Retrospective Study
Copyright ©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Gastroenterol. Jul 28, 2014; 20(28): 9549-9555
Published online Jul 28, 2014. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i28.9549
Table 1 Comparison of eosinophilic esophagitis patients who did and did not require dilations n (%)
CharacteristicNo DilationDilation
(n= 39)(n= 22)
Age (yr)38 (18-61)49 (23-61)
Asthma/allergic history12 (31)10 (45)
Presenting symptoms00
Dysphagia15 (38)22 (100)
Food impaction9 (23)10 (45)2
Reflux9 (23)0
No symptoms6 (15)0
Symptomatic33 (85)22 (100)
Peak eos/hpf47.9 eos/hpf52.6 eos/hpf
Length of follow up (yr)4.8 ± 1.51 yr5.2 ± 1.4 yr
Number of EGDs1.4 ± 0.72.6 ± 1.5
Table 2 Endoscopic findings in the esophagus at the time of diagnosis n (%)
Type of findingsNo dilationDilation
Erosions6 (15)2 (9)
Inflammation1 (3)2 (9)
Linear furrowing13 (33)4 (18)
Ridges and cobblestone1 (3)0
Ringed14 (35)7 (32)
Schatzki ring2 (5)6 (37)
Stenosis04 (18)
Benign strictures09 (41)
Tortuous1 (3)0
White plaques4 (10)2 (9)
No abnormalities8 (21)0
Table 3 Site involvement based on biopsy readings at time of diagnosis
LocationNo dilationDilation
Proximal71
Mid3119
Distal228
GEJ43
Not specified32
Table 4 Comparison of PR and AT groups
CharacteristicsPR Group (Diagnosis before 1st dilation)(n= 6)
AT Group(Diagnosis at 1st dilation)(n= 16)
MeanRangeMeanRange
Peak eos/hpf at 1st diagnosis31.6 ± 18.415-92
Peak eos/hpf at 1st dilation45.7 ± 30.873.6 ± 42.415-145
Number of biopsies at diagnosis1.7 ± 0.81-31.7 ± 0.61-3
Number of EGDs3.7 ± 2.02-72.2 ± 1.21-5
Number of dilations111.4 ± 0.71-3
Length of follow up (yr)15 ± 1.24-75.2 ± 1.44-9
Table 5 Comparison of patients with and without complication after dilation n (%)
ComplicationsNo complications
Age (yr)35 (20-51)41 (20-54)
Asthma/allergy history2 (50)8 (44)
Peak eos/hpf at time of dilation78 ± 5163 ± 37