Corrugated ringed and too small esophagi

Systematic review with meta-analysis: endoscopic dilation is highly effective and safe in children and adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal dilation is frequently used as an adjunct treatment to alleviate symptoms that develop from fibrostenotic remodelling in eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE). Earlier reports described an increased risk of complications associated with dilation.

AIM

Perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic dilation in children and adults with EoE.

METHODS

Professional librarians searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles in any language describing studies of dilation in EoE through December 2016. Studies were selected and data were abstracted independently and in duplicate. Random effects modelling was used to generate summary estimates for clinical improvement and complications (haemorrhage, perforation, hospitalisation, and death).

RESULTS

The search resulted in 3495 references, of which 27 studies were included in the final analysis. The studies described 845 EoE patients, including 87 paediatric patients, who underwent a total of 1820 oesophageal dilations. The median number of dilations was 3 (range: 1-35). Clinical improvement occurred in 95% of patients (95% CI: 90%-98%, I² : 10%, 17 studies). Perforation occurred in 0.38% (95% CI: 0.18%-0.85%, I² : 0%, 27 studies), haemorrhage in 0.05% (95% CI: 0%-0.3%, I² : 0%, 18 studies), and hospitalisation in 0.67% (95% CI: 0.3%-1.1%, I² : 44%, 24 studies). No deaths occurred (95% CI: 0%-0.2% I² : 0%, 25 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic dilation is consistently effective in children and adults with EoE, resulting in improvement in 95% of patients with very low rates (<1%) of major complications.

Diagnostic approaches and treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis. A review article

Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) is a condition that involves eosinophilic influx into the esophageal epithelium. It affects both children and adults; Adults present with dysphagia whereas children with vague abdominal complaints. The clinical symptoms as well as pathologic features of EoE and gastro esophageal reflux disease (GERD) are similar. Since eosinophilia in the esophagus is a non-specific finding, the clinical presentation in conjunction with endoscopic findings and pathology, is crucial in determining a differential diagnosis. Infections such as parasites, allergic phenomenon, Crohn's disease, malignancies, medication, and chemotherapy are all associated with eosinophilia.

A primary endoscopic difference to note between EoE and GERD is that EoE often involves long segments of the esophagus, could be patchy or focal and frequently involves the proximal esophagus. GERD, however, typically involves the distal much more frequently than the proximal esophagus. Because of the similarity between them, GERD should be excluded by using high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment or through evidence of a normal pH by esophageal testing, prior to treatment with an elimination diet or steroids. Until further research establishes different diagnostic tests and criteria, clinical and pathological response to therapy is considered to be the absolute confirmation of this diagnosis. The following is a more detailed discussion of this entity.

•

EoE is an eosinophilic influx into the esophagus epithelium.

•

It is an allergic reaction of esophagus to food particles and allergens.

•

Adults present with dysphagia and reflux-like symptoms whereas children with vague abdominal complaints.

•

Clinical presentation, endoscopic findings and pathology determine the definitive diagnosis.

•

Treatment starts with an elimination diet and followed by orally swallowed inhaled steroids.

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.

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 natural history and complications of eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic disease limited to the esophagus and has a persistent or spontaneously fluctuating course. So far it does not seem to limit life expectancy, but it often substantially impairs the quality of life. To date, there has been no association with malignant conditions, but there is concern that the chronic, uncontrolled inflammation will evoke irreversible structural alterations of the esophagus, leading to tissue fibrosis, stricture formation, and impaired function. This esophageal remodeling may result in several disease-inherent and procedure-related complications.

A systematic review of the risk of perforation during esophageal dilation for patients with eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is associated with tissue remodeling that can result in esophageal mucosal fragility, and esophageal dilation for patients with EoE is known to cause painful mucosal lacerations. Clinicians have been admonished that patients with EoE may be exceptionally predisposed to perforation with esophageal dilation, a notion supported primarily by case reports. We have conducted a systematic review of literature on esophageal dilation in EoE in an attempt to better define the risk of perforation.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and abstracts presented at the annual scientific meetings of the American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology to identify reports on esophageal dilation in EoE. We analyzed reports meeting the following criteria: (1) the diagnosis was established from esophageal biopsy specimens revealing >or=15 eosinophils/hpf, (2) esophageal dilation was described, (3) esophageal perforations described were the result of esophageal dilation.

RESULTS

We identified 18 reports for inclusion in our systematic review. The studies comprised 468 patients who underwent a total of 671 endoscopic dilations. Esophageal mucosal tears were described in most cases, but there was only one perforation among the 671 dilations (0.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review does not reveal an inordinate frequency of esophageal perforation from dilation in patients with EoE, and it is not clear that dilation is any more hazardous for patients with EoE than for patients with other causes of esophageal stricture. Although esophageal dilation must be performed with caution in all patients, the risk of perforation in EoE appears to have been exaggerated.

Putting the puzzle together: epidemiological and clinical clues in the etiology of eosinophilic esophagitis

The cause of eosinophilic esophagitis remains unknown, but its epidemiology and clinical features provide pieces to the puzzle. Eosinophilic esophagitis probably emerged in the 1950s or early 1960s, has an increasing incidence, occurs in most developed countries, is related to food allergies, affects adults and children, has a strong male predominance, clusters in families, and is commonly associated with other allergic and atopic disorders. Several theories have been proposed to explain its evolution, but none has been convincingly demonstrated.

Prevalence of esophageal dysmotility in a cohort of patients with esophageal biopsies consistent with eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is increasingly being diagnosed in adults presenting with dysphagia, food impactions, and chest pain. Studies to date provide conflicting data on the association of EoE and esophageal dysmotility. The objective of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of esophageal dysmotility in a cohort of patients with biopsies consistent with EoE at a military treatment facility. This is a prospective evaluation of consecutively identified patients at our institution diagnosed with EoE from March 1, 2005 to June 1, 2007. Thirty-two patients with biopsies consistent with EoE completed a symptom survey and 30 underwent esophageal manometry. The majority of EoE patients (23/30, 77%) had a normal end-expiratory lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure (normal range 10-35), whereas six patients had a low-normal LES pressure (6-9 mm Hg) and one patient had a decreased LES pressure (<5 mm Hg). Five patients (15.6%) were diagnosed with a nonspecific esophageal motor disorder (NSEMD). Two patients had high mean esophageal amplitude contractions >180 mm Hg (188 mm Hg, 209 mm Hg). No patient was diagnosed with nutcracker esophagus or diffuse esophageal spasm. Patients with and without NSEMD reported a similar degree of swallowing difficulty, heartburn, belching, chest pain, regurgitation, symptoms at night, and total symptom score. Likewise, eosinophil count on mucosal biopsy was similar between patients with and without a NSEMD. In this cohort, we found the prevalence of an NSEMD to be similar to that of a 10% prevalence found in a gastroesophageal reflux population.

Eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis is increasingly recognized in adults. The diagnosis is based on the presence of both typical symptoms and pathologic findings on esophageal biopsy. Patients usually present with dysphagia, food impaction and/or reflux-like symptoms, and biopsy of the esophagus shows more than 15 eosinophils per high-power field. In addition, it is essential to exclude the presence of known causes of tissue eosinophilia such as gastroesophageal reflux disease, infections, malignancy, collagen vascular diseases, hypersensitivity, and inflammatory bowel disease. There are no standardized protocols for the therapy of eosinophilic esophagitis. A variety of therapeutic approaches including acid suppression, dietary modifications, topical corticosteroids and endoscopic dilation can be used alone or in combination.

The natural history and complications of eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a chronic disease limited to the esophagus and has a persistent or spontaneously fluctuating course. So far it does not seem to limit life expectancy, but it often substantially impairs the quality of life. To date, there has been no association with malignant conditions, but there is concern that the chronic, uncontrolled inflammation will evoke irreversible structural alterations of the esophagus, leading to tissue fibrosis, stricture formation, and impaired function. This esophageal remodeling may result in several disease-inherent and procedure-related complications.

Eosinophilic oesophagitis: epidemiology, clinical aspects, and association to allergy

Eosinophilic oesophagitis is characterised by age-dependent symptoms mimicking gastrooesophageal reflux disease, a distinct endoscopic appearance and a histological picture with extensive infiltration of eosinophils in the oesophageal mucosa. Eosinophilic oesophagitis is more frequently seen in males, and patients often belong to the paediatric or adolescence age groups. The exact prevalence of eosinophilic oesophagitis is unknown, but it has been suggested that the United States has a higher prevalence than Europe. Several treatment algorithms have been suggested, including elemental diets, oral steroids, inhaled (swallowed) steroids, and leucotriene receptor antagonists. Detailed information on the eosinophilic inflammatory processes in the oesophageal mucosa was initially obtained from animal models, in particular with regard to the role of interleukin-5 and the chemokine eotaxin-1 in eosinophilic recruitment. Studies have suggested a cytotoxic effect of eosinophilic degranulation products on nerve fibers in the gastric/intestinal mucosa, implicating a direct effect of allergic inflammation on gastrointestinal motility. Human studies recently have emphasized the role of eotaxin-3 and identified a single nucleotide polymorphism probably related to disease susceptibility.

Prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis in adults with food bolus obstruction of the esophagus

BACKGROUND AND GOALS

Acute food bolus impaction is a common emergency in gastrointestinal practice. Management previously used the endoscope with an overtube to allow retrieval of the bolus per os. The push technique using air insufflation and gentle pressure on the bolus provides an alternative approach. Esophageal mucosal biopsy at the time of the initial endoscopy has not been a part of traditional practice. In view of the increasing recognition of eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) as a cause of dysphagia and food bolus obstruction in adults the etiology needs to be reassessed.

STUDY

Forty-three consecutive adults presenting with acute dysphagia secondary to food bolus obstruction of the esophagus were studied. The bolus was advanced into the stomach with the push technique or removed per os with a retrieval net. Protocol biopsies from the proximal and distal esophagus were obtained in 29 patients. Biopsies were contraindicated or not obtained in the remainder.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients were successfully treated at endoscopy. Two subjects with a food bolus impacted at the crico-pharyngeal region required general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation for safe removal. Of 29 patients biopsied, 15 had peptic esophageal stricture as the cause. Fourteen patients (all males, mean age 32 y, range 19 to 62 y) had EE identified histologically. This represents 50% of those biopsied. Patients with EE had typical endoscopic features of linear furrows, mucosal rings, or narrow bore esophagus. Most had prior episodes of food bolus obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Food bolus obstruction can be safely managed by the push technique. EE is an important cause of food bolus obstruction that can be suspected on history and endoscopic appearance and confirmed on histology.

Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: a systematic review

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) is an increasingly recognized condition both in children and adults. The aim of the present study was to review the available evidence regarding EE in adults.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE and medical textbooks were searched in May-June 2005 for English-language articles published between January 1978 and June 2005 containing relevant terms. The abstracts of two major conferences from 2000 to June 2005 were also reviewed. The presence of more than 15 eosinophils per high power field on esophageal biopsies was required to establish the diagnosis.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies with 325 patients (male/female ratio: 3/1) were found that met the review criteria. Presenting symptoms included dysphagia (93%), food impaction (62%) and heartburn (23.6%). An allergic history and peripheral eosinophilia was noted in 51.6 and 30.8% of patients, respectively. Esophageal manometry presented evidence of a motility disorder in 40% of cases. Endoscopic findings included mucosal fragility/oedema, rings, strictures, whitish pinpoint exudates and small-calibre esophagus in 59.3, 49.2, 39.7, 15.7 and 5.3% of cases, respectively, whereas 8.8% of patients had a normal endoscopy. Bougienage was performed in 64 patients, with limited efficacy and an increased complication rate. The administration of corticosteroids resulted in symptomatic improvement in more than 95% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

An allergic history and peripheral eosinophilia is less common in adults than among children with EE. An esophageal motility disorder should be a novel indication for biopsies in adults with long-lasting dysphagia. A trial with corticosteroids before bougienage may reduce active inflammation and the complication rate.

Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: clinical, endoscopic, histologic findings, and response to treatment with fluticasone propionate

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis is an increasingly recognized disorder characterized by intense eosinophilic infiltration of the esophageal mucosa. The aim of this study was to define the clinical syndrome, the endoscopic features, and the distribution of the eosinophil infiltrate in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis. We undertook a prospective evaluation of the symptomatic and histologic response to treatment with fluticasone propionate.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients (18 men; mean age 36 years) had symptom assessment and barium studies, esophageal motility recordings, and 24-hour esophageal pH studies. Upper-GI endoscopy was performed with quantitative eosinophil counts of biopsy specimens from the proximal and distal esophagus, the gastric antrum, and the duodenum. Nineteen subjects received 4 weeks of swallowed fluticasone propionate. After treatment, symptom assessment and endoscopic biopsies were repeated.

RESULTS

All 26 patients had a history of dysphagia, and 11 presented acutely with food-bolus obstruction. Esophageal peristalsis was normal in most and gastroesophageal reflux coexisted in 10 patients. Characteristic endoscopic findings of furrows (20) and rings (18) were observed. All 19 treated patients had symptom improvement and a significant decrease in esophageal eosinophil counts.

CONCLUSIONS

Eosinophilic esophagitis is a distinct entity that may coexist with gastroesophageal reflux. Swallowed fluticasone propionate is an effective treatment.

Pathogenesis of esophageal rings in eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis and eosinophilic gastroenteritis is being recognized more frequently among the adult patients. The disease is characterized by massive infiltration of the wall of gastrointestinal tract by sheets of eosinophils. The clinical features depend upon the site of involvement. They include dyspepsia, dysphagia, nausea, vomiting, chest pain, diarrhea and protein-losing enteropathy. Eosinophilic esophagitis may present as chest pain, dysphagia or dyspepsia. The characteristic endoscopic feature of eosinophilic esophagitis is the formation of fine concentric mucosal rings (corrugated esophagus). Regarding the pathogenesis of these mucosal rings our hypothesis is that mast cells in the esophageal wall in response to allergens release histamine, eosinophilic chemotactic factor and platelet activating factor, etc. which activate eosinophils to release toxic cationic proteins. Activation of acetyl choline by histamine may cause contraction of the muscle fibers in the muscularis mucosae resulting in the formation of esophageal rings. This hypothesis can be tested by demonstrating the contraction of muscle layers of muscularis mucosae with the use of high frequency endoscopic ultrasonic probe introduced via the biopsy channel of an endoscope.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: asthma of the esophagus?

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EE) is rapidly emerging as a distinct disease entity in both pediatric and adult gastroenterology. The typical clinical presentation includes solid food dysphagia in young men who have an atopic predisposition. Food impaction necessitating endoscopic intervention is common. EE should be suspected, in particular, in patients with unexplained dysphagia or those with no response to antacid or anti-acid secretory therapy. Careful endoscopic and radiographic examinations reveal furrows, corrugations, rings, whitish plaques, fragile crêpe paper-like appearance, and a small-caliber esophagus. Mucosal erosion in the distal esophagus, characteristic to reflux esophagitis, is absent in EE. Marked eosinophil infiltration in the esophageal epithelia (>20 eosinophils per high-power field) is the diagnostic hallmark. Food antigens and aeroallergens may play a role in the pathogenesis of EE. The mechanisms may be dependent or independent of immunoglobulin E. Elimination diets, systemic and topical corticosteroids, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and, most recently, an anti-interleukin-5 monoclonal antibody have been used to treat EE. EE likely represents another example of eosinophil-associated inflammation of epithelia at the interface between external and internal milieu, similar to bronchial asthma and atopic dermatitis. This review summarizes recent progress in the diagnosis and management of EE and discusses future research directions.

Endoscopy in eosinophilic esophagitis: "feline" esophagus and perforation risk

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Idiopathic eosinophilic esophagitis is an underdiagnosed disease with typical endoscopic findings, which have not been well described.

METHODS

Charts and pathology reports at two tertiary care centers from June 1993 to April 2002 were reviewed to describe the endoscopic findings of this disease and to correlate them with clinical characteristics. Eight patients were identified as having eosinophilic esophagitis based on clinical symptoms and pathology reports.

RESULTS

Soft and subtle ring(s) in the esophagus were found in 7 of 8 patients. In 3 of 8 patients, the esophagus appeared rigid. Mucosal rents occurred with simple passage of the endoscope in 5 of 8 patients. One patient developed a perforation after simple passage of the endoscope. Endoscopic findings can be normal or very subtle in these patients, and the findings can easily be missed during endoscopy. Tearing of the esophagus can occur with simple passage of the endoscope or biopsy even in the absence of overt rings. A minimum of 8 weeks of medical therapy (proton pump inhibitor, histamine antagonists, immunosuppressants) should be undertaken before considering dilation because of the high risk involved with the procedure and the good response to medical therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend considering dilation only in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis who do not respond to medical therapy and have rings that appear to be obstructing the lumen.

Defiant dysphagia: small-caliber esophagus and refractory benign esophageal strictures

Among causes of defiant dysphagia, two pose a special challenge for the clinician: the small-caliber esophagus and refractory benign esophageal strictures. The small-caliber esophagus is a major cause of dysphagia for solids in young patients with eosinophilic esophagitis. A smooth, diffusely narrow esophageal lumen can be appreciated by barium esophagography or esophagoscopy. The term "small-caliber esophagus" is preferred over "stricture" because of the absence of cicatrization. A "subtle" small-caliber esophagus may defy detection by barium esophagogram and esophagogastroduodenoscopy. The only evidence to its diagnosis is the endoscopic finding of unusually long rents in the body of the esophagus immediately after esophageal dilation. The ringed esophagus seems to be a variant of the small-caliber esophagus, with the additional endoscopic finding of a variable number of rings (few to numerous) throughout the narrowed esophagus. Classification, diagnosis, and management of small-caliber esophagus are discussed in this review. Refractory esophageal strictures have various causes, including gastroesophageal reflux disease, nasogastric tube placement, mediastinal irradiation, and corrosive ingestion. Treatments used to eliminate or reduce the need for frequent esophageal bougienage include acid-suppressive medical therapy, surgery, intralesional corticosteroid injection, and esophageal self-expandable metal stents.

Topical corticosteroid treatment of dysphagia due to eosinophilic esophagitis in adults

OBJECTIVE

To describe the clinical features of patients with eosinophilic esophagitis and the use of topical corticosteroids for treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We evaluated the charts of 21 patients with a diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis seen at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn, between September 1, 1999, and December 31, 2001. The diagnosis was based on the presence of a "ringed esophagus" or a tapered distal esophagus on upper endoscopy as well as the presence of a dense eosinophilic infiltrate on esophageal biopsy. All patients were treated with topical corticosteroids, and follow-up was performed by telephone interviews.

RESULTS

The 15 men and 6 women ranged in age from 27 years to 66 years at diagnosis (mean, 36 [corrected] years). All had solid-food dysphagia for at least 6 years, and 15 patients had prior food impaction. Eighteen patients had either a ringed-appearing esophagus or smooth tapering in the distal esophagus. All patients had a dense eosinophilic infiltration (> 20 eosinophils per high-power field) in the mid or distal esophagus. Topical corticosteroid therapy for 6 weeks resulted in complete dysphagia relief in all patients and lasted a minimum of 4 months.

CONCLUSION

Eosinophilic esophagitis is an entity associated with food dysphagia (predominantly in young adults) and a ringed or smooth tapered distal-appearing esophagus. Our study found no association with gastroesophageal reflux symptoms. Topical corticosteroid therapy was effective.

The small-caliber esophagus: an unappreciated cause of dysphagia for solids in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Dysphagia for solids usually indicates a structural esophageal abnormality. This article is a description of a group of 5 young men referred with chronic dysphagia for solids. Esophagoscopy and barium esophagogram failed to show a cause. Our evaluation showed that these patients had eosinophilic esophagitis and a "small-caliber esophagus." This article describes the clinical features, diagnosis, and management of the small-caliber esophagus.

METHODS

Patients were evaluated by barium esophagogram with marshmallow challenge, esophageal manometry, Bernstein test, and EGD with biopsies. All patients underwent empiric esophageal dilation with wire-guided dilators.

OBSERVATIONS

A diffusely narrow esophagus was appreciated in 3 of 5 patients radiographically, endoscopically, or both. However, the latter studies showed normal findings in 2 patients. Eosinophilic esophagitis was found in all 4 patients in whom biopsy specimens were obtained. Esophageal manometry was performed in 4 patients and showed normal findings in all. The feature that most confirmed the diagnosis of small-caliber esophagus in all patients was the unusually long rents (8 to 17 cm) in the esophageal wall after empiric dilation. Dilation relieved the symptoms in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The small-caliber esophagus is a cause of dysphagia for solids in young men with eosinophilic esophagitis. It frequently defies detection by routine diagnostic studies. The clue to diagnosis lies in endoscopic reinspection after dilation and the finding of unusually long rents in the esophageal wall.