ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Diagnostic Value of the Peptest
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Review article: Diagnosis and management of laryngopharyngeal reflux.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2024Review
- Diagnostic Value of Fasting and Bedtime Saliva Pepsin Measurements in Laryngopharyngeal Reflux.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Usefulness of pepsin saliva measurement for the detection of primary burning mouth syndrome related to reflux.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024Article
- Narrative review of relationship between chronic cough and laryngopharyngeal reflux.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Salivary pepsin as an independent predictor of treatment response for laryngopharyngeal reflux: prospective cohort study with multivariate analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Variability and accuracy of multiple saliva pepsin measurements in laryngopharyngeal reflux patients.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2023Article
- Saliva pepsin measurements in the detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in laryngopharyngeal reflux patients: a cohort study.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023Article
- [Consistency analysis of pepsin immunohistochemistry and pepsin test box in the diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2023Article
- Clinical relevance of salivary pepsin detection in diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease subtypes.Gastroenterology report · 2023Article
- Clinical Update Findings about pH-Impedance Monitoring Features in Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- [Latin American Consensus on the Diagnosis of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease].Acta gastroenterologica LatinoamericanaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Peptest
methodsPatients with suspected LPR were examined with the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI), Reflux Finding Score (RFS), fasting Peptest, and MII-pH monitoring. We calculated the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the Peptest, RSI, and RFS based on the threshold of one and six hypopharyngeal reflux episodes.
resultsAltogether, the data from 46 patients were analyzed. When one hypopharyngeal reflux episode was used as a diagnostic threshold for LPR, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were, respectively, as follows: 35%, 33%, 100%, 100%, and 3%, for the Peptest; 39%, 40%, 0%, 95%, and 0%, for the RSI; and 57%, 58%, 0%, 96%, and 0%, for the RFS. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the Peptest for diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were 46%, 27%, 63%, 40.0%, and 48%, respectively.
conclusionsA positive Peptest is highly supportive of a pathological LPR diagnosis. However, a negative test could not exclude LPR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.