Article

Foreign Body Impaction as Presentation of Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery (Impact Factor: 1.72). 08/2013; DOI: 10.1177/0194599813500462
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Esophageal foreign body is a frequent pediatric presentation, and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an important underlying disease. To determine characteristics common in the presentation of esophageal foreign body indicative of underlying EoE and reach a recommendation for the appropriate scenario in which to obtain esophageal mucosal biopsy, 312 pediatric esophageal foreign bodies requiring operative removal were reviewed. Patients older than 18 years or with a known history of esophageal surgery or pathology were excluded. Eligibility criteria were met in 271 cases. Twenty-seven patients were biopsied, and 18 were diagnosed with EoE. The following factors were identified in the EoE population: food impaction (89%), older age (average 12.2 years), male sex (78%), atopic disease (61%), previous esophageal foreign body or frequent dysphagia (83%), and endoscopic abnormalities (100%). These factors are all associated with an underlying diagnosis of EoE, and patients meeting these criteria should be strongly considered for intraoperative esophageal mucosal biopsy.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
51 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Initial case series describing children and adults with symptoms related to esophageal dysfunction and dense esophageal eosinophilia lead to recognition of a "new" disease, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Clinical, basic, and translational studies have provided a deeper understanding of this somewhat enigmatic disease that mechanistically is defined as an antigen-driven condition limited to the esophagus. This article summarizes many of the key historical features of EoE and provides a glimpse of potential future developments.
    Gastroenterology clinics of North America 06/2014; 43(2):185-199. · 2.56 Impact Factor