4.7 Review

Systematic review with meta-analysis: endoscopic dilation is highly effective and safe in children and adults with eosinophilic oesophagitis

Journal

ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
Volume 46, Issue 2, Pages 96-105

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apt.14123

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Oesophageal dilation is frequently used as an adjunct treatment to alleviate symptoms that develop from fibrostenotic remodelling in eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE). Earlier reports described an increased risk of complications associated with dilation. Aim: Perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic dilation in children and adults with EoE. Methods: Professional librarians searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles in any language describing studies of dilation in EoE through December 2016. Studies were selected and data were abstracted independently and in duplicate. Random effects modelling was used to generate summary estimates for clinical improvement and complications (haemorrhage, perforation, hospitalisation, and death). Results: The search resulted in 3495 references, of which 27 studies were included in the final analysis. The studies described 845 EoE patients, including 87 paediatric patients, who underwent a total of 1820 oesophageal dilations. The median number of dilations was 3 (range: 1-35). Clinical improvement occurred in 95% of patients (95% CI: 90%-98%, I-2: 10%, 17 studies). Perforation occurred in 0.38% (95% CI: 0.18%-0.85%, I-2: 0%, 27 studies), haemorrhage in 0.05% (95% CI: 0%-0.3%, I-2: 0%, 18 studies), and hospitalisation in 0.67% (95% CI: 0.3%-1.1%, I-2: 44%, 24 studies). No deaths occurred (95% CI: 0%-0.2% I-2: 0%, 25 studies). Conclusions: Endoscopic dilation is consistently effective in children and adults with EoE, resulting in improvement in 95% of patients with very low rates (<1%) of major complications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available