Endoscopy 2022; 54(03): 243-250
DOI: 10.1055/a-1493-5627
Original article

Dilation-predominant approach versus routine care in patients with difficult-to-treat eosinophilic esophagitis: a retrospective comparison

Authors

  • Sydney Greenberg

    1   Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
  • Nicole C. Chang

    2   School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
  • S. Ryanne Corder

    2   School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
  • Craig C. Reed

    3   Center for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
    4   Center for Gastrointestinal Biology and Disease, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
  • Swathi Eluri

    3   Center for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
    4   Center for Gastrointestinal Biology and Disease, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
  • Evan S. Dellon

    3   Center for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
    4   Center for Gastrointestinal Biology and Disease, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
Preview

Abstract

Background Little is known about esophageal dilation as a long-term treatment approach for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We examined the impact of a “dilate and wait” strategy on symptom management and safety of patients with EoE.

Methods This retrospective cohort study included two patient groups: those who underwent a dilation-predominant approach (≥ 3 dilations as sole therapy or for histologically refractory disease [> 15 eos/hpf]); and those who had routine care (< 3 dilations or histologic response). Group characteristics were compared and outcomes for the dilation-only group assessed.

Results 53/205 patients (26 %) received the dilation-predominant strategy (total 408 dilations), predominantly for histologic treatment nonresponse (75 %). These patients were younger (33 vs. 41 years; P = 0.003), had a narrower baseline esophageal diameter (9.8 vs. 11.5 mm; P = 0.005), underwent more dilations (7.7 vs. 3.4; P < 0.001), but achieved a smaller final diameter (15.7 vs. 16.7 mm; P = 0.01) vs. routine care. With this strategy, 30 patients (57 %) had ongoing symptom improvement, with esophageal caliber change independently associated with symptom response (adjusted odds ratio 1.79, 95 % confidence interval 1.16–2.78); 26 (49 %) used the strategy as a bridge to clinical trials. Over a median follow-up of 1001 days (interquartile range 581–1710), no deaths or dilation-related perforations occurred, but there were nine emergency room visits, including one for post-dilation bleeding and four for food impaction.

Conclusions A dilation-predominant long-term treatment strategy allowed for symptom control or bridge to clinical trials for patients with difficult-to-treat EoE. Close follow-up and monitoring for complications are required.



Publication History

Received: 01 November 2020

Accepted after revision: 28 April 2021

Accepted Manuscript online:
28 April 2021

Article published online:
10 June 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany