Eosinophilic esophagitis: from pathophysiology to management.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) incidence and prevalence have sharply increased in the last decade; so, the management of these patients is changing rapidly. Standard regimens as elimination diet, proton pump inhibitors and topical swallowed steroids are not able to achieve remission in all patients. Moreover, loss of efficacy and safety concerns for long-term medical treatments are rising questions. As for other chronic immune-mediated diseases, biologics have been evaluated for the treatment of EoE. Several targets in the Th2-mediated inflammatory cascade with eosinophilic mucosal infiltration, have been tested with alternating results. This review provides a comprehensive discussion of the available studies evaluating biologics in EoE and the possible future options most desirable for these patients.

Diagnostic delay and misdiagnosis in eosinophilic oesophagitis.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) may lead to severe complications if not promptly recognised. AIMS: To assess the diagnostic delay in patients with EoE and to explore its risk factors. METHODS: EoE patients followed-up at eight clinics were included via retrospective chart review. Diagnostic delay was estimated as the time lapse occurring between the appearance of the first likely symptoms indicative of EoE and the final diagnosis. Patient-dependent and physician-dependent diagnostic delays were assessed. Multivariable regression models were computed. RESULTS: 261 patients with EoE (mean age 34±14 years; M:F ratio=3:1) were included. The median overall diagnostic delay was 36 months (IQR 12-88), while patient- and physician-dependent diagnostic delays were 18 months (IQR 5-49) and 6 months (IQR 1-24). Patient-dependent delay was greater compared to physician-dependent delay (95% CI 5.1-19.3, p<0.001). A previous misdiagnosis was formulated in 109 cases (41.8%; gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in 67 patients, 25.7%). The variables significantly associated with greater overall diagnostic delay were being a non-smoker, >1 episode of food impaction, previous endoscopy with no biopsies, regurgitation, and ≥2 assessing physicians. Being single was significantly associated with lower overall and patient-dependent diagnostic delay. CONCLUSION: EoE is burdened by substantial diagnostic delay, depending on both patient-related and physician-related factors.

Achalasia and Obstructive Motor Disorders Are Not Uncommon in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: An association has been reported between achalasia and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We performed a retrospective study of high-resolution manometry (HRM) patterns in a large cohort of patients with EoE. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We collected data from consecutive patients with a new diagnosis of EoE from 2012 through 2019 undergoing HRM during the initial assessment at different centers in Italy. Demographic, clinical, endoscopic and histological characteristics were recorded at baseline and during management. Diagnoses of EoE and esophageal motility disorders were made according to established criteria. Treatments offered included proton pump inhibitors and topical steroids for EoE, and pneumatic dilation and myotomy for achalasia. Response to therapy was defined as less than 15 eosinophils per high power field in esophageal biopsies. RESULTS: Of 109 consecutive patients (mean age 37 years, 82 male), 68 (62%) had normal findings from HRM. Among 41 patients with motor disorders, 24 (59%) had minor motor disorders and 17 (41%) presented with major motor disorders, including 8 with achalasia (1 with type 1, 4 with type 2, and 3 with type 3). Achalasia and nonachalasia obstructive motor disorders had 14.7% prevalence among patients with EoE. Achalasia was more frequent in women, with longer diagnostic delay and abnormal esophagogram (P < .05) compared with EoE without achalasia or obstructive motor disorders. Clinical features and endoscopic findings did not differ significantly between patients with EoE with vs without achalasia and obstructive motor disorders. A higher proportion of patients without achalasia and obstructive motor disorders responded to topical steroids than patients with these features (P < .005). Invasive achalasia management was required for symptom relief in 50% of patients with achalasia and obstructive motor disorders. CONCLUSION: Achalasia and obstructive motor disorders are found in almost 15% of patients with EoE, and esophageal eosinophilia might cause these disorders. Patients with EoE who do not respond to standard treatments might require targeted muscle disruption.

Clinical and Psychological Impact of COVID-19 Infection in Adult Patients with Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders during the SARS-CoV-2 Outbreak.

Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are chronic gastrointestinal conditions requiring corticosteroid and immunosuppressive therapy for disease control. Patients with EGIDs usually report impaired quality of life. We aimed to report the clinical and psychological impact of COVID-19 infection in EGID patients. In this prospective web-based study we invited all consecutive EGID patients attending the University Hospital of Salerno (Campania) and Padua (Veneto) to fill an ad hoc COVID-19 survey. Moreover, a telemedicine service for direct consultation was organized. Data regarding the occurrence and perception of COVID-19 infection as well as clinical information were recorded. The study population included 102 EGID patients (mean age 36.6 years, 34 females), of whom 89 had eosinophilic esophagitis, nine had gastroenteritis, and four had colitis. No patient was diagnosed with COVID-19 or had recurrence of his/her primary disease. All of them were adherent to therapy and preventive measures adoption. Most patients were worried because of COVID-19 and social preventing measures but did not consider themselves at major risk or susceptible to COVID-19 or other infections due to their chronic condition or therapy. Female gender and low education level were associated to a higher psychological perception of COVID-19 compared to lockdown status or other demographic and clinical factors (p < 0.05). Overall, COVID-19 had a limited clinical impact on patients with EGIDs. The degree of education and sex, but not the fact of living in a lockdown area, influenced the perception of SARS-CoV-2 infection.