Esophageal perforation: An uncommon initial manifestation of eosinophilic esophagitis

AbstractEoE-Perforation: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is commonly observed in children and young adults. Common manifestations of EoE include dysphagia and food impaction in adolescents and adults, whereas children present with failure to thrive, regurgitation, or heartburn and abdominal pain. We describe two patients presenting with esophageal perforation and EoE. Diagnosing perforation promptly is critical to minimize and/or to avoid the multitude of complications resulting from esophageal perforation and to treat EoE because if left untreated, this condition may result in the recurrence of perforation, major morbidity, or rarely death

Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Children and Adolescents with Abdominal Pain: Comparison with EoE-Dysphagia and Functional Abdominal Pain

Aim. Compare EoE-AP with EoE-D for clinical, endoscopy (EGD), histology and outcomes and also with FAP-N. Method. Symptoms, physical findings, EGD, histology, symptom scores, and treatments were recorded for the three groups. Cluster analysis was done. Results. Dysphagia and abdominal pain were different in numbers but not statistically significant between EoE-AP and EoE-D. EGD, linear furrows, white exudates were more in the EoE-D and both combined were significant (p < 0.05). EoE-D, peak and mean eosinophils (p  0.06) and eosinophilic micro abscesses (p  0.001) were higher. Follow-Up. Based on single symptom, EoE-AP had 30% (p  0.25) improvement, EoE-D 86% (p < 0.001) and similar with composite score (p  0.57 and <0.001, resp.). Patients who had follow-up, EGD: 42.8% with EoE-AP and 77.8% with EoE-D, showed single symptom improvement and the eosinophil count fell from 38.5/34.6 (peak and mean) to 31.2/30.4 (p  0.70) and from 43.6/40.8 to 25.2/22.8 (p < 0.001), respectively. FAP-N patients had similar symptom improvement like EoE-D. Cluster Analysis. EoE-AP and FAP-N were similar in clinical features and response to treatment, but EoE-D was distinctly different from EoE-AP and FAP-N. Conclusion. Our study demonstrates that EoE-AP and EoE-D have different histology and outcomes. In addition, EoE-AP has clinical features similar to the FAP-N group

Effects of esomeprazole treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease on quality of life in 12- to 17-year-old adolescents: an international health outcomes study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common in adolescents, the burden of GERD on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in adolescents has not been previously evaluated. Therefore, the objective of the study was to examine the effect of GERD on HRQOL in adolescents.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This international, 31-site, 8-week safety study randomized adolescents, aged 12 to 17 years inclusive, with GERD to receive esomeprazole 20 or 40 mg once daily. The Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia questionnaire (QOLRAD), previously validated in adults, consists of 25 questions grouped into 5 domains: emotional distress, sleep disturbance, food/drink problems, physical/social functioning, and vitality. The QOLRAD was administered at the baseline and week-8 (final) visits.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 149 patients randomized, 134 completed the QOLRAD at baseline and final visits and were eligible for analysis of their HRQOL data. Baseline QOLRAD scores indicated GERD had a negative effect on the HRQOL of these adolescents, especially in the domains of vitality and emotional distress, and problems with food/drink. At the final visit, mean scores for all 5 QOLRAD domains improved significantly (<it>P </it>< .0001); change of scores (ie, delta) for all domains met or exceeded the adult QOLRAD minimal clinically significant difference standard of 0.5 units.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>GERD had a negative effect on QOL in adolescents. After esomeprazole treatment, statistically and clinically significant improvements occurred in all domains of the QOLRAD for these adolescents.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>D9614C00098; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00241501</p

Budesonide Oral Suspension Improves Symptomatic, Endoscopic, and Histologic Parameters Compared With Placebo in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Pharmacologic treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is limited to off-label use of corticosteroids not optimized for esophageal delivery. We performed a randomized, controlled phase 2 trial to assess the ability of budesonide oral suspension (BOS), a novel muco-adherent topical steroid formulation, to reduce symptoms and esophageal eosinophilia in adolescents and adults with EoE. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, 93 EoE patients between the ages of 11 and 40 years with dysphagia and active esophageal eosinophilia were randomized to receive either BOS 2 mg or placebo twice daily for 12 weeks. Co-primary outcomes were change in Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ) score from baseline, and proportion of patients with a histologic response (≤6 eosinophils/high-power field) after treatment. Endoscopic severity scores and safety parameters were assessed. RESULTS: At baseline, mean DSQ scores were 29.3 and 29.0, and mean peak eosinophil counts were 156 and 130 per hpf in the BOS and placebo groups, respectively. After treatment, DSQ scores were 15.0 and 21.5, and mean peak eosinophil counts were 39 and 113 per high-power field, respectively (P < .05 for all). For BOS vs placebo, change in DSQ score was -14.3 vs -7.5 (P = .0096), histologic response rates were 39% vs 3% (P < .0001), and change in endoscopic severity score was -3.8 vs 0.4 (P < .0001). Adverse events were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with BOS was well tolerated in adolescent and young adult patients with EoE and resulted in improvement in symptomatic, endoscopic, and histologic parameters using validated outcome instruments. ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01642212

Risk factors for esophageal strictures in children and adolescents with eosinophilic esophagitis

Studies in children with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have reported esophageal strictures but none have examined risk factors associated with strictures.&nbsp;Aim: To assess risk factors associated with strictures in children with EoE.&nbsp;Methods: In this retrospective study, children with EoE seen over 20 years were separated into two groups; with and without strictures. Physical features, CBC, endoscopic findings, and biopsy of the distal and mid-esophagus were captured. Statistical significance with p - value and multivariate logistic regression was done.&nbsp;Results: Total patients 222 and 20 (9.1%) had strictures. Mean age of stricture patients 12.7 years (range 7-18) and non-stricture 9.3 years (range 1-17) (p = 0.006). Among stricture patients following were prevalent and significant; dysphagia (stricture 100% vs. non-stricture 41.6%,&nbsp;p = 0.0005) and food impaction (70.04% vs. 4%, p = 0.0005); EGD: rings and exudates were strongly associated with stricture, 45.0% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.0005 and 60% vs. 30.7%, p = 0.008, respectively. Abdominal pain was lower in the stricture group (5% vs. 31.2%, p = 0.017). Eosinophil counts were numerically more in the stricture group but not significant. Multivariate logistic regression confirmed that strictures are likely to&nbsp;occur among patients with dysphagia (p = 0.02, OR = 11.7, 95% LCL 2.0) and food impaction (p = 0.0001, OR = 80.9, 95% LCL 15.4), respectively, adjusted for age and gender.&nbsp;Conclusion: EoE children with dysphagia or food impaction have a higher chance of having an esophageal stricture. These EoE children 12 years or over with exudates or rings on endoscopy, should be treated and carefully monitored, to reduce the risk of stricture formation