Changing epidemiology of food bolus impaction: is eosinophilic esophagitis to blame?

Association between time from esophageal food impaction to endoscopy and adverse events

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Guidelines recommend emergent or urgent EGD for esophageal food impaction (EFI), but data on how time to EGD impacts the risk of adverse events remain limited. We determined whether EFI-to-EGD time was associated with adverse events.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study of patients with endoscopically confirmed EFI, adverse events were classified as esophageal (mucosal tear, bleeding, perforation) or extraesophageal (aspiration, respiratory compromise, hypotension, arrhythmia). Esophageal perforation and extraesophageal adverse events requiring intensive care unit admission were classified as serious adverse events. Baseline characteristics, event details, and procedural details were compared between patients with and without adverse events. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess for an association between EFI-to-EGD time and adverse events.

RESULTS

Of 188 patients with EFI, 22 (12%) had any adverse event and 2 (1%) had a serious adverse event. Patients with adverse events were older and more likely to have an esophageal motility disorder, to tolerate secretions at presentation, and to have a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score. EFI-to-EGD time was similar in those with and without adverse events. On multivariable analysis, EFI-to-EGD time was not associated with adverse events (odds ratio, 1.00 [95% confidence interval, .97-1.04] for 1-hour increments; odds ratio, 1.03 [95% confidence interval, .86-1.24] for 6-hour increments). Results were similar after stratifying by eosinophilic esophagitis status and after adjusting for possible confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

Because the time from EFI to EGD is not associated with adverse events, emergent EGD for EFI may be unnecessary, and other considerations may determine EGD timing.

Characteristics and progression of childhood-onset and adult-onset eosinophilic esophagitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The prevalence and incidence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has been increasing over recent years. However, the natural history remains incompletely understood particularly the differences in disease characteristics and progression of childhood-onset and adult-onset EoE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the disease characteristics and progression of childhood-onset and adult-onset EoE.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study, on 87 adults and 67 children from 2 major tertiary hospitals in South Australia was conducted. Data of those who were diagnosed with EoE between 1999 and 2018 were collected and correlated with medical records.

RESULTS

Of the 87 adults with EoE, 34 (39%) were diagnosed at the age of < 18 years (childhood-onset EoE). Reflux symptoms were more common in childhood-onset EoE, whereas asthma was more common in adult-onset EoE. The median duration of symptoms prior to diagnosis of EoE was > 1-4 years in childhood-onset disease (44%) and ≥ 10 years in adult-onset disease (34%). Food impaction was significantly more common on initial presentation in those with adult-onset EoE, whereas weight loss was more common in childhood-onset EoE. At the time of questionnaire, regurgitation, abdominal pain, and bloating were more common in childhood-onset EoE. Those with childhood-onset EoE were more likely to have multiple symptoms at questionnaire when compared with their adult-onset counterparts. In both groups, 15% (5/34 childhood-onset EoE and 8/53 adult-onset EoE) were asymptomatic at the time of questionnaire.

CONCLUSION

Childhood-onset EoE appears to be a progressive disease from childhood to adulthood, however with more inflammatory-type symptoms post transition compared to those with adult-onset EoE.

Pathophysiology of Dysphagia in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Causes, Consequences, and Management

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a leading cause of food bolus impaction in children and adults. The mechanism of dysphagia in EoE, particularly non-obstructive dysphagia, remains incompletely understood. While fibrostenotic processes appear to be critical in the development of dysphagia, somatosensory dysfunction and dysmotility also contribute. This review considers potential mechanisms of dysphagia and evaluates the utility of current and future treatment strategies in this context.

Incidence and evolution of foreign body impaction in the upper gastrointestinal tract and its relationship with eosionophilic oesophagitis

BACKGROUND

Foreign body impaction is a frequent indication of urgent endoscopy. One of the reasons for impaction is eosinophilic oesophagitis (EE). To analyse characteristics of oesophageal foreign body impactions and their relationship with eosinophilic oesophagitis.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, urgent endoscopies in a tertiary care centre were analysed. We included all urgent endoscopies due to bolus and foreign body impactions performed between September 1^st 2018 and September 1^st 2020. We reviewed clinical data of all patients who were diagnosed with EE and compared it to impactions that were due to other motives. The mean follow-up time was 18.7 months.

RESULTS

693 urgent endoscopy procedures were performed. 239 (34%) of these were due to foreign body ingestion. Mean age of the patients was 63 years old and 135 (63%) were men. EE was diagnosed in 36 (17%) patients. The factors associated with EE were age, to be younger than 50 years (OR, 7.3; 95% CI, 1.1-48.4; P=0.04), asthma/rhinitis/atopic dermatitis (OR, 8.9; 95% CI, 2.3-35.3; P= 0.002), findings in the endoscopy as trachealization (OR, 9.7; 95% CI, 1.3-70.9; P= 0.03) and psychotropic/ calcium channel blocker drugs (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.009-0.9; P= 0.04). 15 (7%) patients died. In 6 of them death was impaction-related. None patients with EE died.

CONCLUSIONS

Foreign body impaction in the upper gastrointestinal tract due to EE is a frequent cause of urgent endoscopy. Being under 50 years of age, having asthma/rhinitis/atopic dermatitis, trachealization on the esophagus and not taking psychotropic/calcium channel blocker drugs are factors associated with the diagnosis of EE. Mortality in the follow-up of patients without EE is important.

Eosinophilic Esophagitis and IgG4: Is There a Relationship?

Our knowledge of the pathophysiology of eosinophilic esophagitis is constantly evolving. There is significant association between eosinophilic esophagitis and atopy; however, multiple studies have refuted the role of IgE in its pathogenesis. Instead, new data have demonstrated an elevated IgG4 level in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis. We review the current understanding of eosinophilic esophagitis pathogenesis and highlight the increasing evidence for the role of IgG4.

Comparison of Cap-Assisted vs Conventional Endoscopic Technique for Management of Food Bolus Impaction in the Esophagus: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

"Push" or "pull" techniques with the use of snares, forceps, baskets, and grasping devices are conventionally used to manage esophageal food bolus impaction (FBI). A novel cap-assisted technique has recently been advocated to reduce time taken for food bolus (FB) removal. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the cap-assisted technique against conventional methods of esophageal FB removal in a randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with esophageal FBI requiring endoscopic removal, from 3 Australian tertiary hospitals between 2017 and 2019, were randomized to either the cap-assisted technique or the conventional technique. Primary outcomes were technical success and FB retrieval time. Secondary outcomes were technical success rate, en bloc removal rate, procedure-related complication, length of hospital stay, and cost of consumables.

RESULTS

Over 24 months, 342 patients with esophageal FBI were randomized to a cap-assisted (n = 171) or conventional (n = 171) technique. Compared with the conventional approach, the cap-assisted technique was associated with (i) shorter FB retrieval time (4.5 ± 0.5 minutes vs 21.7 ± 0.9 minutes, P < 0.001), (ii) shorter total procedure time (23.0 ± 0.6 minutes vs 47.0 ± 1.3 minutes, P < 0.0001), (iii) higher technical success rate (170/171 vs 160/171, P < 0.001), (iv) higher rate of en bloc removal (159/171 vs 48/171, P < 0.001), and (v) lower rate of procedure-related mucosal tear and bleeding (0/171 vs 13/171, P < 0.001). There were no major adverse events or deaths within 30 days in either group. The total cost of consumables was higher in the conventional group (A$19,644.90 vs A$6,239.90).

DISCUSSION

This multicenter randomized controlled trial confirmed that the cap-assisted technique is more effective and less costly than the conventional approach and should be first-line treatment for esophageal FBI.

Esophageal Food Impaction: A Retrospective Chart Review

Background

Esophageal food impaction (EFI) is the third most common non-biliary emergency in gastroenterology, with an annual incidence rate of 13 episodes per 100,000 person-years and 1,500 deaths per year. Patients presenting with food impaction often have underlying esophageal pathology. We evaluated the possible risk factors for EFI in our study.

Methods

We performed a retrospective chart review of 455 patients at Staten Island University Hospital (SIUH) that presented with symptoms of food impaction from 1999 to 2017. We analyzed relevant clinical data such as age, risk factors, type of food bolus, location, administration of glucagon, endoscopic technique and complications.

Results

Overall, 174 patients had endoscopically confirmed EFI. The majority were males 102/174 (58.6%). Esophageal pathological findings included esophagitis in 58/174 (33.3%), strictures in 43/174 (24.7%), hiatal hernias in 29/174 (16.6%) and Schatzki’s rings in 15/174 (8.6%). Thirty-two out of 174 (18.3%) had normal endoscopic findings. Diabetes mellitus (DM) was reported in 20/174 (11.4%) patients. The type of food impacted was mostly meat in 73/174 (41.9%) cases. The location of EFI was mainly in the lower one-third of the esophagus in 94/174 (54%). The endoscopic push technique was used in 95/174 (54.5%) patients and the pull technique in 83/174 (47.7%) cases. The endoscopic therapeutic intervention was successful as a first attempt in 165/175 (94.8%) patients. Complications were reported in only 5/174 (2.8%), and these mostly comprised of perforations and tears. Glucagon was given to 74/174 (42.5%) patients. The median door-to-scope time (time of presentation at the emergency department to endoscopic intervention) was 7 h (range 1.5 - 24 h) in patients who had received glucagon as opposed to 7 h (range 1 - 24 h) in patients who did not receive it.

Conclusion

EFI is more common in males. Esophageal strictures and hiatal hernias were the most common pathologies found in endoscopy. Esophagitis was evident in 33.3% of patients, but if it was the cause or consequence of EFI is not clearly understood. DM was associated with food impaction in only 11.4% of patients, but more studies are needed to determine if DM has a stronger association with EFI. The door-to-scope time was shorter in patients who had received glucagon. Endoscopy is a safe and effective therapeutic intervention for EFI, and complications reported were minimal.

Food bolus and oesophageal foreign body: a summary of the evidence and proposed management process

PURPOSE

Food bolus and oesophageal foreign bodies are a common presentation that may be managed by otolaryngologists, gastroenterologists, acute medicine physicians and accident and emergency. The condition is highly variable with presentations ranging from well patients whose obstruction spontaneously passes to peri-arrest with severe aspiration or impending airway compromise. Management of this condition is heterogeneous and often depends on the specialty the patient is originally admitted under. There exist European and American guidelines from the perspective of gastroenterology, but there are no UK-based guidelines and limited consideration of the role of the otolaryngologists and rigid oesophagoscopy.

METHODS

An extensive literature search was carried out to generate conclusions on key management questions for food bolus and oesophageal foreign bodies. This was then summarised into both a written summary of the evidence and a graphical decision tree.

RESULTS

This paper is a review article and presents conclusions regarding management options for food bolus and oesophageal foreign bodies.

CONCLUSION

This article considers the current evidence surrounding investigation and management of oesophageal food bolus and foreign body. It draws conclusions regarding presentation, investigation and subsequent operative treatment. As part of this process, we propose a graphical decision tree to assist in management decisions.

Outcome, complication and follow-up of patients with esophageal foreign body impaction: an academic institute's 15 years of experience

Esophageal foreign body impaction (EFBI) is a gastrointestinal emergency, mostly requiring endoscopic management. The aim of this study is to evaluate the epidemiology, adverse events, and outcomes of patients following the episode of EFBI. All esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) reports of admitted patients for EFBI at the University of Kansas Medical Center between 2003 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Of 204 patients, who met the inclusion criteria, 60% were male and the mean age was 54.7 ± 17.7 years. The encounter was the first episode of EFBI in 76% of cases. EGD in less than 24 hours of patients' admission was required in 79% of cases. The distal esophagus was the most common site of impaction (44%). Push and pull techniques were used in 38 and 35.2% of cases, respectively, while 11% were managed by a combination of both techniques. Structural causes were the most common etiologic findings including benign strictures and stenosis in 21.5% of patients, followed by Schatzki's ring (7.8%) and hiatal hernia (6.9%). Of all cases, 45% did follow-up in up to 1 year, and biopsy was done in 34% of cases. Out of 43 patients who had endoscopic findings suspicious for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), the diagnosis was confirmed by pathology in 37. The rate of recurrence EFBI was significantly higher in patients with EoE (P < 0.001). EFBI-related esophageal adverse events (AEs) occurred in 4.9% of cases. Cardiovascular and pulmonary AEs occurred in 1.5 and 2.9%, respectively. Logistic regression did not find any predictor for AEs occurrence. EFBI managed very well with endoscopic treatments. Despite the emerging data about the safety of the push technique, there are still concerns regarding its adverse events especially the risk of perforations. Our study shows no significant difference in adverse events between different types of techniques.

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.

Loss to follow-up after food impaction among patients with and without eosinophilic esophagitis

Symptoms of esophageal dysfunction such as food impaction are consistent with, but not diagnostic for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) without obtaining histology. We conducted a retrospective study to characterize patients with food impaction at a tertiary center. We hypothesized that many patients with food impaction may be lost to follow-up and that many have features suggestive of EoE. Adult patients presenting to the emergency department with esophageal food impaction were identified from an endoscopic database. Electronic medical records were manually abstracted. We examined associations between demographics, comorbid conditions, and follow-up with biopsy findings. Of 220 patients who presented to the emergency department for food impaction, 74.1% were men. Adequate follow-up was not documented in 120 (54.5%). Those lost to follow-up did not differ significantly by gender, age at symptom onset, or distance from hospital compared to those with follow-up. Esophageal biopsies were obtained in 158 (71.8%), and those with ≥15 eos/HPF were more likely to be lost to follow-up than those with <15 eos/HPF (52.8% vs. 34.8%, P < 0.05). Of those never biopsied, 79.0% were lost to follow-up and had intermediate proportions of males, food allergy, and asthma when compared to those with and without eosinophilic inflammation. Patients with food impaction commonly have EoE but are often lost to follow-up. Among those never biopsied, demographic and clinical features suggest that many may have undiagnosed EoE. Strategies for increasing use of biopsies in patients with food impaction and improving follow-up are needed to diagnose and manage EoE.

Recognising eosinophilic oesophagitis as a cause of food bolus obstruction

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, inflammatory condition of the oesophagus, characterised by intermittent dysphagia, food bolus obstruction (FBO) and histologically proven, eosinophil-mediated inflammation. EoE is identified in up to 50% of FBO presentations.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the management of patients presenting with FBO to our centre against current clinical guidelines.

DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of acute FBO was performed between January 2008 and August 2014. Patients were identified using the ICD 10 code T18.1, 'foreign body in oesophagus' in their electronic discharge document. Data were collected on admitting specialty, previous FBO, endoscopy findings, biopsy sites and findings, eosinophil count and diagnosis of EoE.

RESULTS

310 acute episodes of FBO were included in the final study cohort. 202 (65.2%) flexible oesophagogastroduodenoscopies (OGDs) were performed, with 50 (34.5%) of those occurring in those admitted under ENT (n=145), versus 28 (93.3%) and 124 (91.9%) in general medicine (n=30) and surgery (n=135), respectively. 80 (39.6%) had oesophageal biopsies taken, and 21 novel diagnoses of EoE were made (26.3% biopsy-proven rate). Five (23.8%) of the novel diagnoses had a formal eosinophil count included in the histopathology report, and eight (38.1%) had up to three previous OGDs that had not diagnosed their condition of EoE.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights wide variation in adherence to the guidelines for the management of FBO depending on admitting specialty. We advocate an FBO protocol involving single specialty management, flexible OGD, ≥6 biopsies from the upper and lower oesophagus, and standardisation of oesophageal biopsy reports with a formal eosinophil count.

The evolution of treatment and complications of esophageal food impaction

Background

Esophageal food impaction is relatively common and increasing over time. Treatment ranges from medications to invasive endoscopic therapies. The endoscopic push technique has been advised against in favor of endoscopic retrieval for safety concerns. We sought to assess use patterns and safety of treatments for food impaction in a population-based retrospective review.

Methods

A database of recorded esophageal food impactions in Olmsted County, MN, USA, from 1975-2011 was reviewed for patient demographics, treatment, and complications.

Results

A total of 645 impactions occurred, with increasing incidence over time, peaking at 23.2 per year (2000-2004). Medications (almost exclusively glucagon) were successful in relieving impactions 34.5% of the time when trialed. Urgent endoscopy was common (74.0%), as was the need for endoscopic therapy (67.1%). Endoscopic therapy increased over time, with the endoscopic push technique becoming most common. Esophageal complications (deep mucosal injury or perforation) increased over time but remained rare (peak 11%). There was no difference in complications between push and retrieval techniques.

Conclusions

The endoscopic push technique is safe in comparison to endoscopic retrieval in esophageal food impactions. While complications surrounding impaction have increased, they remain rare. Medication trials are reasonable, as long as they do not delay endoscopy, and may prevent the need for emergent endoscopy in one-third of cases.

Esophageal Food Impaction: Causes, Elective Intubation, and Associated Adverse Events

GOALS

The goal of this study is to examine the causes, type of adverse events (AE), and effects of elective intubation in outcomes associated with esophageal food impaction (EFI).

BACKGROUND

EFI is a gastrointestinal emergency requiring immediate medical attention.

STUDY

Retrospective review of all EFI cases presenting at 3 large tertiary centers from October 1, 2011 to October 31, 2014 and all cases registered in the Clinical Outcome Research Initiative (CORI) database from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2012. Statistical analysis compared health care utilization, AEs, and outcomes in patients with or without elective intubation.

RESULTS

A total of 214 cases presenting with EFI at our 3 referral hospitals and 4950 cases in the CORI database met inclusion criteria. Prevalence of structural disorders was similar in the Mayo Clinic and CORI datasets: 24.3% and 27.7% had strictures, and 3.8% and 2.5% had a tumor, respectively. AEs in the nonintubation group were 14.7% compared with 33.3% in the elective intubation group (P=0.003); however, 71.0% of these events were associated with EFI itself and not therapeutic procedure. Esophageal AEs were common (15.0%), followed by pulmonary and cardiovascular events with 3.0% and 1.4%, respectively. Severity of the AEs was influenced by the impaction-to-endoscopy time.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of structural esophageal disorders was similar to previous smaller studies. Elective intubation was associated with increased AEs; however, this is felt to be because of the nature of EFI itself and not by therapeutic endoscopy. Prolonged impaction-to-endoscopy time was associated with severe AEs.

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and eosinophilic oesophagitis: What is the relationship?

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) are the most common causes of chronic oesophagitis and dysphagia associated with oesophageal mucosal eosinophilia. Distinguishing between the two is imperative but challenging due to overlapping clinical and histological features. A diagnosis of EoE requires clinical, histological and endoscopic correlation whereas a diagnosis of GORD is mainly clinical without the need for other investigations. Both entities may exhibit oesophageal eosinophilia at a similar level making a histological distinction between them difficult. Although the term proton-pump inhibitor responsive oesophageal eosinophilia has recently been retracted from the guidelines, a relationship between EoE and GORD still exists. This relationship is complex as they may coexist, either interacting bidirectionally or are unrelated. This review aims to outline the differences and potential relationship between the two conditions, with specific focus on histology, immunology, pathogenesis and treatment.

Food impaction: etiology over 35 years and association with eosinophilic esophagitis

With the emergence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) as a common cause of food impaction (FI) and a presumed increase in incidence of EoE in the population, the effect on the incidence of FI has not been well described. The aim of this study is to describe the incidence of FI and endoscopic findings in these patients and the association with EoE. A population-based retrospective chart review of the Rochester Epidemiology Project database was performed to identify all patients within Olmsted County that presented with FI from 1976 to 2012. A review of all endoscopic findings, biopsy results, and demographic data was performed. 497 patients were identified with FI from 1976 to 2012. The overall incidence of FI has changed from 1976 to 2012 (Fig. 1) (P < 0.001). The peak incidence of 17.12 per 100,000 people occurred in the time period 1995 to 2000. Both the incidence of comorbid gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use increased over the time period of the study (P < 0.001 for both). Of these patients, 188 (46.7%) had no abnormalities on their endoscopy. The most common endoscopic finding was stricture in 71 (17.6%) patients followed closely by Schatzki's ring in 68 (16.9%) patients. 139 patients had biopsies performed within 2 years of FI and 50 (36.0%) of those were diagnosed with EoE. We present for the first time the changing incidence of FI over the last 35 years in a population-based setting. We also demonstrate the rise of EoE as an important clinical consideration in patients with FI.

Low Prevalence of Biopsy-Proven Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Patients with Esophageal Food Impaction in Mexican Population

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is the most common cause of dysphagia and esophageal food impaction (EFI) in the USA, Western Europe, and Australia. In Mexico, the uncomplicated form of this disease is infrequent, and prevalence in patients with EFI is unknown.

AIMS

To determine the prevalence and causes of EFI, endoscopic and therapeutic aspects, and establish the prevalence of biopsy-proven EoE in patients with EFI.

METHODS

Diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy reports from January 2011 to December 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with therapeutic procedures, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, or non-food foreign body impaction were excluded. The number of patients with EFI was determined. Additionally, patients with esophageal biopsy were retained for EoE prevalence calculation. The diagnosis of EoE was defined with the presence of eosinophil infiltration count ≥ 15/high-power field with or without typical endoscopic abnormalities.

RESULTS

A total of 4700 reports of the same number of patients were selected; 2209 were males (47%) with a mean age of 57.6 ± 12.3 years (range 14-93). We identified 36 patients with EFI (0.76, 95% CI 0.51-1.01), 16 males (44.4%) with a mean age of 54.9 ± 19.7 (range 22-92). Esophageal biopsies were obtained in 17/36 (47.2%) cases. The diagnosis of EoE was confirmed in 2 patients (11.7%). Peptic stenosis was the most frequent cause of EFI.

CONCLUSIONS

EoE is an infrequent cause of EFI in the Mexican population (11.7%). EoE had the lowest prevalence compared to that reported in Caucasian populations. The prevalence of EFI was also low.

Effectiveness of a cap-assisted device in the endoscopic removal of food bolus obstruction from the esophagus

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The use of a transparent cap has been found to be effective for retrieval of an esophageal foreign body. However, data on the use of a cap in food bolus obstruction (FBO) are limited. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of a cap-assisted technique compared with conventional techniques in removal of FBO.

METHODS

All patients who underwent an endoscopy for boneless FBO between 2011 and 2016 were prospectively recruited. The measured outcomes were procedure time, success rate of food bolus (FB) extraction, rate of en bloc removal, procedure-related adverse events, and length of hospital stay (LOS) between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Of the 315 patients who had an endoscopy for FBO, 48 (15.2%) had spontaneous passage of FB and 267 (84.8%) had impacted FB. Sixty-eight (25%) patients had the "push" maneuver, and 199 (75%) patients had the "pull" maneuver to remove FB. Of those who had the "pull" maneuver, a cap was used for 93 and conventional device(s) for 106. The use of a cap was associated with a shorter procedural time (34.3 ± 8.0 minutes versus 43.3 ± 22.6 minutes, P = .003), a higher rate of en bloc removal (87.3% versus 22.8%, P < .001), a lower rate of adverse events (0/93 versus 7/106, P = .01), and a shorter LOS (1.0 ± 0.6 days versus 1.6 ± 1.4 days, P = .0017).

CONCLUSION

The cap-assisted technique has been found to be effective and safe in removal of esophageal FBO. This technique was associated with a shorter procedural time and a reduced LOS compared with conventional techniques. However, these findings require further validation in a randomized control study.

Epidemiology and Natural History of Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has emerged over the past 2 decades as a major cause of upper gastrointestinal morbidity. Over this time, the epidemiology of EoE has also rapidly evolved. EoE has transformed from a rare case-reportable condition to disease that is commonly encountered in the gastroenterology clinic, hospital emergency room, and endoscopy suite. The incidence and prevalence are increasing at rates that outpace increased disease recognition. Current incidence estimates range from 5 to 10 cases per 100,000, and current prevalence estimates range from 0.5 to 1 case per 1000. We review the data and potential reasons behind this increase, examine risk factors, and identify important areas for research into disease etiology. The article also discusses the progression of EoE from an inflammatory to fibrostenotic phenotype. An accurate view of the natural history of EoE is central to discussions with patients regarding disease prognosis and decisions about long-term use of medical, endoscopic, and diet therapies. Progressive remodelling appears to be gradual, but not universal, and the duration of untreated disease is the best predictor of stricture risk. Ultimately, prospective, long-term outcome studies focusing on multiple aspects of disease activity are needed to fully understand the natural history of EoE.

Eosinophilic esophagitis: current understanding and evolving concepts

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is now considered to represent a form of food allergy and this is demonstrated by a response to elimination diet in many patients. A critical additional factor may be an inherent impairment in epithelial barrier integrity, possibly worsened by reflux of gastric contents and improved with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use. Key clinic challenges are posed by the absence of reliable allergy tests to guide elimination diet, and the subsequent need for invasive endoscopic assessment following empirical food challenge, meaning that corticosteroids will remain the mainstay of therapy for many. From a research standpoint, determining if impairments in barrier integrity are innate, and how PPIs address this deficit (which may be pH independent) are important questions that when answered may allow future therapeutic advancement.

Esophageal food impaction during cultural holidays and national athletic events

Background: Although intrinsic risk factors contributing to esophageal food impaction are well established, whether social behavior affects its occurrence has not yet been examined.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of the gastroenterology endoscopy procedural documentation software for the period of 2001–2012 to identify all patients who presented to our emergency department for esophageal foreign-body removal at the time of national athletic events and holidays associated with dietary indiscretions.

Results: We found that adults undergoing emergent esophagogastroduodenoscopy during periods celebrating cultural holidays and national athletic events were more likely to experience esophageal food impaction compared with those undergoing emergent endoscopy during periods not associated with these events (36.8% vs 3.6%; P < 0.001): a 10-fold increase. During a national holiday/athletic event period, the most common impacted food item was turkey (50%) followed by chicken (29%) and beef (21%).

Conclusions: Esophageal food impaction is more likely to occur on American holidays and national athletic events and is associated with large meals. Patients with intrinsic risk factors should be advised to modify their diet during cultural events associated with tachyphagia and large meals to prevent esophageal food impaction.

Lack of compliance with consensus recommendations on the diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) in published prevalence studies. A clinical and systematic review

OBJECTIVE

According to consensus recommendations, the presence of esophageal symptoms, >15 eosinophils/high-power field and unresponsiveness to proton pump inhibitors are required for a diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Nevertheless, inconsistency in using these guidelines has been reported in recent publications. The objective of this study was to assess compliance with EoE diagnostic guidelines in published studies on EoE prevalence and to evaluate other clinical and methodological parameters.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in articles published between 2008 and 2015 on the prevalence of EoE in unselected adults. Studies using EoE diagnostic definitions were judged to be compliant if they included all three components of the definition, partially compliant if they included two and non-compliant if they included one or none. Esophageal biopsy protocol differences and descriptions of patients' characteristics were determined.

RESULTS

Among the 20 studies included, eight were performed in a hospital setting and 12 in the general population. Only 40.0% of studies were compliant, 35.0% were partially compliant and 25.0% were non-compliant with the EoE diagnostic definition guidelines. In 60.0% of the studies a proton pump inhibitor trial was not administered. Only 30.0% adhered to the recommendations in the esophageal biopsy protocol. A lack of description of the history of atopia and endoscopic characteristics was observed in many studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Partial or non-compliance with the EoE diagnostic definition was observed in most of the published prevalence studies after the publication of the first consensus. The results of these studies might be interpreted taking into account this context.

Prevalence of Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Lymphocytic Esophagitis in Adults with Esophageal Food Bolus Impaction

Background. The relation of esophageal food bolus impaction (FBI) to eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and lymphocytic esophagitis (LyE) is unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of EoE and LyE among adults with FBI. Methods. In this retrospective study we analyzed data from all patients referred for gastroscopy during the past 5 years, because of a present or recent episode of FBI. Results. We found 238 patients with FBI (median age 51 (17–96), 71% males). Endoscopic therapy was required in 143 patients. Esophageal biopsies were obtained in 185 (78%) patients. All biopsies were assessed for numbers of eosinophils and lymphocytes. EoE was found in 18% of patients who underwent biopsy. We found 41 patients (22%) who fulfilled the criteria for both EoE and LyE (EoE/LyE). LyE was found in the 9% of patients with FBI. EoE together with EoE/LyE was the leading cause of FBI in patients ≤50 years (64%). GERD was the leading cause of FBI among patients older than 50 years (42%). Conclusions. Our study showed that EoE was the leading cause of FBI in particular among young adults. Our study highlights the need for esophageal biopsies in any patient with FBI.

Esophageal Food Impaction and Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Retrospective Study, Systematic Review, and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Esophageal food impaction (EFI) can be the initial presentation of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). EoE is characterized by persistent esophageal eosinophilia (EE). Both EFI and EE are related to a variety of conditions. To date, the relationship between EFI, EE, and EoE remains unclear.

AIMS

To review our institutional experience with EFIs and combine our knowledge with the existing literature to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis for delineating the relationship between EFI, EE, and EoE.

METHODS

We reviewed medical records of 72 children with EFI presenting to our emergency center between 2007 and 2013. PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were screened from inception until July 2014 to identify studies linking EFI and EoE. Included studies were methodically assessed for the quality and strength of association between EFI and EoE.

RESULTS

Our institutional experience highlighted the possibility of proton-pump inhibitor therapy-responsive EE (PPI-REE) as an underrecognized risk factor for EFI. A systematic review of 14 studies, including ours, revealed that most studies did not eliminate other causes of EFI or EE. The meta-analysis revealed that esophageal biopsies were obtained from 54% (40-68) of individuals presenting with EFI, and the overall EoE-attributable EFI among those who were biopsied was 54% (43-65). Substantial heterogeneity was noted among the studies.

DISCUSSION

PPI-REE is an underestimated risk factor for EFI. The quality of existing evidence linking EFI and EoE is limited by several important factors. Future studies with robust design are warranted to delineate the relationship between EFI, EE, and EoE.

Insights into the emerging epidemic of eosinophilic oesophagitis

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EOE) is a relatively recently recognised condition characterised by an increase in oesophageal eosinophils. EOE occurs in children and adults with a strong male preponderance. There has been a sharp increase in EOE in North America, Europe and Australia. The reasons for this increase remain unclear but are likely to be influenced by genetic and environmental factors, as well as early-life exposures. Based on recent population-based data, the estimated EOE prevalence in the USA is 56.7 per 100,000 persons. The peak prevalence was observed in patients between 35 and 39 years of age. Prevalence figures in Asia and the Middle East generally appear to be lower than in Western countries, but population-based studies are not available. A causal association between coeliac disease and EOE appears unlikely. Data on the seasonal variation of EOE remain inconclusive. Further population-based studies are needed to define the epidemiology of EOE.

Etiology and management of esophageal food impaction: a population based study

OBJECTIVE

Esophageal food impaction (FI) is a common clinical problem with limited information on incidence. Previous population based studies are lacking. The incidence, main etiological factors, recurrence and outcome of FI was determined in the present study in a population based setting.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a study of consecutive adult patients who presented with FI from 2008 to 2013 at the National University Hospital of Iceland. The mean crude incidence rate of FI was calculated. Retrospective analysis was undertaken on relevant clinical data such as type of bolus, management, complications, recurrence rate, risk factors for recurrence, and outcome.

RESULTS

Overall 308 patients had endoscopically confirmed FI, males 199/308 (65%), median age 62 years. The mean crude incidence was 25 per 100,000 inhabitants per year. The types of FI was meat (68%), fish (12%), vegetable (4%) and other food/objects (16%). Causes for the FI included: esophageal strictures (45%), hiatal hernia (22%), eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) (16%) and esophageal carcinoma (2%). Recurrence appeared in 21%, in which 24/48 (50%) had EoE vs. 40/260 (15%) in others (p = 0.0001). The removal of the foreign body was successful in 98% of the cases during the first endoscopy. Endoscopic associated complications included four (1.3%) aspirations, one (0.3%) esophageal perforation and one Boerhaave syndrome at presentation (both had EoE).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of FI is the highest reported to date. EoE was strongly associated with recurrence of FI. In a population based setting endoscopy is a safe and effective procedure for removing FI.

Risk factors for eosinophilic esophagitis

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic antigen driven disease, whereby food and/or aeroallergens result in inflammation and luminal narrowing, and the clinical symptoms of dysphagia and food bolus obstruction events (FBOE). Established risk factors are male gender, Caucasian race and atopy. Increased risk amongst family members, and a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in a gene coding thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) on the pseudoautosomal region of the X and Y chromosomes supports a genetic predisposition. Environmental factors including the timing and nature of food and aeroallergen exposure to the developing immune system may be important, whilst esophageal barrier function integrity and the influence of microbiota are worthy of future research.