Effectiveness of empirical dilation for persistent obstructive symptoms in eosinophilic esophagitis despite histological remission
Résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: Some patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) remain symptomatic despite histological remission. In absence of strictures at endoscopy, empirical dilation has been suggested, however no data on usefulness are available. AIMS: To investigate effectiveness of empirical dilation. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all EoE patients who achieved histological remission at our Institution between July 2018 and February 2024. Patients with persistent dysphagia and/or bolus impaction underwent dilation irrespective of stricture at endoscopy. Follow-up of ≥6 months was required. RESULTS: Forty-six patients (median age 42 years, 25 men) were included. Thirty-seven had no stricture and 9 had a stricture (i.e., S1 or R3 according to EREFS score). In the former group, 23/37 patients became asymptomatic whereas 14 were still symptomatic and underwent empirical dilation, clinically effective in 13 of them. A second dilation was needed in 2, after 25 and 31 months. In the latter group all patients underwent dilation and achieved clinical remission. All 45 patients remained in clinico-histological remission during a 14(8-46) months follow-up, with no change in medical treatment and a final I-SEE score of 1(0-1). CONCLUSIONS: Empirical esophageal dilation is highly effective when dysphagia/bolus impaction persists despite histological remission and should be considered before escalating treatment.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Effectiveness of empirical dilation for persistent obstructive symptoms in eosinophilic esophagitis despite histological remission
- Date Crossref
- 01/07/2026
- Éditeur
- Elsevier BV
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.