4.1 Article

Eosinophilic esophagitis prevalence in an adult population undergoing upper endoscopy in southeastern Mexico

Journal

DISEASES OF THE ESOPHAGUS
Volume 28, Issue 6, Pages 524-529

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1111/dote.12238

Keywords

dysphagia; eosinophilic esophagitis; esophagus; Mexico

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) prevalence fluctuates according to the population studied and varies from 0.4% in an open population to 6.5% in subjects with esophageal symptoms. Even though this entity has been described in North American and European populations, it is still considered an unusual' condition in Latin America. The study aimed to determine EoE prevalence in patients undergoing elective endoscopy in a tertiary referral center in southeastern Mexico. Consecutive patients were evaluated that had been referred to the Medical and Biological Research Institute, Veracruz, Mexico, for upper endoscopy due to gastrointestinal symptoms. Demographic variables and symptoms were analyzed in all the cases. Eight mucosal biopsies of the esophagus (four proximal and four distal) were obtained and were reviewed by a blinded pathologist. Histological diagnosis was established when the mean eosinophil count at a large magnification was 15. A total of 235 subjects (137 women, 51.16 years) were evaluated, and EoE prevalence was 1.7% (4/235 95% confidence interval 0.2-3.6%). In all four cases, pH test were normal. Among patients with histological diagnosis of EoE, a greater number of patients with a past history of asthma (50% vs. 19.3%, P = 0.04) and a tendency for a greater frequency of dysphagia (50% vs. 25%, P = 0.10). There were no differences in the endoscopic findings (rings, grooves, plaques, or stricture) when compared with the patients presenting with erosive esophagitis. EoE prevalence among patients undergoing upper endoscopy from southeastern Mexico was 1.7%, which can be regarded as intermediate to low.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available