Clinical outcomes of adults with eosinophilic esophagitis with severe stricture.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an inflammatory disease of the esophagus. Its prevalence has been increasing steadily over the past 3 decades. The prognosis of patients with EoE presenting with severe esophageal strictures is poorly understood. The aim of this study was to describe the clinical outcomes of patients with EoE with severe strictures and identify factors associated with a greater likelihood of improvement in esophageal diameter. METHODS: This study is a retrospective chart review of patients with EoE with severe stricture, defined as an esophageal diameter of 10 mm or less at one point in their disease course. Each patient's clinical course was followed during standard-of-care follow-up with medical or dietary therapy in conjunction with repeated esophageal dilation. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to determine which variables are associated with endoscopic response, defined by an improvement in esophageal diameter to 13 mm and to 15 mm. RESULTS: From a cohort of 1091 adults with EoE, severe strictures were identified in 66 patients (7%). Of the 66 patients, 59 (89%) achieved an esophageal diameter of ≥13 mm and 43 (65%) achieved ≥15 mm. Initial diameter (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.35; P = .025) and histologic remission (odds ratio, 34.97; 95% confidence interval, 6.45-189.49; P < .0001) were significantly associated with achieving a diameter ≥15 mm. Age at diagnosis, gender, and number of months to maximum esophageal diameter were not associated with achieving either diameter. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with EoE with severe stricture experienced improvement in esophageal diameter to ≥15 mm with treatment, suggesting that the currently available treatment options are effective for patients with severe strictures. The most significant factors associated with disease reversibility are initial esophageal diameter and histologic remission.

How I Approach Dysphagia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review presents an overview of the diagnostic approach to esophageal dysphagia and summarizes recent epidemiological trends and technical advancements. RECENT FINDINGS: The evaluation of dysphagia begins with a detailed history followed by endoscopy to evaluate for any structural abnormalities including malignancy. This is especially true given the emergence of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) as a dominant cause of esophageal dysphagia. In fact, it is now standard practice to obtain esophageal biopsies during endoscopy performed to evaluate dysphagia, since EoE can present without the characteristic mucosal features of rings, furrows, and exudate. Achalasia is also more frequently encountered since the introduction of high-resolution manometry (HRM) and the Chicago Classification into clinical practice. The Chicago Classification provides a stepwise diagnostic algorithm for evaluating HRM studies and systematically diagnosing esophageal motility disorders. Lastly, the functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) is a novel technology that has added insight into both achalasia and EoE. Measuring esophageal distensibility with FLIP has useful prognostic implications for both diseases, and FLIP can identify motility abnormalities in achalasics not detected with HRM. A careful history is key to the efficient evaluation of dysphagia, and endoscopy is usually the first diagnostic study to obtain. For patients with prominent reflux symptoms, an empiric trial with proton pump inhibitors is reasonable then because reflux disease is such a common cause of dysphagia. Thereafter, patients should undergo HRM to evaluate for a motility disorder, and FLIP can provide complementary data to guide management.

Treatment Gap in Primary Prevention Patients Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndrome.

Previous studies assessing healthcare provider compliance to the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) cholesterol guidelines indicate a significant underuse of statin therapy at appropriate intensity. However, data are limited in primary prevention patients. Our study aimed to evaluate the impact of the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines through a retrospective analysis of primary prevention patients presenting with first time acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We retrospectively calculated the 10-year predicted Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (10yASCVD) risk in 1,265 patients ages 40 to 75 who presented with ACS and no previous ASCVD. In patients without known ambulatory systolic blood pressure, a multivariable linear regression model was used to predict outpatient systolic blood pressure. Outcomes analyzed in each 10yASCVD category included statin status and statin intensity (high/medium/low) with further categorization by type of ACS event and date of left heart catheterization. In both primary analysis and sensitivity analysis (patients with predicted systolic blood pressure), statistical significance was shown with respect to overall statin status, ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction, and date of left heart catheterization. In summary, retrospective calculation of 10yASCVD in patients with a first ACS event showed a significant number of ACS patients would have qualified for statin therapy per 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines before their event but had not been initiated on one.

Persistence of atopic dermatitis (AD): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies found conflicting results about whether childhood atopic dermatitis (AD) persists into adulthood. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine persistence rates and clinical factors associated with prolonged AD. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, GREAT, LILACS, Web of Science, Academic Search Complete, and Cochrane Library. Meta-analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier plots and random-effects proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: In total, 45 studies including 110,651 subjects spanning 434,992 patient-years from 15 countries were included. In pooled analysis, 80% of childhood AD did not persist by 8 years and less than 5% persisted by 20 years after diagnosis (mean ± SE: 6.1 ± 0.02 years). Children with AD that persisted already for more than 10 years (8.3 ± 0.08 years) had longer persistence than those with 3 (3.2 ± 0.02 years) or 5 (6.8 ± 0.06 years) years of persistence. Children who developed AD by age 2 years had less persistent disease (P < .0001). Persistence was greater in studies using patient-/caregiver-assessed versus physician-assessed outcomes, female versus male patients (P ≤ .0006), but not in those with sensitivity to allergens (P = .90). Three studies found prolonged persistence with more severe AD. LIMITATIONS: Some studies did not capture recurrences later in life. CONCLUSIONS: Most childhood AD remitted by adulthood. However, children with already persistent disease, later onset, and/or more severe disease have increased persistence.