels. Pepsin levels in LPR groups are significantly higher (an average of 0.783 ± 0.393) compared to non-LPR groups (an average of 0.591 ± 0.216). This difference shows that pepsin levels in saliva can be a potential indicator for LPR diagnosis.

Conclusion and Implications

This study concluded that examination of pepsin levels in saliva can be an effective tool in establishing the diagnosis of LPR. Although there is still a need for further research to ensure the effectiveness and accuracy of this method, the results of this study open new opportunities for LPR diagnosis that is easier, more affordable, and comfortable for patients. This method can be a more practical alternative compared to pH monitoring, especially for patients who cannot tolerate the procedure.

Future Directions

The development of new and more effective LPR diagnosis methods is very important to improve the quality of life of LPR sufferers. With early detection and appropriate treatment, LPR sufferers can avoid various complications that can be caused by this condition. Further research is needed to ensure the effectiveness and accuracy of this method, as well as to explore its potential applications in clinical settings.

Limitations and Future Research Directions

While this study provides promising results, there are several limitations that need to be addressed in future research. Firstly, the sample size of this study is relatively small, and further research is needed to confirm the findings with a larger sample size. Secondly, the study only measured pepsin levels in saliva, and further research is needed to explore the relationship between pepsin levels in other bodily fluids and LPR diagnosis. Finally, the study only used the Immunoasssay (ELISA) method to measure pepsin levels, and further research is needed to explore the use of other methods, such as mass spectrometry, to measure pepsin levels.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study provides evidence that pepsin levels in saliva can be a potential indicator for LPR diagnosis. The results of this study open new opportunities for LPR diagnosis that is easier, more affordable, and comfortable for patients. Further research is needed to ensure the effectiveness and accuracy of this method, as well as to explore its potential applications in clinical settings.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Laryngopharyngeal Reflux (LPR) and Salivary Pepsin Levels

Q: What is Laryngopharyngeal Reflux (LPR)?

A: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a condition in which stomach acid rises to the esophagus and reaches the larynx, causing symptoms such as dry coughing, hoarseness, and discomfort in the throat.

Q: What are the symptoms of LPR?

A: The symptoms of LPR can include dry coughing, hoarseness, discomfort in the throat, and difficulty swallowing. In some cases, LPR can also cause chronic coughing, throat pain, and difficulty speaking.

Q: How is LPR diagnosed?

A: The current LPR diagnosis still relies on a monitoring pH examination, but this method has several limitations. Its sensitivity is only 50% to 80% and the inability of some ENT patients to tolerate this procedure, making the search for new diagnosis methods very important.

Q: What is the role of pepsin in LPR diagnosis?

A: Pepsin is a digestive enzyme that plays an important role in the digestive process of protein. In the context of LPR, pepsin levels in saliva can be a potential indicator for LPR diagnosis.

Q: How are pepsin levels measured in saliva?

A: Pepsin levels in saliva are measured using the Immunoasssay (ELISA) method. This method involves using antibodies to detect the presence of pepsin in saliva.

Q: What are the results of the study on pepsin levels in saliva and LPR diagnosis?

A: The results of the study showed a significant relationship between pepsin and LPR levels. Pepsin levels in LPR groups are significantly higher (an average of 0.783 ± 0.393) compared to non-LPR groups (an average of 0.591 ± 0.216).

Q: What are the implications of this study for LPR diagnosis?

A: This study provides evidence that examination of pepsin levels in saliva can be an effective tool in establishing the diagnosis of LPR. Although there is still a need for further research to ensure the effectiveness and accuracy of this method, the results of this study open new opportunities for LPR diagnosis that is easier, more affordable, and comfortable for patients.

Q: What are the limitations of this study?

A: The sample size of this study is relatively small, and further research is needed to confirm the findings with a larger sample size. Additionally, the study only measured pepsin levels in saliva, and further research is needed to explore the relationship between pepsin levels in other bodily fluids and LPR diagnosis.

Q: What are the future directions for research on LPR diagnosis?

A: Further research is needed to ensure the effectiveness and accuracy of this method, as well as to explore its potential applications in clinical settings. Additionally, research is needed to explore the use of other methods, such as mass spectrometry, to measure pepsin levels.

Q: What are the potential benefits of using pepsin levels in saliva for LPR diagnosis?

A: The potential benefits of using pepsin levels in saliva for LPR diagnosis include a more accurate and effective diagnosis, as well as a more comfortable and affordable procedure for patients.

Q: What are the potential risks of using pepsin levels in saliva for LPR diagnosis?

A: The potential risks of using pepsin levels in saliva for LPR diagnosis include the possibility of false positives or false negatives, as well as the need for further research to confirm the effectiveness and accuracy of this method.