Abstract:Background and Aims: A proportion of patients with active eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have a normal appearing esophagus on endoscopy (EGD). We aimed to determine associations between baseline clinical features and the endoscopically normal esophagus in EoE as well as time trends in reporting.
Methods: In this retrospective study of active EoE cases from 2002-2018, patients with and without esophageal endoscopic abnormalities were compared. Multivariable logistic regression identified independent predictors… Show more
“…On endoscopy, typical features of EoE include esophageal rings, white plaques or exudates, decreased vascularity or edema, linear furrows, strictures, narrowing, and crepe-paper mucosa [9]. While these endoscopic findings of EoE are not formally part of the diagnostic criteria and they are not completely specific, they remain widely prevalent and recognized as hallmark features of the condition [3,10]. The EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS) was developed and validated to measure the severity of five key endoscopic features of EoE: edema, rings, exudates, furrows, and stricture [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On endoscopy, typical features of EoE include esophageal rings, white plaques or exudates, decreased vascularity or edema, linear furrows, strictures, narrowing, and crepe-paper mucosa 9 . While these endoscopic findings of EoE are not formally part of the diagnostic criteria and they are not completely specific, they remain widely prevalent and recognized as hallmark features of the condition 3 10 .…”
Background and study aims: While endoscopic features of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are measured using the validated EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS), a threshold for treatment response has not been defined. We aimed to determine a cut-point for endoscopic response as measured by EREFS.
Patients and Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial comparing budesonide slurry to swallowed fluticasone multidose inhaler for initial treatment of EoE. In the parent trial, EREFS was determined before and after treatment (score range 0-9), as were histologic findings and dysphagia symptoms. We performed tabular, flexible trend, and dependent mixture analyses of measures of treatment response to select the best clinical EREFS threshold.
Results: In the 111 included subjects (mean age 39 years; 67% male; 96% white), an EREFS threshold of ≤2 was 80% sensitive (95% confidence limits 69 - 88%) and 83% specific (95% confidence limits 67 - 94%) for histologic response (peak of <15 eosinophils per high-power field). Flexible trend analysis and dependent mixture modeling similarly suggested a threshold of ≤2 best captured the correlation of EREFS with histologic and symptomatic measures. Dependent mixture modeling found near total membership in the response class at EREFS of 0 or 1 and >75% at EREFS of 2 or 3.
Conclusions: An EREFS of ≤2 was the best clinical threshold for endoscopic response to topical steroid treatment and was consistent with clinical and histologic response. Therefore, future studies can report a binary outcome of endoscopic response when EREFS is two or less.
“…On endoscopy, typical features of EoE include esophageal rings, white plaques or exudates, decreased vascularity or edema, linear furrows, strictures, narrowing, and crepe-paper mucosa [9]. While these endoscopic findings of EoE are not formally part of the diagnostic criteria and they are not completely specific, they remain widely prevalent and recognized as hallmark features of the condition [3,10]. The EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS) was developed and validated to measure the severity of five key endoscopic features of EoE: edema, rings, exudates, furrows, and stricture [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On endoscopy, typical features of EoE include esophageal rings, white plaques or exudates, decreased vascularity or edema, linear furrows, strictures, narrowing, and crepe-paper mucosa 9 . While these endoscopic findings of EoE are not formally part of the diagnostic criteria and they are not completely specific, they remain widely prevalent and recognized as hallmark features of the condition 3 10 .…”
Background and study aims: While endoscopic features of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are measured using the validated EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS), a threshold for treatment response has not been defined. We aimed to determine a cut-point for endoscopic response as measured by EREFS.
Patients and Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial comparing budesonide slurry to swallowed fluticasone multidose inhaler for initial treatment of EoE. In the parent trial, EREFS was determined before and after treatment (score range 0-9), as were histologic findings and dysphagia symptoms. We performed tabular, flexible trend, and dependent mixture analyses of measures of treatment response to select the best clinical EREFS threshold.
Results: In the 111 included subjects (mean age 39 years; 67% male; 96% white), an EREFS threshold of ≤2 was 80% sensitive (95% confidence limits 69 - 88%) and 83% specific (95% confidence limits 67 - 94%) for histologic response (peak of <15 eosinophils per high-power field). Flexible trend analysis and dependent mixture modeling similarly suggested a threshold of ≤2 best captured the correlation of EREFS with histologic and symptomatic measures. Dependent mixture modeling found near total membership in the response class at EREFS of 0 or 1 and >75% at EREFS of 2 or 3.
Conclusions: An EREFS of ≤2 was the best clinical threshold for endoscopic response to topical steroid treatment and was consistent with clinical and histologic response. Therefore, future studies can report a binary outcome of endoscopic response when EREFS is two or less.
“…This was a retrospective cohort study using the University of North Carolina (UNC) EoE clinicopathologic database through 2019. The development and characteristics of the database have been reported previously [23,24]. All study participants were patients with an incident diagnosis of EoE who met consensus diagnostic guidelines at the time of diagnosis [14], including symptoms of esophageal dysfunction, ≥ 15 eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf), and exclusion of competing causes of eosinophilia, and in whom esophageal dilation was performed.…”
Section: Study Design Study Population and Data Sourcementioning
Background & Aims: Little is known about esophageal dilation as a long-term treatment eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We examined the impact of a “dilate and wait” strategy on symptoms and safety of patients with EoE.
Methods: This retrospective cohort study included two groups of EoE patients: those who underwent a dilation-predominant approach, defined as >3 dilations as EoE sole therapy or for histologically refractory disease (>15 eos/hpf); and those who had routine care, defined as <3 dilations or histologic response. Characteristics of the groups were compared and outcomes for the dilation-only group assessed.
Results: Of 205 patients, 53 (26%) received the dilation-predominant strategy (n=408 dilations total), most commonly because of histologic treatment non-response (75%). These patients were younger (33 vs 41 yrs, p=0.003), had a narrower baseline esophageal diameter (9.8 vs 11.5mm, p=0.005), underwent more dilations (7.7 vs 3.4, p <0.001), but achieved a smaller final diameter (15.7 vs 16.7mm, p=0.01) compared to routine care. With this strategy, 30 patients (57%) had ongoing symptom improvement, with esophageal caliber change independently associated with symptom response (aOR 1.79; 95%CI 1.17-2.78); 26 (49%) used the strategy as a bridge to clinical trials. Over a median follow-up of 1001 days (IQR 581-1710), there were no deaths or dilation-related perforations, but there were 9 ER visits, including 1 for post-dilation bleeding and 4 for food impaction.
Conclusions: A dilation-predominant long-term treatment strategy allows for symptom control or bridge to clinical trials for patients with difficult to treat EoE. Close follow-up and monitoring for complications is required.
“…The EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS), based on the endoscopic features described above, has improved the recognition, reporting, and classification of EoE 7 , 9 , 10 but is still not used as a standard tool in many settings 11 . For enhanced detection of EoE, Artificial Intelligence (AI) with deep learning (DL) could be an additional diagnostic option.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the presence of these morphological changes is not required for diagnosis, they are supportive and prompt the biopsies necessary for histopathological confirmation 5 . However, the endoscopic features of EoE may be missed, either because physicians are not familiar with them or the morphologic changes are too subtle 7 , 8 .…”
The endoscopic features associated with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) may be missed during routine endoscopy. We aimed to develop and evaluate an Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithm for detecting and quantifying the endoscopic features of EoE in white light images, supplemented by the EoE Endoscopic Reference Score (EREFS). An AI algorithm (AI-EoE) was constructed and trained to differentiate between EoE and normal esophagus using endoscopic white light images extracted from the database of the University Hospital Augsburg. In addition to binary classification, a second algorithm was trained with specific auxiliary branches for each EREFS feature (AI-EoE-EREFS). The AI algorithms were evaluated on an external data set from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (UNC), and compared with the performance of human endoscopists with varying levels of experience. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of AI-EoE were 0.93 for all measures, while the AUC was 0.986. With additional auxiliary branches for the EREFS categories, the AI algorithm (AI-EoE-EREFS) performance improved to 0.96, 0.94, 0.95, and 0.992 for sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC, respectively. AI-EoE and AI-EoE-EREFS performed significantly better than endoscopy beginners and senior fellows on the same set of images. An AI algorithm can be trained to detect and quantify endoscopic features of EoE with excellent performance scores. The addition of the EREFS criteria improved the performance of the AI algorithm, which performed significantly better than endoscopists with a lower or medium experience level.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.