Latar belakang: Refluks laringofaring (RLF) didefinisikan sebagai aliran balik cairan lambungke daerah laring dan faring, sehingga berkontak dengan saluran pencernaan dan pernapasan bagian atasyang menyebabkan keluhan suara serak, batuk, sensasi globus, throat clearing, dan post nasal drip. RLFmemberikan dampak negatif terhadap kualitas hidup terutama fungsi fisik dan emosi. Diagnosis RLFditegakkan dengan mengetahui riwayat penyakit, gejala klinis, pemeriksaan laringoskopi, serta menentukanadanya aliran balik cairan lambung ke laringofaring. Pemeriksaan ambulatory 24 hours double-probepHmetri merupakan baku emas untuk diagnosis RLF, tetapi pemeriksaan ini masih belum ideal. Salahsatu cara untuk menentukan RLF saat ini adalah dengan menentukan keberadaan pepsin pada laring danfaring, menggunakan metode Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA). Hal ini berdasarkan faktabahwa pepsin hanya dihasilkan pada lambung. Tujuan: Mengetahui karakteristik pasien, gambaran refluxsymptom index (RSI), gambaran reflux finding score (RFS) dan mengetahui kadar pepsin pada salivapasien RLF. Metode: Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian deskriptif untuk mengetahui gambaran hasilpemeriksaan RSI, RFS, dan kadar pepsin dalam saliva pasien RLF dengan metode ELISA di bagian TelingaHidung Tenggorok-Bedah Kepala dan Leher Rumah Sakit Dr. M. Djamil Padang, mulai Januari–Oktober2015. Hasil: Dari 30 responden yang terdiri dari perempuan 23 orang (76,7%), dan laki-laki 7 orang(23,3%), didapatkan kelompok usia terbanyak 48-57 tahun (40%), dengan rata-rata usia 47,2+12,06 tahun.Nilai rerata RSI 18,53+4,46, nilai rerata RFS 11,47+2,50, dan pada semua sampel didapatkan pepsin (+)dengan nilai rerata kadar pepsin dalam saliva responden 2,75+1,23 ng/ml. Kesimpulan: Pepsin terdeteksipada semua sampel saliva responden RLF. ABSTRACTBackground: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is defined as the backflow of gastric contents intolarynx and pharynx areas, making contacts with upper digestive and respiratory tracks causing hoarseness,cough, globus sensation, throat clearing and post nasal drip. LPR has a negative impact on quality oflife. LPR diagnosis is confirmed by disease history, clinical symptoms, laryngoscopy examination andthe backflow of gastric fluid into laryngopharynx. Ambulatory examination of 24 hours double-probepHmetry is the gold standard for LPR diagnosis, although it is not yet ideal. To detect the presence ofpepsin in the larynx and pharynx using ELISA is now being used to determine LPR, based on the fact thatpepsin is only produced in the stomach. Purpose: To investigate patient characteristics, reflux symptomindex (RSI) and reflux finding score (RFS) descriptions, and pepsin level in the saliva of LPR patients.Methods: A descriptive research to describe RSI, RFS, and levels of pepsin in the saliva of LPR patientsusing ELISA at the Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Departement of Dr. M. Djamil Hospital,Padang, from January-October 2015. Results: Thirty respondents consisted of 23 females (76.7%),and 7 males (23.3%), revealed the largest age group was 48-57 years (40%), with an average age of 47.2+12.06 years. The average value of RSI 18.53+4.46, the average value of RFS 11.47+2.50, andpepsin result (+) in all samples, with an average value of pepsin level in respondents’ saliva 2.75+1.23ng ml. Conclusion: Pepsin was detected in all samples of LPR patients’ saliva.

Background Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) and laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) have been found to coexist in the population. OSAS and LPR also share obesity as an important risk factor. However, the relationship between LPR and OSAS remains unclear. This study aimed to correlate LPR as measured by the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) and the Reflux Finding Score (RFS) with OSAS. Methods This cross-sectional study included sixty-four subjects who underwent anamnesis to complete the RSI and the Epworth Sleeping Scale (ESS). The subjects were then divided into the OSAS and non-OSAS groups based on the Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) obtained through a polysomnography examination. Both groups underwent a flexible fiberoptic nasopharyngolaryngoscopy examination to determine the RFS. LPR was identified based on the RSI and RFS. Results The mean BMI of the OSAS group significantly was higher than the non-OSAS group (p < 0.05). Most of the subjects in the OSAS group exhibited mild-moderate OSAS (AHI 10–29), and severe OSAS occurred in only seven subjects. The mean RSI and RFS values in the OSAS group did not differ significantly from the non-OSAS group (p = 0.34 and p = 0.36, respectively). The proportion of LPR between the mild-moderate OSAS group, the severe OSAS group, and the non-OSAS group did not differ significantly (p = 1.00). RSI and RFS did not significantly correlate with AHI. Based on RSI, the proportion of LPR between the ESS (+) and ESS (-) groups did not significantly differ (adjusted p = 0.062). The proportion of LPR based on RFS was almost equal between the ESS (+) and ESS (-) groups (p = 0.817). Conclusions The BMI of the OSAS group was significantly higher than the non-OSAS group. There was no significant difference in RSI and RFS between the OSAS and non-OSAS groups. There was no significant correlation between RSI and AHI, or between RFS and AHI. There was no significant difference in the proportion of RSI between the ESS (+) and the ESS (-) groups.

Background Of preterm infants born before 32 weeks of gestation, 40-70% have atypical and immature feeding skills, which could delay initiation of oral feeding. A formal objective measurement of non-nutritive sucking may increase the accuracy of determining the right time to initiate oral feeding, however, most hospital perinatology care units do not own a suction pressure measurement device to objectively measure non-nutritive sucking parameters. Objective To compare objective and subjective non-nutritive sucking (NNS) based on sucking pressure, number of suctions per burst, and time between bursts. Methods One hundred twenty preterm infants born at 28-34 weeks’ gestation were evaluated for objective and subjective NNS. Data were collected from August to November 2021 at five hospitals in Jakarta. Objective NNS was measured by a suction pressure measurement device, while subjective NNS was clinically examined. Number of suctions per burst, sucking pressure, and time between bursts were analysed by Spearman’s correlation test. Results A positive and significant correlation between objective and subjective NNS was found in all parameters (P<0.001). The highest correlation was found in time between bursts (r=0.74; P<0.001), followed by number of suctions per burst (r=0.60; P<0.001), and sucking pressure (r=0.58; P<0.001). Conclusion The correlation between objective and subjective NNS examination was moderate in preterm infants. Therefore, an objective NNS measurement is still required for optimizing the examination.

Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the location, configuration, and degree of differences in upper airway obstruction between the Mueller Maneuver (MM) and Drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE), thus acquiring a better diagnostic value for SDB patients. Methods: A cross-sectional and analytical descriptive study using retrospective secondary data to evaluate the location, configuration and degree of upper airway obstruction in SDB subjects using the Mueller Maneuver and DISE. Polysomnography (PSG) type 2 was used to determine the SDB degree. Results: Subjects with SDB non-Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and OSA show a multilevel obstruction with a different location and configuration due to the various risk factors, such as nasal congestion, laryngopharyngeal reflux, obesity and menopause. Conclusion: Statistical differences in upper airway obstruction configuration between MM and DISE were found in the level of the velum (p=0,036), oropharynx (p<0,001) and epiglottis (p=0,036) and were also found in the obstruction degree of the velum, oropharynx, tongue base and epiglottis with p=0,002; p<0,001; p<0,001 and p<0,001. No statistical difference was found on the lowest oxygen saturation between PSG and DISE (p=0,055).