Clinical Features of Esophageal Eosinophilia According to Endoscopic Phenotypes

Proton Pump Inhibitors for Inducing and Maintaining Remission in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy results in clinical and histological remission in approximately 50% of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) patients. We aimed to systematically update this topic due to cumulative data from pediatric/adult populations in wider geographical settings.

METHODS

A search in MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases was performed. Primary outcomes were clinical response and histological remission (<15 eosinophils per high-power field). Subgroup analyses included age group, PPI drug and dosage, study design, data origin, and risk of bias. Data were pooled using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Seventy-three studies comprising 7304 patients were included. PPI therapy led to clinical response in 65% (95% confidence interval [CI], 57.2-72.4; I2 = 0%) and histological remission in 45.4% (95% CI, 41.6%-49.3%) of patients, without differences between children and adults (41.2% vs 48%; P ••• .17). Overall, 34.1% (95% CI, 27.9%-40.5%) achieved <5 eosinophils per high-power field. Pooled effectiveness was significantly superior (P < .001) in Western Pacific areas, principally Japan (67.9%), compared with American and European areas (40.6% and 44.4%, respectively). Histological remission was significantly higher with double PPI doses compared with standard (51.7% vs 28.3%; P •••.005). Response was significantly higher in studies with lower risk of bias. Maintenance half-doses led to sustained histological remission in 68.2% (95% CI, 63.7%-72.6%; I2 = 0%) of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

PPI therapy induces clinic-histological remission in almost half of pediatric and adult EoE patients. Response to PPIs is significantly higher in Japan. Sustained remission is common on tapering PPI doses.

Long-term Outcome of Asymptomatic Esophageal Eosinophilia

Background/Aims

: Asymptomatic esophageal eosinophilia (aEE), characterized by eosinophil infiltration in the esophagus without clinical symptoms, has been reported as a precursor of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Nevertheless, no report exists on the long-term clinical course of the disease. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the long-term clinical course of aEE over 5 years, including the symptomatic conversion rate and the effect of treatments.

Methods

: We reviewed 28 patients with aEE who had been followed up for over 5 years with endoscopic monitoring. The basal characteristics of patients were compared with those of 58 patients diagnosed with EoE during the same period. Patients' clinicopathological findings were collected and examined.

Results

: No significant differences in basal characteristics and histopathological findings were observed between the patients with aEE and those with EoE. The median follow-up duration was 64 months. Among the 28 patients with aEE, seven were treated with proton pump inhibitor or potassium-competitive acid blocker and the remaining 21 opted for follow-up with no medication. Among the treated patients, six (85.7%) exhibited endoscopic and pathologic improvements. Among the cases followed up without medication, the findings worsened in two (9.5%), improved spontaneously in seven (33.3%), and were unchanged in 12 (57.1%), and three (14.3%) developed symptoms at a mean time of 40 months. Symptoms developed in cases where endoscopic and pathologic findings remained unchanged or worsened during follow-up.

Conclusions

: Some patients with aEE had improved findings without treatment, whereas others developed symptoms, emphasizing the importance of long-term monitoring and individualized treatment decisions.

Long-term course of untreated asymptomatic esophageal eosinophilia and minimally symptomatic eosinophilic esophagitis

Background and study aims The long-term course of untreated asymptomatic esophageal eosinophilia (aEE) and minimally symptomatic eosinophilic esophagitis (mEoE) are not well understood. This study aimed to clarify this course. Patients and methods A total of 36 patients with EE who were endoscopically followed up for more than 5 years, and who underwent more than one endoscopy evaluation after the first diagnosis, were investigated. These patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of the continuous treatment: no treatment group (NT group, n=22) and proton pump inhibitor/potassium competitive acid blocker group (Tx group, n=14). Symptoms and endoscopic and histological findings were retrospectively reviewed according to endoscopic phenotypes. Endoscopic assessment was performed using the EoE endoscopic reference score (EREFS). Results The median follow-up period was 84.5 months in the Tx group and 92 months in the NT group. During the follow-up period, about half of the patients in the Tx-diffuse group persisted EREFS >3, while the remaining half had EREFS ≤2. The total EREFS in the NT-diffuse group remained almost unchanged (median: 2-4) without apparent exacerbation. In contrast, EREFS in the NT-localized group exhibited an unchanged or gradually decreasing trend, with statistical significance from the first diagnosis to 72 to 83 months after. Conclusions Untreated aEE and mEoE are not likely to worsen even without treatment at least for a median follow-up of 7 years. Instead, the localized type may spontaneously improve, implying a different pathogenesis in the presence of the diffuse type. Further studies should clarify the long-term prognosis.

Mucosal and Submucosal Thickening of Esophageal Wall Is a Promising Factor in the Development of Symptoms in Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Background/Aims

Asymptomatic esophageal eosinophilia (aEE) is considered to be a potential precursor of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). However, there are few clinical parameters that can be used to evaluate the disease. Therefore, we aimed to clarify the factors involved in the symptoms of EoE by examining the clinicopathological differences between aEE and EoE.

Methods

We reviewed 41 patients with esophageal eosinophilia who underwent endoscopic ultrasonography and high-resolution manometry. They were divided into the aEE group (n=16) and the EoE group (n=25) using the Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease score. The patients' clinicopathological findings were collected and examined.

Results

The median Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease score was 3.0 in the aEE group and 10.0 in the EoE group. There was no significant difference in patient characteristics, endoscopic findings and pathological findings. The cutoff value for wall thickening was 3.13 mm for the total esophageal wall thickness and 2.30 mm for the thickness from the surface to the muscular layer (total esophageal wall thickness: 84.0% sensitivity, 75.0% specificity; thickness from the surface to the muscular layer: 84.0% sensitivity, 68.7% specificity). The high-resolution manometry study was abnormal in seven patients (43.8%) in the aEE group and in 12 (48.0%) in the EoE group. The contractile front velocity was slower in the EoE group (p=0.026).

Conclusions

The esophageal wall thickening in the lower portion of the esophagus is an important clinical factors related to the symptoms in patients with EoE.

Number of bottles of esophageal biopsies in the evaluation of eosinophilic esophagitis and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

The number of bottles of esophageal biopsies needed for the evaluation of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is unclear, despite cost differences.

AIMS

Assess the clinical outcomes between patients with one and two bottles of esophageal biopsies for the assessment of EoE.

METHODS

Retrospective study of adults who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for esophageal symptoms between January 2015 and June 2021 and findings of ≥15 eosinophils per high power field (eos/hpf). Patients with one bottle (1 bottle-EoE) had biopsies from the entire or proximal esophagus. Patients with two bottles had biopsies separated from the distal and proximal esophagus and were separated into those with ≥ 15 eos/hpf in both bottles (2 bottle Dif-EoE), or the distal bottle alone (2 bottle Lim-EoE). The primary outcomes were endoscopic findings at follow-up EGD as assessed by the Eosinophilic Esophagitis Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS) and the presence of ≥15 eos/hpf.

RESULTS

Of 85 patients with esophageal eosinophilia who met inclusion criteria, 49 had 2 bottle Dif-EoE, 18 had 2 bottle Lim-EoE, and 18 had 1 bottle-EoE. At median follow-up of 3.3-5.6 months, more patients with 1 bottle EoE had dysphagia (p = 0.029), however there were no differences in the EREFS (p = 0.14) or presence of ≥15 eos/hpf (p = 0.39). More patients with 2 bottle Dif-EoE were treated with topical steroids (16.3% vs. 0% vs. 0%, p = 0.039) and diet (20.4% vs. 0% vs. 5.6%, p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic and histologic outcomes were similar in patients who had one and two bottles for esophageal biopsies in the evaluation of EoE.

Linked color imaging improves the diagnostic accuracy of eosinophilic esophagitis

Objectives

To assess the usefulness of linked color imaging (LCI), a recently developed image‐enhanced endoscopy technique, in the endoscopic diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

Methods

Thirty white light images (WLIs) and 30 WLI+LCI images collected from patients with and without EoE were randomly and blindly reviewed by 10 endoscopists, including four experts (Exs) and six non‐Exs. Edema, ring, exudate furrows, and strictures were rated on the adjusted EoE endoscopic reference score; the diagnosis of EoE was assessed. Using the kappa value, inter‐ and intra‐observer agreements were analyzed among endoscopists.

Results

WLI+LCI images had a higher diagnostic accuracy for EoE than WLIs (0.85 vs. 0.70, respectively), especially in non‐Exs or endoscopists with no experience with EoE patients. Inter‐observer agreement for WLI+LCI images statistically surpassed WLIs for furrows (kappa, 0.73 vs. 0.67, respectively; p = 0.0013), stricture (kappa, 0.51 vs. 0.39, respectively; p = 0.0072), and diagnosis (kappa, 0.67 vs. 0.57, respectively; p < 0.0001) of EoE. The increase in inter‐observer agreement in WLI+LCI images allowed for a reduction in the differences between the Exs and non‐Ex endoscopists. Intra‐observer agreement for WLI+LCI images surpassed WLIs for a ring (kappa, 0.62 vs. 0.43, p = 0.0052), and a similar trend was found in exudates, furrows, and diagnosis irrespective of the Exs or non‐Exs.

Conclusions

LCI can contribute to the improvement of the endoscopic diagnosis for EoE, with “moderate” to “substantial” consistency, by enhancing the visibility of abnormal findings, leading to reduced diagnostic disparities among endoscopists.

Endoscopic Diagnosis of Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Basics and Recent Advances

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory disease, characterized by esophageal dysfunction and intense eosinophil infiltration localized in the esophagus. In recent decades, EoE has become a growing concern as a major cause of dysphagia and food impaction in adolescents and adults. EoE is a clinicopathological disease for which the histological demonstration of esophageal eosinophilia is essential for diagnosis. Therefore, the recognition of the characteristic endoscopic features with subsequent biopsy are critical for early definitive diagnosis and treatment, in order to prevent complications. Accumulating reports have revealed that EoE has several non-specific characteristic endoscopic findings, such as rings, furrows, white exudates, stricture/narrowing, edema, and crepe-paper esophagus. These findings were recently unified under the EoE endoscopic reference score (EREFS), which has been widely used as an objective, standard measurement for endoscopic EoE assessment. However, the diagnostic consistency of those findings among endoscopists is still inadequate, leading to underdiagnosis or misdiagnosis. Some endoscopic findings suggestive of EoE, such as multiple polypoid lesions, caterpillar sign, ankylosaurus back sign, and tug sign/pull sign, will aid the diagnosis. In addition, image-enhanced endoscopy represented by narrow band imaging, endocytoscopy, and artificial intelligence are expected to render endoscopic diagnosis more efficient and less invasive. This review focuses on suggestions for endoscopic assessment and biopsy, including recent advances in optical technology which may improve the diagnosis of EoE.

Clinicopathological Differences between Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Asymptomatic Esophageal Eosinophilia

Objective According to consensus guidelines, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is defined as a clinicopathological entity whose symptoms and histology must always be considered together. However, endoscopic findings typical of EoE are often seen in asymptomatic esophageal eosinophilia (aEE). We aimed to clarify the clinicopathological features of aEE. Methods We retrospectively compared cases of aEE and those of symptomatic EoE. Materials We reviewed 146 patients who underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and were confirmed histopathologically to have esophageal eosinophil infiltration of at least 15 eosinophils per high-power field. They were divided into the aEE group (n=75) and the EoE group (n=71). Patients' clinicopathological findings were then collected and examined. Results The EoE group experienced dysphagia (47.9%), heartburn (40.8%), food impaction (40.8%), chest pain (16.9%), and other symptoms (8.5%). There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to age, sex, current smoking status, or alcohol consumption. The aEE group had a significantly higher body mass index (p<0.01) and significantly lower frequency of concurrent allergic diseases (p<0.01) than the EoE group. No significant differences were found between the two groups with regard to the mean peripheral blood eosinophil count, non-specific immunoglobulin E concentration, peak eosinophil infiltration in the biopsy specimens, EoE histology scoring system, phenotype and location of typical endoscopic findings of EoE, or thickness of the esophagus wall or the mucosal and submucosal layer as measured by endoscopic ultrasonography. Two patients in the aEE group who were followed up without treatment subsequently developed esophageal symptoms. Conclusion aEE and EoE may have the same clinicopathological features.

The role of advanced endoscopy in the management of inflammatory digestive diseases (upper gastrointestinal tract)

The Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society held four serial symposia between 2019 and 2020 on the state-of-the-art of issues related to upper GI inflammatory diseases. This review discusses some of the topics addressed in these symposia. The papers regarding nonerosive reflux disease, recent improvements in intraesophageal pH-impedance monitoring and endoscopic diagnosis using image-enhanced endoscopy have been published. Many publications have addressed its usefulness in endoscopic treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease such as anti-reflux mucosectomy. In the management of eosinophilic esophagitis, since the symptoms are subjective, objective indicators have been sought, and ultrasonography and high-resolution manometry may be useful tools for evaluation. The natural course of this condition, especially of asymptomatic cases, is not well clarified. Some newly developed anti-acid or anti-inflammatory medicines are now under investigation. With regard to autoimmune gastritis, because of widespread medical examinations, diagnosis of asymptomatic cases has been increasing. Recently, its endoscopic characteristics have become clear and the natural history of these conditions is being elucidated. The Kyoto Classification of Gastritis has been reported to be useful not only for Helicobacter pylori diagnosis but also for identification of risks of gastric cancer. Its usefulness is now recognized in Asia and Europe.