Severity of esophageal eosinophilia predicts response to conventional gastroesophageal reflux therapy

Eduardo Ruchelli, William Wenner, Theresa Voytek, Kurt Brown, Chris Liacouras

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

172 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Pediatric patients who present with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux and severe eosinophilic esophagitis may be unresponsive to aggressive anti- reflux medical therapy. In order to determine whether the degree of eosinophilia predicts anti-reflux treatment response and possibly distinguishes different etiologies, we reviewed the initial biopsies of patients with esophageal eosinophilia and compared the number of eosinophils with the response to anti-reflux treatment. Over a 1-year period, 102 patients with a biopsy demonstrating at least l intraepithelial eosinophil were identified among patients undergoing initial endoscopy for symptoms of reflux. All patients were treated with H2 blockers and prokinetic agents. Treatment response was classified into three categories: improvement, relapse, and failure. There were significant differences between the group who improved (mean eosinophil count [MEC] 1.1 ± 0.3 SEM) and those who failed (24.5 ± 6.1 SEM, P < 0.0025) or relapsed 6.4 ± 2.4 SEM, P < 0.05). A threshold MEC value of ≥7 provided a sensitivity of 61.3%, a specificity of 95.7%, and a predictive value for treatment failure of 86.1. A MEC value of <7 provided an 85% predictive value of successful therapy. From these data we made the following conclusions: (1) The number of eosinophils has a predictive value of treatment response with ≥7 per high power field offering a valuable clinical threshold for predicting outcome of conventional therapy. (2) The variable response to conventional reflux treatment may reflect different etiologies. (3) Alternate medical treatment modalities may be appropriate in the presence of severe eosinophilia, before considering surgical intervention.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)15-18
Number of pages4
JournalPediatric and Developmental Pathology
Volume2
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1999

Fingerprint

Eosinophilia
Gastroesophageal Reflux
Eosinophils
Therapeutics
Eosinophilic Esophagitis
Biopsy
Treatment Failure
Endoscopy
Pediatrics
Recurrence

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Cite this

Ruchelli, Eduardo ; Wenner, William ; Voytek, Theresa ; Brown, Kurt ; Liacouras, Chris. / Severity of esophageal eosinophilia predicts response to conventional gastroesophageal reflux therapy. In: Pediatric and Developmental Pathology. 1999 ; Vol. 2, No. 1. pp. 15-18.
@article{fe71b930bff642418b1322f4e23fb38e,
title = "Severity of esophageal eosinophilia predicts response to conventional gastroesophageal reflux therapy",
abstract = "Pediatric patients who present with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux and severe eosinophilic esophagitis may be unresponsive to aggressive anti- reflux medical therapy. In order to determine whether the degree of eosinophilia predicts anti-reflux treatment response and possibly distinguishes different etiologies, we reviewed the initial biopsies of patients with esophageal eosinophilia and compared the number of eosinophils with the response to anti-reflux treatment. Over a 1-year period, 102 patients with a biopsy demonstrating at least l intraepithelial eosinophil were identified among patients undergoing initial endoscopy for symptoms of reflux. All patients were treated with H2 blockers and prokinetic agents. Treatment response was classified into three categories: improvement, relapse, and failure. There were significant differences between the group who improved (mean eosinophil count [MEC] 1.1 ± 0.3 SEM) and those who failed (24.5 ± 6.1 SEM, P < 0.0025) or relapsed 6.4 ± 2.4 SEM, P < 0.05). A threshold MEC value of ≥7 provided a sensitivity of 61.3{\%}, a specificity of 95.7{\%}, and a predictive value for treatment failure of 86.1. A MEC value of <7 provided an 85{\%} predictive value of successful therapy. From these data we made the following conclusions: (1) The number of eosinophils has a predictive value of treatment response with ≥7 per high power field offering a valuable clinical threshold for predicting outcome of conventional therapy. (2) The variable response to conventional reflux treatment may reflect different etiologies. (3) Alternate medical treatment modalities may be appropriate in the presence of severe eosinophilia, before considering surgical intervention.",
author = "Eduardo Ruchelli and William Wenner and Theresa Voytek and Kurt Brown and Chris Liacouras",
year = "1999",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s100249900084",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2",
pages = "15--18",
journal = "Pediatric and Developmental Pathology",
issn = "1093-5266",
publisher = "Society for Pediatric Pathology",
number = "1",

}

Severity of esophageal eosinophilia predicts response to conventional gastroesophageal reflux therapy. / Ruchelli, Eduardo; Wenner, William; Voytek, Theresa; Brown, Kurt; Liacouras, Chris.

In: Pediatric and Developmental Pathology, Vol. 2, No. 1, 01.01.1999, p. 15-18.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Severity of esophageal eosinophilia predicts response to conventional gastroesophageal reflux therapy

AU - Ruchelli, Eduardo

AU - Wenner, William

AU - Voytek, Theresa

AU - Brown, Kurt

AU - Liacouras, Chris

PY - 1999/1/1

Y1 - 1999/1/1

N2 - Pediatric patients who present with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux and severe eosinophilic esophagitis may be unresponsive to aggressive anti- reflux medical therapy. In order to determine whether the degree of eosinophilia predicts anti-reflux treatment response and possibly distinguishes different etiologies, we reviewed the initial biopsies of patients with esophageal eosinophilia and compared the number of eosinophils with the response to anti-reflux treatment. Over a 1-year period, 102 patients with a biopsy demonstrating at least l intraepithelial eosinophil were identified among patients undergoing initial endoscopy for symptoms of reflux. All patients were treated with H2 blockers and prokinetic agents. Treatment response was classified into three categories: improvement, relapse, and failure. There were significant differences between the group who improved (mean eosinophil count [MEC] 1.1 ± 0.3 SEM) and those who failed (24.5 ± 6.1 SEM, P < 0.0025) or relapsed 6.4 ± 2.4 SEM, P < 0.05). A threshold MEC value of ≥7 provided a sensitivity of 61.3%, a specificity of 95.7%, and a predictive value for treatment failure of 86.1. A MEC value of <7 provided an 85% predictive value of successful therapy. From these data we made the following conclusions: (1) The number of eosinophils has a predictive value of treatment response with ≥7 per high power field offering a valuable clinical threshold for predicting outcome of conventional therapy. (2) The variable response to conventional reflux treatment may reflect different etiologies. (3) Alternate medical treatment modalities may be appropriate in the presence of severe eosinophilia, before considering surgical intervention.

AB - Pediatric patients who present with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux and severe eosinophilic esophagitis may be unresponsive to aggressive anti- reflux medical therapy. In order to determine whether the degree of eosinophilia predicts anti-reflux treatment response and possibly distinguishes different etiologies, we reviewed the initial biopsies of patients with esophageal eosinophilia and compared the number of eosinophils with the response to anti-reflux treatment. Over a 1-year period, 102 patients with a biopsy demonstrating at least l intraepithelial eosinophil were identified among patients undergoing initial endoscopy for symptoms of reflux. All patients were treated with H2 blockers and prokinetic agents. Treatment response was classified into three categories: improvement, relapse, and failure. There were significant differences between the group who improved (mean eosinophil count [MEC] 1.1 ± 0.3 SEM) and those who failed (24.5 ± 6.1 SEM, P < 0.0025) or relapsed 6.4 ± 2.4 SEM, P < 0.05). A threshold MEC value of ≥7 provided a sensitivity of 61.3%, a specificity of 95.7%, and a predictive value for treatment failure of 86.1. A MEC value of <7 provided an 85% predictive value of successful therapy. From these data we made the following conclusions: (1) The number of eosinophils has a predictive value of treatment response with ≥7 per high power field offering a valuable clinical threshold for predicting outcome of conventional therapy. (2) The variable response to conventional reflux treatment may reflect different etiologies. (3) Alternate medical treatment modalities may be appropriate in the presence of severe eosinophilia, before considering surgical intervention.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032960929&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032960929&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s100249900084

DO - 10.1007/s100249900084

M3 - Article

C2 - 9841701

AN - SCOPUS:0032960929

VL - 2

SP - 15

EP - 18

JO - Pediatric and Developmental Pathology

JF - Pediatric and Developmental Pathology

SN - 1093-5266

IS - 1

ER -