Skip to main content
. 2019 Mar 3;2019:6271910. doi: 10.1155/2019/6271910

Table 1.

Correlation between the number of pharyngeal reflux episodes relative to the assumed pH level detected by the Dx-pH sensor and the number of GER episodes identified with MII-pH (proximal and distal) and the pH sensor.

Number of episodes detected by Dx-pH and MII-pH R p
LPR pH < 5.5 vs. proximal GER in MII-pH -0.061485 0.780481
LPR pH < 5.5 vs. distal acid GER in pH monitoring -0.182251 0.405236
LPR pH < 5.5 vs. distal GER in MII-pH -0.188251 0.389678
LPR pH < 5 vs. proximal GER in MII-pH -0.112918 0.607964
LPR pH < 5 vs. distal acid GER in pH monitoring -0.171029 0.435239
LPR pH < 5 vs. distal GER in MII-pH -0.198517 0.363855
LPR pH < 4.5 vs. proximal GER in MII-pH -0.052490 0.811990
LPR pH < 4.5 vs. distal acid GER in pH monitoring -0.193745 0.375732
LPR pH < 4.5 vs. distal GER in MII-pH -0.164930 0.452029
LPR pH < 4 vs. proximal GER in MII-pH -0.124503 0.571390
LPR pH < 4 vs. distal acid GER in pH monitoring -0.071277 0.746559
LPR pH < 4 vs. distal GER in MII-pH -0.218874 0.315676
LPR upon decrease of pH ≥ 10% relative to baseline vs. proximal GER in MII-pH -0.201656 0.356162
LPR upon decrease of pH ≥ 10% relative to baseline vs. distal acid GER in pH monitoring -0.091367 0.678426
LPR upon decrease of pH ≥ 10% relative to baseline vs. distal GER in MII-pH -0.301609 0.161926

Dx-pH: pharyngeal pH monitoring; MII-pH: multichannel intraluminal pH-impedance; LPR: laryngopharyngeal reflux; GER: gastroesophageal reflux.