Mechanical Dilation vs. Medical Therapy for Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Posted on by

D Burnett et al. JPGN Reports. 2025;6:19–26. A Canadian multicenter pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis cohort: Evidence for a nondilation approach to esophageal narrowing

This was a retrospective study from Vancouver with 332 new diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE).

Key findings:

  • The incidence of EoE in patients less than 15 years old was 5.4 per 100,000 person‐years
  • Of the 332 new diagnoses, 40 (12.0%) had endoscopically-identified esophageal narrowing at diagnosis
  • During follow-up of 1-4 years, 11 (27.5% of narrowed cohort) patients underwent mechanical esophageal dilation
  • “Our most surprising result was the high number of cases of esophageal narrowing that resolved on follow‐up scope after initiating medical/dietary therapy, without need for mechanical dilation.” The rates of resolution were 1 with 1 (100%) on systemic steroids, 7 out of 13 (54%) with topical steroids, 3 out of 4 (75%) with dietary therapy, and 4 out of 12 (33%) with PPI therapy

My take: This study was a little confusing in how the results are presented. Through most of the article, there are 40 (of 332) children with newly-diagnosed EoE who had narrowing identified. However, there is also discussion of a 65 children subset who had follow-up endoscopy and this is the group in which esophageal narrowing treatment response is reported.

Despite the confusion, the clear take-home message is that esophageal narrowing often responds to medical treatment; only a subset of children with esophageal strictures need mechanical dilatation.

Related blog posts:

I love walking around NYC -even when it is cold (pictures from February)