Topical Steroids Are Effective and Safe in Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis Over a Median of 6.5 Years of Chronic Use.

GOALS: To determine long-term efficacy and safety of tCS for treatment of EoE. BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy with topical corticosteroids (tCS) is recommended for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but data for long-term use are still needed. STUDY: This retrospective cohort study assessed newly diagnosed patients with EoE who were treated with a tCS and had a follow-up endoscopy with biopsy after at least 5 years. Histologic symptomatic and endoscopic responses were extracted from medical records. Patients who did and did not have long-term tCS treatment were compared at baseline, and outcomes for patients were assessed at their last endoscopy while on tCS. RESULTS: Of 431 patients with EoE treated with tCS, 104 met inclusion criteria for long-term use. For patients with long-term tCS use, the median time (IQR) on tCS was 6.5 years (5.4 to 8.8 y). At the last endoscopy, 54% had histologic response (<15 eos/hpf), but those with excellent adherence had a histologic response of 64%. Endoscopic severity also decreased with improved adherence which was strongly associated with EREFS (1.7 vs. 2.8 vs. 4.0 for excellent, good, and poor adherence; P<0.001). Symptomatic response was 68% overall, but only 40% in those with poor adherence (P=0.07). Complications of taking tCS were uncommon (adrenal insufficiency: 1%; osteopenia: 1%; and esophageal candidiasis: 4% at final endoscopy). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term tCS (median 6.5 y) were generally effective, especially with better adherence, and also safe, with only rare serious complications. These data can be used to help patients make clinical decisions about chronic tCS use in EoE.

Impact of cannabis use on presentation and treatment response in eosinophilic esophagitis.

Cannabis use is becoming increasingly common, both for recreational and medical purposes. However, there is a paucity of data regarding cannabis use in the context of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to determine the impact of cannabis use on presentation and treatment response in EoE. To this end, we conducted a retrospective cohort study at a large academic medical center of newly diagnosed EoE patients age ≥ 12 years. Self-reported cannabis use status, baseline characteristics, and treatment response to topical corticosteroids and dietary therapy data were extracted. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were used to compare cannabis users and non-users at time of EoE diagnosis and to assess treatment response. Of 983 EoE patients, 80 reported using cannabis, with the majority reporting daily use and administration by inhalation. Baseline symptoms and peak eosinophil count were similar between cannabis users and non-users; cannabis users were less likely to have baseline endoscopic findings of exudates, edema, and stricture, and lower total Endoscopic Reference Score. On multivariable analysis, younger age, male sex, non-White race, and psychiatric diagnosis were independently associated with history of cannabis use at EoE presentation and stricture was independently associated with cannabis non-use. Post-treatment symptom and histologic responses were similar between cannabis users and non-users though there was a higher odds of post-treatment endoscopic inflammatory features with cannabis use. In conclusion, despite presenting with milder initial endoscopic findings, cannabis users exhibited greater inflammatory findings after treatment, highlighting a potential negative influence of cannabis use on EoE management.

Performing Esophageal Biopsies Is Safe During Upper Endoscopy for Food Impaction but Are Underperformed in Certain Populations.

BACKGROUND: Despite recommendations to perform esophageal biopsies during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for esophageal food impaction to evaluate for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), endoscopists often forgo biopsies. There are minimal data on the risks of biopsies in this setting. AIMS: To determine the safety of performing biopsies during EGD for food impaction. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who presented to University of North Carolina Hospitals from 2014 to 2021 with endoscopically confirmed food impaction. Data were abstracted from the medical records. Baseline clinical characteristics, procedural details, and adverse events were compared between patients who did and did not undergo biopsy. Adverse events were classified as esophageal (mucosal tear, bleeding, perforation) or extra-esophageal (aspiration, respiratory compromise, hypotension, arrhythmia). RESULTS: Of 188 patients who underwent EGD for food impaction, 73 (39%) had biopsies taken. Older and non-White patients were less likely to be biopsied. None of the Black patients had biopsies taken. Only 2 (2.7%) of the 73 biopsied patients had an adverse event, and neither was related to the biopsies. Patients who were biopsied were less likely to experience adverse events. There were no differences in re-admission, ICU admission, or 30-day mortality between patients who were and were not biopsied. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal biopsies remain underperformed during EGD for food impaction, especially in certain patient populations. Esophageal biopsies at the time of food impaction are unlikely to cause adverse events. Safety concerns should not preclude biopsies, and biopsies should be performed in the absence of extenuating circumstances.

Prevalence and Costs of Esophageal Strictures in the United States.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophageal strictures are a leading cause of dysphagia, but data regarding the epidemiology of esophageal strictures are limited. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence, health care utilization, and financial burden of esophageal strictures in the United States. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using 2 large national insurance claims databases (MarketScan and Medicare). Using International Classification of Diseases-9 and -10 diagnostic codes, annual prevalence was calculated for both cohorts overall, and stratified by age and sex strata. Most common diagnostic and procedural codes associated with esophageal strictures were extracted and analyzed to estimate health care utilization. Direct annual medical costs of esophageal strictures were calculated. RESULTS: The annual prevalence of esophageal strictures in MarketScan in 2021 was 203.14 cases/100,000 people, whereas the annual prevalence in Medicare cohort in 2017 was 1123.47 cases/100,000. Although rates were relatively stable over time, esophageal stricture prevalence increased with advancing age. No prevalence differences were noticed between males and females. Gastroesophageal reflux disease/erosive esophagitis was the top diagnostic code associated with esophageal strictures, although an increase in the proportion of eosinophilic esophagitis codes was noted over time. Esophageal dilation codes were present in ∼50% of stricture cases. The total health care costs associated with esophageal strictures were estimated at $1.39 billion in 2017. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal strictures are common, affecting between 1/100 and 1/1000 patients in the United States, with the highest rates seen in patients aged 75 years and older. Accordingly, strictures have a significant financial burden on the health care system, with costs greater than $1 billion annually.