Review article: oesophageal dilation in adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis

British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (BSPGHAN) joint consensus guidelines on the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic oesophagitis in children and adults

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is an increasingly common cause of dysphagia in both children and adults, as well as one of the most prevalent oesophageal diseases with a significant impact on physical health and quality of life. We have provided a single comprehensive guideline for both paediatric and adult gastroenterologists on current best practice for the evaluation and management of EoE.

METHODS

The Oesophageal Section of the British Society of Gastroenterology was commissioned by the Clinical Standards Service Committee to develop these guidelines. The Guideline Development Group included adult and paediatric gastroenterologists, surgeons, dietitians, allergists, pathologists and patient representatives. The Population, Intervention, Comparator and Outcomes process was used to generate questions for a systematic review of the evidence. Published evidence was reviewed and updated to June 2021. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to assess the evidence and make recommendations. Two rounds of voting were held to assess the level of agreement and the strength of recommendations, with 80% consensus required for acceptance.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven statements on EoE presentation, diagnosis, investigation, management and complications were produced with further statements created on areas for future research.

CONCLUSIONS

These comprehensive adult and paediatric guidelines of the British Society of Gastroenterology and British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition are based on evidence and expert consensus from a multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals, including patient advocates and patient support groups, to help clinicians with the management patients with EoE and its complications.

Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Dietary and Nondietary Approaches

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergen-driven chronic inflammatory condition, characterized by symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction and confirmed histologically by esophageal mucosal eosinophilia. Since its first description in the 1990s, the incidence and prevalence of EoE have been on the rise. It is known to affect all ages of various ethnic backgrounds and both sexes; however, it is most seen in White males. Children with EoE often present with abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, and failure to thrive, whereas adults with EoE typically present with dysphagia and food impaction. Diagnosis of EoE requires histologic confirmation of elevated esophageal eosinophils in a symptomatic patient, and only after secondary causes have been excluded. Because EoE is a chronic and progressively fibrostenotic disease, treatment goals include resolution of symptoms, induction and maintenance of disease remission, and prevention and possibly reversal of fibrostenotic complications, while minimizing treatment-related adverse effects and improving quality of life. Treatment strategies include the "3 D's"-drugs, diet, and dilation. Standard drug therapies include proton-pump inhibitors and topical corticosteroids. Dietary therapies include elemental diet, allergy testing-directed elimination diet, and empiric elimination diets. Endoscopic esophageal dilation for EoE strictures can alleviate esophageal symptoms but has no effect on mucosal inflammation. Recent progress in EoE research has made possible evidence-based clinical guidelines. Ongoing pharmacologic trials show promise for novel biologic agents in the treatment of refractory EoE.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Adults: A Concise Overview of an Evolving Disease

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory disease that encompasses esophageal symptoms along with eosinophilic infiltration of the esophageal epithelium. EoE is an evolving disease that has been a subject of interest to many researchers since the first studies recognized this condition as a new and distinct clinicopathological entity 25 years ago. Clinical presentation in adult patients may include dysphagia, food impaction, vomiting, and reflux symptoms. The diagnosis of EoE is based on the combination of clinical history suggestive of esophageal dysfunction, endoscopic features indicative of the disease, and histology revealing eosinophilic infiltration of the esophageal epithelium that persists after a trial of proton pump inhibitor therapy along with the exclusion of other disorders that may be associated with esophageal tissue eosinophilia. The interplay between EoE and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is complex, and differentiating these two conditions continues to be difficult and challenging in clinical practice. The mainstay treatment includes dietary modification, topical steroids, and/or endoscopic dilation. The primary care physician (PCP) plays an important role in improving patient care and quality of life by ensuring early referral and participating in management and follow-up. This article provides an overview of the current knowledge base regarding the disease including epidemiology, genetics, pathogenesis, common clinical presentations, the interplay between EoE and GERD, diagnostic approaches, and therapeutic options available to the PCP.

Oesophageal food bolus obstruction and eosinophilic oesophagitis

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is now a well-recognised cause of dysphagia and food bolus obstruction (FBO). The diagnosis requires histologic confirmation, and the yield is greatest when at least 4 to 6 oesophageal biopsies are taken from different sites. Previous case reports of FBO have demonstrated a low biopsy rate, and as such cases of EoE may have been missed. In this review, the medical records of 123 patients aged 18 years or older, who had presented with FBO over a 2 year period, were reviewed. EoE was the most common diagnosis, and was found in 81.3% of patients with FBO aged 40 years or less. 45.5% of patients with FBO were biopsied, and of those, 33.9% were confirmed to have had at least 4 biopsies. EoE is a common cause of FBO and requires appropriate oesophageal sampling to confirm the diagnosis. Cases of EoE may otherwise be missed.

Challenges and updates in the management of eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) is a chronic T helper cell-2 mediated inflammatory condition and is considered as a primary cause of dysphagia and foregut symptoms. There are many challenges regarding the treatment options of EE. Different therapeutic approaches are best at meeting different endpoints. There are unresolved questions such as whether the goal for treatment should be to control esophageal eosinophilia and inflammation or to achieve symptomatic improvement. Still, proton pump inhibitors are used in differential diagnosis, along with their anti-inflammatory and anti-acid properties. Conducted trials continue to recommend the use of topical corticosteroids and empiric food elimination diets as first-line therapeutic modalities. The growing knowledge on the pathogenesis of EE has allowed further progression of encouraging targeted biologic therapies. However, the guidelines for EE management should be updated accordingly in the coming years, including fast evolving data on non-invasive diagnostic strategies, new treatment modalities, and the long-term prognosis of the disease.

Successful Esophageal Dilation of Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) Patients With a Previous Postdilation Complication: Start Low and Go Slow

INTRODUCTION

Esophageal dilation is an effective and safe treatment option for fibrostenotic eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Despite the safety, adverse events occur, yet there is scarce literature on the best treatment postcomplications.

METHODS

Patients with diagnosis of EoE (≥15 eosinophils per high-power field) from 2011 to 2015 treated at our center were included. Thirty patients with fibrostenotic disease had records available regarding serial dilation therapy. Eight patients previously experienced complications by outside providers. Groups were created based on history of complication before our dilation versus a group without. Mean difference and odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

There were 8 complications, 7 occurred during dilation and 1 during passage of the endoscope. Esophageal diameter at initial dilation was lower in patients with prior complications 9.0±1.51 versus 11.73±2.98 mm (95% CI: -4.44, -1.02; P=0.003). However, end-esophageal diameter was similar across both groups 15.8±1.8 versus 16.1±2.0 mm. Total number of dilation sessions: 4.0±1.8 versus 2.32±1.0 (95% CI: 0.17, 3.19; P=0.03), as well as sessions to reach 17 mm diameter 3.8±1.0 versus 2.3±1.0 (95% CI: -0.08, 2.89; P=0.04), were higher in the patients with complications. The length of time in months to reach an esophageal diameter of 17 mm was longer in patients with complications, but the difference was not statistically significant 3.50±0.6 versus 2.3±2.3 months (P=0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Esophageal dilation is a safe and effective modality to treat severe fibrostenotic EoE in patients with prior history of complications. The keys to success are: (1) start with lower diameter bougies and (2) dilate slowly over a longer time course to reach targeted diameter and symptom resolution.

UK guidelines on oesophageal dilatation in clinical practice

These are updated guidelines which supersede the original version published in 2004. This work has been endorsed by the Clinical Services and Standards Committee of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) under the auspices of the oesophageal section of the BSG. The original guidelines have undergone extensive revision by the 16 members of the Guideline Development Group with representation from individuals across all relevant disciplines, including the Heartburn Cancer UK charity, a nursing representative and a patient representative. The methodological rigour and transparency of the guideline development processes were appraised using the revised Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool.Dilatation of the oesophagus is a relatively high-risk intervention, and is required by an increasing range of disease states. Moreover, there is scarcity of evidence in the literature to guide clinicians on how to safely perform this procedure. These guidelines deal specifically with the dilatation procedure using balloon or bougie devices as a primary treatment strategy for non-malignant narrowing of the oesophagus. The use of stents is outside the remit of this paper; however, for cases of dilatation failure, alternative techniques-including stents-will be listed. The guideline is divided into the following subheadings: (1) patient preparation; (2) the dilatation procedure; (3) aftercare and (4) disease-specific considerations. A systematic literature search was performed. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Develop-ment and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to evaluate the quality of evidence and decide on the strength of recommendations made.

Endoscopic Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

In eosinophilic esophagitis, the main cause of solid-food dysphagia is tissue remodeling resulting in strictures and narrowed esophagus. Endoscopy and biopsies help to identify the degree of inflammation but often miss the fibrosis. Although initially considered dangerous, esophageal dilation has evolved into an extremely effective and safe treatment in fibrostenotic disease. The key is starting low with small-diameter bougies or balloons, and gradually dilating the esophagus and strictures to 16 to 18 mm. Results in more than 1000 adults and children have shown low rates of complications, especially perforations, and no deaths, but postprocedure chest pain is common.

Esophageal dilation with either bougie or balloon technique as a treatment for eosinophilic esophagitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Esophageal dilation is a now recognized to be an important therapeutic modality in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to evaluate the safety of esophageal dilation in EoE, especially regarding perforation risk, and to examine perforation risk by dilator type.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the published literature from January 1, 1950 to June 30, 2016 using PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Studies were included if they described patients with EoE who underwent elective esophageal dilation and also reported the presence or absence of at least 1 adverse event (eg, perforation, bleeding, pain, or hospitalization). We used random-effects meta-analysis to estimate the frequency of each adverse event.

RESULTS

Of 923 identified articles, 37 met inclusion criteria and represented 2034 dilations in 977 patients. On meta-analysis, postprocedure hospitalization occurred in .689% of dilations (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-1.42%), clinically significant GI hemorrhage in .028% (95% CI, 0%-.217%), and clinically significant chest pain in 3.64% (95% CI, 1.73%-5.55%). Nine perforations were documented, at a rate of .033% (95% CI, 0%-.226%) per procedure after meta-analysis. None of the perforations resulted in surgical intervention or mortality. Most (5/9) were reported before 2009 (rate, .41% [95% CI, 0%-2.75%]); from 2009 forward the rate was .030% (95% CI, 0%-.225%). Dilation method was described in 30 studies (1957 dilations), in which 4 perforations were detected. The estimated perforation rate for bougies was .022% (95% CI, 0%-.347%) and for balloons was .059% (95% CI, 0%-.374%).

CONCLUSIONS

Perforation from esophageal dilation in EoE is rare, and there is no evidence of a significant difference in perforation risk related to dilator type. Esophageal dilation should be considered a safe procedure in EoE.

Management of refractory eosinophilic oesophagitis

The goal of this Review is to discuss the clinical approach to patients who do not respond to treatment for eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE). Refractory EoE is challenging to manage as there are limited data to guide decision-making. In this Review, refractory EoE is defined as persistent eosinophilia in the setting of incomplete resolution of the primary presenting symptoms and incomplete resolution of endoscopic findings following a PPI trial, and after treatment with either topical steroids or dietary elimination. However, this definition is controversial. This Review will examine these controversies, explore how frequently non-response is observed, and highlight potential explanations and predictors of non-response. Non-response is common and affects a large proportion of patients with EoE. It is important to systematically assess multiple possible causes of non-response, as well as consider treatment complications and an incorrect diagnosis of EoE. If non-response is confirmed, second-line treatments are required. Although the overall response rate for second-line therapy is disappointing, with only half of patients eventually responding, there are several promising agents that are currently under investigation, and the future is bright for new treatment modalities for refractory EoE.

Control of inflammation decreases the need for subsequent esophageal dilation in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis

It is unknown if successful control of esophageal inflammation in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) decreases the need for subsequent esophageal dilation. We aimed to determine whether histologic response to topical steroid treatment decreases the likelihood and frequency of subsequent esophageal dilation. We conducted a retrospective cohort study. Patients with an incident diagnosis of EoE were included if they had an initial esophageal dilation, received topical steroids, and had a subsequent endoscopy with biopsies. The number of dilations performed in each group was determined, and histologic responders (<15 eos/hpf) were compared to nonresponders. The 55 EoE patients included (27 responders and 28 nonresponders) underwent a mean of 3.0 dilations over a median follow-up of 19 months. Responders required fewer dilations than nonresponders (1.6 vs. 4.6, P = 0.03), after adjusting for potential confounders. Despite undergoing significantly fewer dilations, responders achieved a similar increase in esophageal diameter with dilation (4.9 vs. 5.0 mm; P = 0.92). In EoE patients undergoing esophageal dilation at baseline, control of inflammation with topical steroids was associated with a 65% decrease in the number of subsequent dilations to maintain the same esophageal caliber. This suggests that inflammation control is an important goal in patients with fibrostenotic changes of EoE.

Dilation of Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Adverse Events and Short-term Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Although several studies report on the experience with adult eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE)-related stricture, outcomes for pediatric patients with EoE-associated fibrostenosis and stricture is more limited. To address this, we aim to identify the adverse event (AE) rate and short-term outcomes of the largest reported cohort of children with EoE to undergo esophageal dilation for management of symptomatic esophageal narrowing.

METHODS

A retrospective assessment of all children, 18 years and younger, who underwent esophageal dilation at an academic children's hospital during a 5-year period was conducted. Clinical, endoscopic, histologic, and outcomes of dilation were extracted from the medical record. AEs were captured within a standardized endoscopic AE database. Grade 2 AEs (requiring unanticipated medical intervention) were termed significant. Dilation-related events were compared between patients with EoE, without EoE, and those undergoing standard upper endoscopy.

RESULTS

Of the 451 total dilations, 68 dilations were performed in 40 EoE patients (mean age 13.8 years, standard deviation 3.3 years [4.6-18.9 years]). Forty-three percent (17/40) had repeat dilation during the study period. Dilation-related grade 2 AE rates in EoE and in non-EoE patients were 2.9% and 3.1%, respectively (P > 0.5). Chest pain (any grade AE) was reported in 14.7% of EoE dilations. No significant associations were found between postprocedural pain and dilation method, final dilator size, medical therapy, or esophageal eosinophilia. No perforations or significant hemorrhage were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that dilation can be performed safely in children with EoE. In the appropriate clinical setting, cautious dilation may be considered in the management of fibrostenotic EoE.

Savary Dilation Is Safe and Effective Treatment for Esophageal Narrowing Related to Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis

OBJECTIVES

Data on management of esophageal narrowing related to eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) in children are scanty. The aim of the present study is to assess the safety and effectiveness of esophageal dilation in pediatric EoE from the largest case series to date.

METHODS

Children diagnosed with EoE during 2004 to 2015 were reviewed for the presence of esophageal narrowing. Esophageal narrowing was categorized as short segment narrow caliber, long segment narrow caliber, and single short stricture. The characteristics of the narrowed esophagus, therapeutic approach, clinical outcome, and complications were reviewed.

RESULTS

Of the 50 EoE cases diagnosed during the study period, 11 cases (9 boys; median age 9 years, range 4-12) were identified with esophageal narrowing (22%). Six had short segment narrow caliber esophagus and 5 had long segment narrow caliber esophagus (median length of the narrowing was 4 cm, range 3-20 cm). Three cases with narrow caliber esophagus also had esophageal stricture 2 to 3 cm below the upper esophageal sphincter. Nineteen dilation sessions were performed in 10 cases using Savary dilator. Esophageal size improved from median 7 mm to median 13.4 mm. Good response was obtained in all cases. Following the dilation procedure, longitudinal esophageal mucosal tear occurred in all cases without esophageal perforation or chest pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Esophageal dilation using Savary dilator is safe and highly effective in the management of esophageal narrowing related to EoE in children. Dilation alone does not improve the inflammatory process, and hence a combination with dietary or medical intervention is required.

Randomized controlled trial comparing esophageal dilation to no dilation among adults with esophageal eosinophilia and dysphagia

The role of esophageal dilation in patients with esophageal eosinophilia with dysphagia remains unknown. The practice of dilation is currently based on center preferences and expert opinion. The aim of this study is to determine if, and to what extent, dysphagia improves in response to initial esophageal dilation followed by standard medical therapies. We conducted a randomized, blinded, controlled trial evaluating adult patients with dysphagia and newly diagnosed esophageal eosinophilia from 2008 to 2013. Patients were randomized to dilation or no dilation at time of endoscopy and blinded to dilation status. Endoscopic features were graded as major and minor. Subsequent to randomization and endoscopy, all patients received fluticasone and dexlansoprazole for 2 months. The primary study outcome was reduction in overall dysphagia score, assessed at 30 and 60 days post-intervention. Patients with severe strictures (less than 7-mm esophageal diameter) were excluded from the study. Thirty-one patients were randomized and completed the protocol: 17 randomized to dilation and 14 to no dilation. Both groups were similar with regard to gender, age, eosinophil density, endoscopic score, and baseline dysphagia score. The population exhibited moderate to severe dysphagia and moderate esophageal stricturing at baseline. Overall, there was a significant (P < 0.001) but similar reduction in mean dysphagia score at 30 and 60 days post-randomization compared with baseline in both groups. No significant difference in dysphagia scores between treatment groups after 30 (P = 0.93) or 60 (P = 0.21) days post-intervention was observed. Esophageal dilation did not result in additional improvement in dysphagia score compared with treatment with proton pump inhibitor and fluticasone alone. In patients with symptomatic esophageal eosinophilia without severe stricture, dilation does not appear to be a necessary initial treatment strategy.

[Eosinophilic esophagitis]

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a major cause of dysphagia and esophageal food impaction in young adults, although the diagnostic can be made in older patients. The diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis is suspected on endoscopic abnormalities of esophageal mucosa and confirmed by esophageal biopsy samples. Approximately 50% of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis do respond to proton pump inhibitors therapy. The first line therapy for eosinophilic esophagitis is proton pump inhibitor therapy. Ingested topical steroids represent a second-line therapy. The practical modalities of this treatment should be clearly explained to patients. A diet that eliminates most alimentary allergens provide a 75% clinical and histological remission rate. The progressive reintroduction protocol allows to identify the allergen(s) involved in the disease. Endoscopic dilatations should be proposed in patients with significant esophageal stricture.

Managing eosinophilic esophagitis: challenges and solutions

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic and progressive immune-mediated condition defined by symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and dense eosinophilic infiltration of the esophageal mucosa. Therapies consist of anti-eosinophilic medications and specialized diets aimed to decrease the progression of EoE and alleviate its symptoms, namely, dysphagia and food impaction. Assessing response to therapy remains challenging, as treatment end points are not well defined and currently consist of clinical, histologic, and endoscopic features. Newer validated measures may help standardize treatment end points. Emerging data support the use of maintenance therapy, which may reduce disease progression. Optimal dosages, delivery techniques, and duration of treatment need to be determined. When features of fibrostenosis develop, esophageal dilation is a safe and effective adjunctive strategy for improving symptoms. In EoE cases refractory to conventional treatments, newer therapies targeting inflammatory mediators and cytokines are on the horizon.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Adults

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a relatively recently discovered disease of increasing incidence and prevalence and is a common cause of dysphagia and food bolus impaction. The definition of eosinophilic esophagitis continues to evolve, most recently with the characterization of proton pump inhibitor-responsive esophageal eosinophilia. The number of high-quality prospective, controlled trials guiding therapeutic decisions in eosinophilic esophagitis has increased steadily over the past several years. Treatment options at present focus on dietary therapy, particularly implementation of a 6-food elimination diet, and medical therapy, primarily the use of swallowed, topical corticosteroids. Proton pump inhibitors play an important role in current management. Conservative esophageal dilation is effective at ameliorating dysphagia in symptomatic patients with esophageal strictures. We conducted an evidence-based review of the diagnosis and treatment options in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis. The understanding of eosinophilic esophagitis continues to be refined. Continued validation of appropriate endpoints, however, is essential to establish the efficacy of existing and novel therapeutic approaches.

Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: An update

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a worldwide chronic allergic disease of the esophagus. In the last decade, there is an epidemic of this entity in the western world. Mostly seen in children and young adults, patients present with dysphagia or food impaction in the emergency room. Characteristic endoscopic findings, esophageal eosinophilia and non-responsiveness to proton pump inhibitors help make the diagnosis. Avoidance of food allergens, administration of steroidal anti-inflammatory medications and dilation of the esophagus are the mainstays of treatment. Investigations are ongoing for mucosal healing and optimum maintenance treatment.

An Overview of the Diagnosis and Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory condition characterized by symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and eosinophilic infiltration of the esophageal mucosa. The diagnosis requires esophageal biopsies demonstrating at least 15 eosinophils per high-powered field following a course of high-dose proton pump inhibitors. Management of EoE consists of the three Ds: drugs, dietary therapy, and esophageal dilation. In this review, we discuss the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of EoE to include the role of emerging therapies.

Impact of Diagnostic Delay and Other Risk Factors on Eosinophilic Esophagitis Phenotype and Esophageal Diameter

GOALS

Endoscopic features of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are variable with at least 2 phenotypes. The goal of this study was to classify adult EoE patients based on esophageal phenotype and diameter, and assess an association between demographical and clinical histories to define EoE phenotypes and overall disease progression.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with a confirmed diagnosis of EoE from 1988 to 2013 treated at University of South Florida were included. Patients were grouped into inflammatory or fibrostenotic phenotype, and further characterized by esophageal diameter: group 1 (6 to 9.9 mm), group 2 (10 to 16.9 mm), and group 3 (>17 mm-control). Significance level was set at 5%.

RESULTS

Sixty-four adult patients met inclusion criteria. Sixty-one percent of patients (39/64) were defined as fibrostenotic and 39% (25/64) as inflammatory phenotype. There was a significant difference in mean time of delayed diagnosis in patients with <10 mm esophageal diameter (14.8 y) and patients with a diameter of 10 to 16.9 mm (11.1 y) compared with patients with an esophageal diameter of ≥17 mm (5 y); P=0.002 and 0.006, respectively. Patients on aspirin with delayed diagnosis (>7 y) were significantly more likely to present with strictures (<10 mm) compared with nonaspirin users [odds ratio (OR=7.0; 95% confidence interval (CI), 7.2-31.3; P=0.008]. Similar results were found with non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs, smoking, and alcohol (OR=6.4; 95% CI, 1.6-26.4; P=0.01, OR=5.2; 95% CI, 1.4-20.1; P=0.02, and OR=6.4; 95% CI, 1.6-26.0; P=0.009), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In our US population, a delay in diagnosis was shown to be associated with stricture formation in EoE confirming the Swiss experience. The results show the importance of reducing the diagnostic delay in EoE as there appears to be progression to fibrosis over time, aggravated by common medications and social habits.

Outcomes of Esophageal Dilation in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Safety, Efficacy, and Persistence of the Fibrostenotic Phenotype

OBJECTIVES

Esophageal dilation is commonly performed in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but there are few long-term data. The aims of this study were to assess the safety and long-term efficacy of esophageal dilation in a large cohort of EoE cases, and to determine the frequency and predictors of requiring multiple dilations.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in the University of North Carolina EoE Clinicopathological Database from 2002 to 2014. Included subjects met consensus diagnostic criteria for EoE. Clinical, endoscopic, and histologic features were extracted, as were dilation characteristics (dilator type, change in esophageal caliber, and total number of dilations) and complications. Patients with EoE who had undergone dilation were compared with those who did not and also stratified by whether they required single or multiple dilations.

RESULTS

Of 509 EoE patients, 164 were dilated a total of 486 times. Those who underwent dilation had a longer duration of symptoms before diagnosis (11.1 vs. 5.4 years, P<0.001). Ninety-five patients (58%) required >1 dilation (417 dilations total, mean of 4.4±4.3 per patient). The only predictor of requiring multiple dilations was a smaller baseline esophageal diameter. Dilation was tolerated well, with no major bleeds, perforations, or deaths. The overall complication rate was 5%, primarily due to post-procedural pain. Of 164 individuals dilated, a majority (58% or 95/164) required a second dilation. Of these individuals, 75% required repeat dilation within 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

Dilation in EoE is well-tolerated, with a very low risk of serious complications. Patients with long-standing symptoms before diagnosis are likely to require dilation. More than half of those dilated will require multiple dilations, often needing a second procedure within 1 year. These findings can be used to counsel patients with fibrostenotic complications of EoE.

Current Management of Eosinophilic Esophagitis 2015

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory condition characterized by esophageal dysfunction and eosinophilic infiltrate (≥15/hpf) in the esophageal epithelium and the absence of other potential causes of eosinophilia. The prevalence is increasing and is the most common cause of solid food dysphagia in children and young adults. This article will review the diagnosis and management of EoE based on consensus conferences, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis and highlights seminal studies in our evolving treatment of this disease. However, all answers are not available and I will remark about the lessons learned in my clinical practice seeing EoE patients over the last 25 years. The complicated etiology of the complaint of dysphagia in EoE patients will be reviewed. The importance of utilizing endoscopy, biopsies, and barium esophagram to help define the 2 phenotypes (inflammatory, fibrostenosis) of EoE will be highlighted. The controversy about PPI-responsive esophageal eosinophilia will be discussed and contrasted with idiopathic EoE. Finally, the 3 treatment options for EoE (drugs, diet, dilation) will be reviewed in detail and a useful clinical management algorithm presented.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: From pathophysiology to treatment

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune disease, characterized by a dense eosinophilic infiltrate in the esophagus, leading to bolus impaction and reflux-like symptoms. Traditionally considered a pediatric disease, the number of adult patients with EoE is continuously increasing, with a relatively higher incidence in western countries. Dysphagia and food impaction represent the main symptoms complained by patients, but gastroesophageal reflux-like symptoms may also be present. Esophageal biopsies are mandatory for the diagnosis of EoE, though clinical manifestations and proton pump inhibitors responsiveness must be taken into consideration. The higher prevalence of EoE in patients suffering from atopic diseases suggests a common background with allergy, however both the etiology and pathophysiology are not completely understood. Elimination diets are considered the first-line therapy in children, but this approach appears less effective in adults patients, who often require steroids; despite medical treatments, EoE is complicated in some cases by esophageal stricture and stenosis, that require additional endoscopic treatments. This review summarizes the evidence on EoE pathophysiology and illustrates the safety and efficacy of the most recent medical and endoscopic treatments.

Eosinophilic oesophagitis: a systematic review for otolaryngologists

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic oesophagitis is a chronic, immune/antigen-mediated oesophageal disease, only recently, but increasingly, recognised in the world literature. It is diagnosed and managed primarily by medical gastroenterologists and allergy specialists, and is a distinct disease entity, affecting both children and adults. Few studies have been published in otolaryngology journals, although otolaryngologists will encounter patients with undiagnosed eosinophilic oesophagitis. Patients may present with dysphagia, bolus obstruction or with other ENT disorders, such as atopic rhinitis, reflecting the underlying systemic allergic disorder.

OBJECTIVE

This paper systematically reviews the evidence base published on the epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of eosinophilic oesophagitis, particularly as it relates to otolaryngology practice.

Esophageal dilation in eosinophilic esophagitis

Tissue remodeling with scaring is common in adult EoE patients with long standing disease. This is the major factor contributing to their complaints of solid food dysphagia and recurrent food impactions. The best tests to define the degree of remodeling are barium esophagram, high resolution manometry and endoscopy. Many physicians are fearful to dilate EoE patients because of concerns about mucosal tears and perforations. However, multiple recent case series attest to the safety of esophageal dilation and its efficacy with many patients having symptom relief for an average of two years. This chapter will review the sordid history of esophageal dilation in EoE patients and outline how to perform this procedure safely. The key is graduated dilation over one to several sessions to a diameter of 15-18 mm. Postprocedural pain is to be expected and mucosal tears are a sign of successful dilation, not complications. In some healthy adults, occasional dilation may be preferred to regular use of medications or restricted diets. This approach is now supported by recent EoE consensus statements and societal guidelines.

Elimination and elemental diet therapy in eosinophilic oesophagitis

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated disorder of the oesophagus. The incidence of EoE has been raised substantially and EoE has recently become the most prevalent cause of dysphagia among the adolescents. Food and aeroallergens are believed to play a major role in the pathogenesis. Current treatment includes topical steroids and dietary therapy. Dietary therapy with elimination of causative allergens could provide a durable long-term solution. Dietary therapy in EoE consists of in elemental and empiric elimination diets. Elemental diet with amino acid-based formula is most effective in achieving disease remission but poor taste makes adherence challenging. Empiric elimination diet based on avoidance of most common food allergens offers moderate response rates, the usefulness of allergy test-directed elimination diets is questioned by low response rates. In conclusion, dietary treatments for EoE seem promising, but further refinement is required before it can become standard care.

Steroids therapy for eosinophilic esophagitis: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We designed this systematic review and meta-analysis aiming to clarify the advantage of steroid therapy compared with non-steroid therapy for the treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, ISI Web of Science and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing steroid and non-steroid therapy, and retrospective and prospective trials on steroid therapy for EoE. RevMan 5.2 was used for the analysis. Weighted mean difference and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated and pooled using meta-analysis methods.

RESULTS

Six RCTs including 193 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis, and another two RCTs, three prospective and five retrospective trials were included in systematic review. Meta-analysis showed that topical steroids significantly decreased the mean and peak esophageal eosinophils (EOS) count compared to non-steroid therapy (MDmean  = -23.41, 95% CImean -42.08--4.73, P = 0.01 and MDpeak  = -51.27, 95% CIpeak -78.62--23.92, P = 0.0002). There were 14 trials showing the efficacy of steroids on decreasing the EOS count, 10 showing the amelioration of symptoms, and five showing endoscopic improvement. Only mild adverse events were reported for topical steroids.

CONCLUSIONS

Steroids are effective on decreasing the EOS count in EoE patients. Its value in ameliorating symptoms and endoscopic changes remains undetermined due to the lack of comparable criteria.

The changing faces of eosinophilic esophagitis: the impact of consensus guidelines at the University of South Florida

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Prior to the consensus guideline conference in 2007, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) was uncommon dominated by the fibrostenotic phenotype, but over the past decade has become a common cause of dysphagia with more inflammatory phenotypes diagnosed. We assessed the impact of guideline definitions on the characteristics of EoE phenotypes over the past 26 years at our institution.

METHODS

We reviewed the electronic health record of 75 consecutive patients meeting guideline definition EoE from 1/1988 to 5/2014. We separated groups based on 5-year intervals of diagnosis and phenotype. For continuous data, results were summarized as mean difference and standard deviation with 95 % confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Five groups based on 5-year intervals of diagnosis were identified: group 1-1988-1993 (n = 7), group 2-1994-1999 (n = 7), group 3-2000-2005 (n = 4), group 4-2006-2011 (n = 35), and group 5-2012-2014 (n = 22). Prior to 2000, all patients were diagnosed with fibrostenotic EoE. After the initial 2007 guideline conference, inflammatory EoE has predominated with only one-third diagnosed with fibrostenotic EoE. Prior to 2011, only two were diagnosed with PPI-REE. In the last 3 years, 8 out of 22 patients (32 %) had PPI-REE. Overall, 8 out of 10 (80 %) PPI-REE were the inflammatory phenotype. When comparing pre- (n = 18) and post (n = 57)-consensus definitions, there was a significant difference between age of diagnosis (30.710.2 vs. 41.3 ± 14.3; p = 0.001), age of symptom onset (18.4 +/15.2 vs. 32.4 ± 15.5), and initial esophageal diameter (10.5 ± 2.7 vs. 14.3 ± 4.2; p < 0.0001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Fibrostenotic EoE has steadily decreased, and inflammatory EoE is now the most recognized form. Across our 26-year experience, there was a decrease in delay in diagnosis and severity of esophageal stricture. The pivotal change occurred around 2007 corresponding to the first EoE guideline emphasizing the impact and importance of early detection of disease.

The 2011-2014 prevalence of eosinophilic oesophagitis in the elderly amongst 10 million patients in the United States

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is primarily diagnosed by clinicians. There are less than a handful of epidemiological studies in EoE that have included elderly patients (>65 years).

AIM

To determine the prevalence of elderly subjects among EoE patients and compare their clinical presentation, associated conditions and treatment modalities with adult and paediatric EoE patients.

METHODS

A large nationwide database (Explorys) between January 2011 and January 2014 was used. The term 'Eosinophilic Oesophagitis' was used in the Explorys search tool. The patient population was divided into three groups, Paediatric (<18 years), Adult (18-65 years) and Elderly (>65 years).

RESULTS

We identified 4840 patients coded as EoE. The total estimated prevalence was 50.6 cases per 100 000 patients (0.05%). A total of 360 cases (7.44%) were elderly patients with an estimated prevalence rate of 18.6 cases per 100 000. Across all age groups, the majority of EoE patients were Caucasians and males. A significantly greater proportion of older patients had concomitant GERD. Dysphagia was the most common symptom among elderly EoE patients as compared with the paediatric EoE patients (P < 0.001). The proportion of elderly EoE patients with food allergies or asthma was significantly lower as compared with paediatric and adult EoE patients (P < 0.001). Oesophageal dilation and/or proton pump inhibitor treatment were the most commonly used therapeutic modalities in elderly EoE patients.

CONCLUSION

Eosinophilic oesophagitis is uncommon in elderly subjects and the clinical presentation is markedly different as compared with adults or the paediatric population.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: affecting all ages

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic inflammatory disorder in which elevated eosinophils are found in the esophagus, and symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction are experienced. It has been found in both children and adults. Diagnosis is based on 15 or more eosinophils per high power field in one or more esophageal biopsy specimens coupled with a lack of response to acid suppression therapy or a normal pH monitoring study. It is often associated with other allergic conditions such as eczema and asthma. The reported cases of eosinophilic esophagitis have risen in the past decade, but whether this reflects a true increase in incidence or simply an increased recognition of the disorder by providers is not clear. Patients present with a wide range of symptoms from feeding difficulties, food refusal, and vomiting in children, to dysphagia and food impaction in adults. Treatment options for patients include dietary restrictions, topical steroids, and esophageal dilation.

The increasing incidence and prevalence of eosinophilic oesophagitis outpaces changes in endoscopic and biopsy practice: national population-based estimates from Denmark

BACKGROUND

National population-based medical registries in Denmark offer a unique opportunity to study eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) epidemiology.

AIM

To determine the incidence and prevalence of EoE in Denmark, and evaluate whether an increase in endoscopy with biopsy activity explains changes in these trends.

METHODS

The Danish National Pathology Registry, Danish National Patient Registry and Danish Registry of Medicinal Product Statistics were queried from 1997 to 2012. Using an EoE case-finding algorithm validated for Danish patients, EoE cases were identified during each year of the study period; we also identified all patients with oesophageal eosinophilia. Using the known population of Demark, the annual incidence and prevalence of EoE were determined. We also determined the number of oesophageal biopsies performed each year in Denmark, and compared the change in the incidence rate to the change in biopsy rate.

RESULTS

Between 1997 and 2012, 1708 patients had oesophageal eosinophilia, of whom 844 met the case definition of EoE. There were seven new cases of EoE in 1997 and 145 new cases in 2012, corresponding to a 19.5-fold increase in incidence (0.13/100 000 to 2.6/100 000). There were 769 total cases in 2012 (prevalence of 13.8/100 000). Over the same time frame, the oesophageal biopsy rate increased only 1.9 fold, from 91.1/100 000 to 175.3/100 000.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence and prevalence of EoE markedly increased in Denmark over the past 15 years. This increase far outpaced the increase in oesophageal biopsy utilisation, indicating that changes in the frequency of EoE are not due to changes in biopsy rates alone.

Advances in clinical management of eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune/antigen-mediated clinicopathologic condition that has become an increasingly important cause of upper gastrointestinal morbidity in adults and children over the past 2 decades. It is diagnosed based on symptoms of esophageal dysfunction, the presence of at least 15 eosinophils/high-power field in esophageal biopsy specimens, and exclusion of competing causes of esophageal eosinophilia, including proton pump inhibitor-responsive esophageal eosinophilia. We review what we have recently learned about the clinical aspects of EoE, discussing the clinical, endoscopic, and histological features of EoE in adults and children. We explain the current diagnostic criteria and challenges to diagnosis, including the role of gastroesophageal reflux disease and proton pump inhibitor-responsive esophageal eosinophilia. It is also important to consider the epidemiology of EoE (with a current incidence of 1 new case per 10,000 per year and prevalence of 0.5 to 1 case per 1000 per year) and disease progression. We review the main treatment approaches and new treatment options; EoE can be treated with topical corticosteroids, such as fluticasone and budesonide, or dietary strategies, such as amino acid-based formulas, allergy test-directed elimination diets, and nondirected empiric elimination diets. Endoscopic dilation has also become an important tool for treatment of fibrostenotic complications of EoE. There are a number of unresolved issues in EoE, including phenotypes, optimal treatment end points, the role of maintenance therapy, and treatment of refractory EoE. The care of patients with EoE and the study of the disease span many disciplines; EoE is ideally managed by a multidisciplinary team of gastroenterologists, allergists, pathologists, and dieticians.

The natural history of steroid-naïve eosinophilic esophagitis in adults treated with endoscopic dilation and proton pump inhibitor therapy over a mean duration of nearly 14 years

BACKGROUND

Despite the vast focus of research in eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), the natural history of untreated EoE remains undefined. Current expert consensus panels are calling for natural history studies to define long-term risks, adverse events, and progression of the disease.

OBJECTIVE

To address the natural course and long-term adverse events of EoE.

DESIGN

Retrospective, single-center study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care center. A cohort of patients from the year 1988 initially diagnosed as having congenital esophageal stenosis who were later reclassified as having EoE.

PATIENTS

Ninety-five patients, with 13 meeting entrance criteria for idiopathic EoE with follow-up >5 years.

INTERVENTIONS

Anti-acids and esophageal dilation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Clinical response, adverse events, long-term clinical outcomes, and progression of disease.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients (mean age at diagnosis 30.3 years, 10 male) were evaluated over a 13.6-year mean follow-up (range 5-24 years). All patients experienced daily dysphagia, with 12 presenting with food impactions. Patients were treated with esophageal dilation (64% Maloney, 34% Savary, 2.5% through-the-scope balloon) and daily anti-acids. Patients were initially treated with an average of 3.2 dilations over the first year (range 1-6) to achieve a luminal size of 15.8 mm (range 14-18 mm). They were maintained successfully with dilations every 2 years, on average, based on symptoms. Two patients not adhering to recommended dilation schedules experienced repeat impactions. One adverse event from a mucosal tear required hospitalization (1 of 157, 0.6%). Seven of 13 had Barrett's esophagus, average length 2.4 cm (range 1-4 cm), 3 on initial EGD and 4 identified over a mean duration of 9.4 years. No patient developed dysplasia or malignancy.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, small sample.

CONCLUSION

The course of EoE over a 13.6-year mean duration, although persistent, appears benign and not associated with cancer risk. A program of regular esophageal dilations based on symptom recurrence appears to be a safe, long-term treatment.

Which patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) should receive elemental diets versus other therapies?

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has increasingly been identified in both children and adults. The aim of therapies is to alleviate symptoms while reducing the esophageal inflammation. Mechanical dilation is effective at relieving symptoms, but without the benefit of controlling disease inflammation. Topical steroids appear to be effective at controlling both symptoms and esophageal eosinophilia. Recurrence rates are high once steroids are discontinued. For dietary modification, both the elimination of select, specific foods and the complete elimination of food proteins via amino acid formulas have been looked at. Both forms of dietary modification are effective. Elemental diet, although not an ideal first-line therapy for EoE, provides insight into the etiology of unusual or refractory EoE. The contribution of unusual food antigens to EoE may be determined via the use of amino-acid-based formulas in patients with EoE.

Esophageal dilations in eosinophilic esophagitis: A single center experience

AIM: To diagnose the clinical and histologic features that may be associated with or predictive of the need for dilation and dilation related complications; examine the safety of dilation in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

METHODS: The medical records of all patients diagnosed with EoE between January 2002 and July 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. Esophageal biopsies were reexamined by an experienced pathologist to confirm the diagnosis (≥ 15 eos/hpf per current guidelines). Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients who did not receive dilation therapy and those who did. Demographics, clinical history, the use of pharmacologic therapy, endoscopic and pathology findings, and the number of biopsies and dilations carried out, if any, and their locations were recorded for each patient. The dilation group was further examined based on the interval between diagnosis and dilation, and whether or not a complication occurred.

RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were identified with EoE and 22 (36%) of them underwent esophageal dilations for stricture/narrowing. The peak eos/hpf was significantly higher in patients who received a dilation (P = 0.04). Four (18% of pts.) minor complications occurred: deep mucosal tear 1, and small mucosal tears 3. There were no cases of esophageal perforations. Higher peak eos/hpf counts were not associated with increased risk of complications.

CONCLUSION: Esophageal dilation appears to be a safe procedure in EoE patients, carrying a low complication rate. No correlation was found between the peak of eosinophil count and complication rate. Complications can occur independently of the histologic features. The long-term outcome of EoE treatment, with or without dilation, needs to be determined.

The safety of a strict wire-guided dilation protocol for eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune/antigen-mediated disease seen in an increasing number of young adults. Solid food dysphagia is the most common presenting symptom, and food impactions are not uncommon because of stricturing and decreased compliance of the esophagus. Although esophageal dilation is effective in managing patients with EoE, it needs to be performed cautiously, given a perceived higher rate of perforation.

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of a strict wire-guided dilation protocol used in patients with EoE.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed to identify patients treated for EoE by a single physician (K.M.) over a 9-year period at UPMC. Medical records were reviewed to obtain information on demographic, clinical, and outcome data. Newly diagnosed and previously known EoE patients (biopsy proven) who underwent serial wire-guided bougie dilation were included in this study. All procedures were performed using monitored anesthesia care. On the basis of the initial endoscopic inspection, a bougie size was chosen that was subjectively considered to approximate the size of the esophageal lumen diameter. Fluoroscopy was used for safe guide wire placement if the endoscope could not traverse the stricture. After each bougie passage, the esophagus was reintubated with the endoscope to assess for mucosal tears. Serial dilation by 1 mm increments was continued until a small to moderate mucosal tear was seen, whereupon the procedure was terminated. For an index endoscopy for suspected EoE, biopsies were also taken to confirm the diagnosis.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were identified, mean age 33 years, 90% men. Solid food dysphagia was present in all. Twenty-seven patients (90%) were diagnosed with EoE during the index dilation; 17% underwent dilation for known, but symptomatic EoE. The median initial bougie size was 11. The median final bougie size was 15 mm; 24 patients (80%) had resultant mucosal tears. One patient complained of postprocedure chest pain requiring opioids. There were no perforations or hospitalizations. After dilation, patients were placed on swallowed fluticasone for 6 weeks (87%), maintenance montelukast (90%), or a prednisone taper (7%). Six patients (20%) underwent repeat dilation for recurrent dysphagia. All except one of these patients were on medical therapy for EoE.

CONCLUSION

Serial wire-guided dilation guided by repeated endoscopic inspection is safe in patients with EoE. Caution should be exercised when choosing the initial dilator size.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: overview of clinical management

A validated disease-specific symptom-assessment tool for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has yet to be approved by regulatory authorities for use in clinical trials. Relevant end points for daily practice include EoE-related symptoms and esophageal eosinophilic inflammation. Endoscopic features should also be taken into account when establishing a therapy plan. A reasonable clinical goal is to achieve a reduction in EoE-related symptoms and esophageal eosinophilic inflammation. Evidence is increasing to support an anti-inflammatory maintenance therapy, as this can reduce esophageal remodeling. In EoE patients in clinical remission, annual disease monitoring with symptom, endoscopic, and histologic assessments of sustained treatment response is recommended.

Prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis in the United States

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has become a major cause of upper gastrointestinal morbidity in children and adults. However, there are few data on the nationwide prevalence of EoE. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of EoE in the United States.

METHODS

We collected health insurance claims from a large database that represented the U.S. commercially insured population. We analyzed data from 2008 to 2011, identifying cases of EoE by using a previously validated definition, and calculated a period prevalence by using data from 2009 to 2011. EoE was defined as any instance of the International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision code 530.13. We calculated the prevalence of the code in the database and standardized the estimate to the U.S. population.

RESULTS

Of 35,575,388 individuals in this database, 16,405 had at least 1 code for EoE. The mean age was 33.5 years, 65% were male, 55.8% had dysphagia, and 52.8% had a diagnostic code for at least 1 allergic condition. Among 11,569,217 individuals with continuous insurance coverage between mid-2009 and mid-2011, 6513 had at least 1 code for EoE. When standardized to the U.S. population, the estimated period prevalence of EoE was 56.7/100,000 persons, translating to approximately 152,152 cases in the U.S. Prevalence peaked in men 35-39 years old, with a rate of 114.6/100,000 persons.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite its relatively recent description, EoE is frequently diagnosed in the United States, with an estimated prevalence of 56.7/100,000 persons. This estimate depends on the accuracy of the International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision code, but it could be an underestimate, because knowledge of the code and recognition of EoE are increasing.

A phenotypic analysis shows that eosinophilic esophagitis is a progressive fibrostenotic disease

BACKGROUND

Phenotypes of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are not well-characterized.

OBJECTIVE

To describe clinical features of patients with EoE with predefined phenotypes, determine predictors of these phenotypes, and make inferences about the natural history of EoE.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care center.

PATIENTS

Incident EoE cases from 2001 to 2011 that met consensus diagnostic guidelines.

INTERVENTION

Review of records.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Endoscopic phenotypes, including fibrostenotic, inflammatory, or mixed. Other groups of clinical characteristics examined included atopy, level of esophageal eosinophilia, and age of symptom onset. Multinomial logistic regression assessed predictors of phenotype status.

RESULTS

Of 379 cases of EoE identified, there were no significant phenotypic differences by atopic status or level of eosinophilia. Those with the inflammatory phenotype were more likely to be younger than those with mixed or fibrostenotic (13 vs 29 vs 39 years, respectively; P < .001) and less likely to have dysphagia, food impaction, and esophageal dilation (P < .001 for all). The mean symptom length before diagnosis was shorter for inflammatory (5 vs 8 vs 8 years; P = .02). After multivariate analysis, age and dysphagia independently predicted phenotype. The odds ratio (OR) for fibrostenosis for each 10-year increase in age was 2.1 (95% CI, 1.7-2.7). The OR for dysphagia was 7.0 (95% CI, 2.6-18.6).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, single-center study.

CONCLUSION

In this large EoE cohort, the likelihood of fibrostenotic disease increased markedly with age. For every 10-year increase in age, the odds of having a fibrostenotic EoE phenotype more than doubled. This association suggests that the natural history of EoE is a progression from an inflammatory to a fibrostenotic disease.

Eosinophilic oesophagitis: from physiopathology to treatment

Eosinophilic oesophagitis is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by eosinophilic infiltration of the oesophageal mucosa. Food and aero-allergens are involved in its pathogenesis. Dysphagia and food impaction are the dominant symptoms in adult with eosinophilic oesophagitis. However, a wide range of symptoms has been noticed such as chest pain or gastro-oesophageal reflux disease-like symptoms. Upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy and oesophageal biopsies are crucial for the diagnosis of eosinophilic oesophagitis. Endoscopy might be normal or reveal typical patterns such as rings, furrows, exudates, oedema, and stricture. Two to four biopsies should be performed both in the distal and in the proximal oesophagus, and 15 eosinophils per high power field within the oesophageal epithelium are the minimal threshold to diagnose eosinophilic oesophagitis. Allergy testing is recommended, although its impact to orient treatment remains to be demonstrated. Eosinophilic oesophagitis treatment includes medical treatment, diet and endoscopic dilation. Proton pump inhibitors are the first-line therapy as some eosinophilic oesophagitis phenotypes respond well to proton pump inhibitors. Topical viscous corticosteroids or diet elimination are the treatment of choice. There is no clear evidence in the literature to prefer one to the other. Finally endoscopic dilation should be considered in case of persistent symptomatic stenosis despite medical therapy.

Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: an update on medical management

Management of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) centers around the 3 Ds: diet, drug therapy, and dilation. Unfortunately, there is not a consistent relationship between symptom relief and resolution of mucosal eosinophilia. Elemental diets are very successful in children, but poorly tolerated by adults. The 6-food elimination diet is more attractive to adults, especially for those individuals with multiple food allergies. Steroids are the preferred anti-eosinophil drug for EoE. Oral prednisone is infrequently used because of side effects. Topical swallowed preparations (fluticasone, budesonide) are preferred for acute and possibly maintenance therapy. Relapses off steroids are frequent and dysphagia does not predictably improve. Esophageal dilation is key treatment for patients with the fibrostenotic phenotype of EoE. Long-term symptom relief for 1-2 years is common. Post-procedure chest pain is to be expected but perforation is very rare. A suggested algorithm for the treatment of EoE based on endoscopic phenotypes is outlined.

Meta-analysis: the safety and efficacy of dilation in eosinophilic oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal dilation is one of the most effective options in the management of symptoms of eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE). However, earlier reports described an increased rate of complications.

AIM

To perform a meta-analysis of population-based studies of the risks associated with dilation and the clinical efficacy and duration of response to dilation in EoE.

METHODS

Using MEDLINE and EMBASE, a systematic search was performed for published articles since 1977 describing cohort or randomised controlled trials of dilation in EoE. Summary estimates, including 95% confidence interval (CI), were calculated for the occurrence of complications associated with dilations (perforations, haemorrhage, chest pain, lacerations) and percentage of patients with symptom improvement following dilation. Heterogeneity was calculated using the I² statistic.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 232 references, of which 9 studies were included in the final analysis. The studies described 860 EoE patients, of whom 525 patients underwent at least one oesophageal dilation and a total of 992 dilations. There were three cases of perforation (95% CI 0-0.9%, I² 0%) and one haemorrhage (95% CI 0-0.8%, I² 0%). Six studies reported postprocedural chest pain in 2% of cases (95% CI 1-3, I² 53%). Clinical improvement from dilation occurred in 75% of patients (95% CI 58-93%, I² 86%).

CONCLUSIONS

Dilation in patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis is a safe procedure with a low rate of serious complications (<1%), and seems to result in at least a short-term improvement of symptoms in the majority of patients.

ACG clinical guideline: Evidenced based approach to the diagnosis and management of esophageal eosinophilia and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE)

Esophageal eosinophilia and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are increasingly recognized and prevalent conditions, which now represent common clinical problems encountered by gastroenterologists, pathologists, and allergists. The study of EoE has become a dynamic field with an evolving understanding of the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment. Although there are limited data supporting management decisions, clinical parameters are needed to guide the care of patients with eosinophilic-esophageal disorders. In this evidence-based review, recommendations developed by adult and pediatric gastroenterologists are provided for the evaluation and management of these patients. New terminology is emphasized, particularly the concepts of esophageal eosinophilia and proton-pump inhibitor-responsive esophageal eosinophilia (PPI-REE) as entities distinct from EoE.