Challenges in managing patients referred for eosinophilic esophagitis: A telephone survey and retrospective review.

Background: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) in patients referred to allergists can be difficult to manage. This is due to multiple factors, including overlaps in presentation with gastroesophageal reflux disease and proton-pump inhibitor responsive eosinophilia, remaining uncertainties regarding the role of different forms of allergy testing, and a variety of patient adherence issues. Objective: To highlight, in an objectively studied fashion, complications that can be faced when managing patients referred for EoE. Methods: We conducted a telephone survey of 78 patients (pediatric and adult) who were referred to our academic allergy clinic for EoE. The survey focused on patients' perspectives regarding their symptoms and treatments. We then conducted a chart review to determine if there had been a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) trial before diagnosis, and we compared patient responses with documented allergy test results, treatment plans, and biopsy results. Results: Only 22 of 78 patients (28%) had a ≥8-week PPI trial before diagnosis and/or referral. There was considerable variability in the type of allergy testing done for patients, and how the results were used to guide therapy. More than one-third of the patients reported being on a different treatment regimen (PPI, swallowed steroid, and/or diet) than planned, and the majority of patients on dietary therapy reported being on a different diet than planned. Also, nearly half of the adult patients did not have follow-up biopsies done despite recommendations for this. Conclusion: We identified several challenges in EoE management, including potential misdiagnosis or overtreatment, lack of standardization in testing and dietary recommendations, and patient adherence issues. We hope this information will prompt increased vigilance for these issues and promote solutions when needed.

Characterization of Vancomycin Reactions and Linezolid Utilization in the Pediatric Population.

BACKGROUND: Red man syndrome (RMS) occurs because of non-IgE-mediated histamine release. Unlike vancomycin allergy, which necessitates the use of an alternative drug (often linezolid), RMS does not typically preclude further vancomycin use. Care should be taken to differentiate these reaction types from one another to prevent unnecessary vancomycin avoidance. OBJECTIVE: To characterize vancomycin reaction types in our population, and to determine whether having a reaction consistent with RMS is associated with otherwise unexplained vancomycin avoidance and linezolid use. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed charts for children with documented vancomycin reactions. We classified the in-hospital reactions via an objective analysis and estimated the prevalence of different reaction types. We then identified children who received linezolid over 3 years, and investigated reasons for linezolid use instead of vancomycin. RESULTS: Of the 78 in-hospital reactions we characterized, 72 (92%) were objectively consistent with RMS, 5 we could not objectively classify (2 most likely RMS, 3 more suspicious for possible IgE-mediated allergy), and 1 was a non-RMS/non-IgE reaction. Of 60 children who received linezolid, 19 had previous reactions consistent with RMS, which should not preclude further vancomycin. Nevertheless, only 7 of 19 (37%) had a clear explanation for receiving linezolid instead of vancomycin compared with 32 of 39 (82%) children without previous vancomycin reactions (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of patients had vancomycin reactions consistent with RMS. These patients are at risk for unnecessary vancomycin avoidance and linezolid utilization. We propose that this may be related to how reactions appear in the electronic medical record.

A review of the evidence linking eosinophilic esophagitis and food allergy.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammation of the esophagus that has been considered an allergic phenomenon based on its similarities to other allergic conditions. More specifically, EoE has been considered a form of food allergy because of patient sensitizations to foods and improvements in symptoms and inflammation after food eliminations. This article presents the currently available evidence regarding the classification of EoE as an allergic condition, the involvement of foods in disease pathogenesis, and the value of different types of allergy testing and elimination diets in management of EoE. Using the search engines PubMed and Ovid, English literature in the past 10 years was reviewed with the use of the following key words: eosinophilic esophagitis, EoE epidemiology, EoE pathophysiology, food allergy, eosinophils, skin-prick testing, atopy patch testing, elemental diet, test directed elimination diet, six food elimination diet. Studies of EoE epidemiology and pathophysiology support the link between EoE and allergy in general, and studies of food allergy testing and elimination diets have supported a link between EoE and food allergy. Although food elimination diets cause resolution of symptoms and pathology in pediatric EoE, the results of testing and diet elimination studies are not as clear in adults, and aeroallergen sensitizations may play a larger role in adult EoE pathophysiology. Although several studies in children and adults support considering EoE a form of food allergy, the usefulness of skin-prick testing and atopy patch testing for food allergies and the optimal elimination diet for disease management are still uncertain.