Gastroesophageal or laryngopharyngeal reflux (GERD/LPR) vs Healthy controls: Salivary function impairment (buffering capacity, flow rate, oral pH)
Reflux is associated with impaired salivary function (notably reduced buffering capacity) as a proposed pathophysiological mechanism, based on several ungraded studies.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Gastroesophageal or laryngopharyngeal reflux (GERD/LPR) vs Healthy individuals (controls) Salivary function impairment (buffering capacity, flow rate, oral pH) · Adults with GERD/LPR reflux · Adult patients in gastroenterology, ENT and dental clinical settings Reflux is associated with impaired salivary function (notably reduced buffering capacity) as a proposed pathophysiological mechanism, based on several ungraded studies. Laryngopharyngeal reflux, gastroesophageal reflux and dental disorders: A systematic review. (2020) All outcomes | Mixed/controversial salivary findings: reduced salivary buffering capacity supported in three studies (Correa, Holbrook, Filipi) with low oral pH and reduced flow as additional factors in GERD patients, but Meurman and Schroeder found no significant salivary abnormalities; no pooled estimate. | 6 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Laryngopharyngeal reflux, gastroesophageal reflux and dental disorders: A systematic review. 2020 All outcomes | January 1990 to December 2019 (publication period searched) | 24 | Not applicable |
Studies behind the findings
The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.
- Oral health status, salivary factors and microbial analysis in patients with active gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. · 2011 · included by 1 of these review
- Gastric Reflux is a Significant Causative Factor of Tooth Erosion · 2009 · included by 1 of these review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.