. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Sep 1.

Published in final edited form as: Curr Otorhinolaryngol Rep. 2016 Jul 9;4(3):157–167. doi: 10.1007/s40136-016-0121-5

Table 2.

Description of comparative studies evaluating the effectiveness of treatment for patients diagnosed with laryngopharyngeal reflux

Study	Comparison	Study Type	N	LPR Diagnostic Definition	Calculated Odds Ratio (95% CI)
Havas 1999	Lansoprazole BID vs Placebo	RCT	15	Posterior pharyngitis, dual probe pH+	1.03 (0.16–6.5)^*
El-Serag 2001	Lansoprazole BID vs Placebo	RCT	20	Dual probe pH+, EGD, Laryngoscopy	9 (4.2–19.3)^*
Noordzij 2001	Omeprazole BID vs Placebo	RCT	30	Dual probe pH+	0.85 (0.23–3.13)^**
Eherer 2003	Panmiddlerazole BID vs Placebo	Crossover	14	Dual probe pH+	0.39 (0.07–1.92)^*
Steward 2004	Rabeprazole BID vs Lifestyle change	RCT	37	Symptoms and signs	1.8 (0.57–6.06)^**
Vaezi 2006	Esomeprazole BID vs Placebo	RCT	145	Symptoms and signs	0.91 (0.35–2.33)^*
Wo 2006	Panmiddlerazole QD vs Placebo	RCT	39	Symptoms, +RFS, dual probe pH+	0.92 (0.52–1.62)^*
Reichel 2008	Esomeprazole BID vs Placebo	RCT	58	+RFS and RSI	5 (1.5–16.5)^**
Fass 2010	Esomeprazole BID vs Placebo	RCT	41	Symptoms and +pH probe	1.67 (0.53–5.2)^**
Park 2012	Omeprazole BID+Speech Therapy vs Omeprazole BID	RCT	100	+RFS and RSI	2.49 (1.4–4.4)^**

BID=twice daily, QD=once daily, RCT=randomized controlled trial, LPR=laryngopharyngeal reflux, EGD=esophagogastroduodenoscopy, RFS=reflux finding score, RSI=reflux symptom index, PPI=proton pump inhibitor, ST=speech therapy, CI=confidence interval.

OR calculated via 2×2 table.

^**

OR calculated via Logit method from standardized mean difference and variance of the symptoms scores.