Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Recent consensus guidelines for diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have been published. Whether these guidelines have standardized diagnostic criteria for EoE is unknown. We aimed to determine if the EoE guidelines had an impact on the diagnostic criteria reported in the EoE literature, and whether the previously observed variability in diagnostic criteria has become more uniform.
METHODS: Two investigators independently conducted a MEDLINE search from 1 January 2007 through 30 June 2010 for all publications reporting EoE in human subjects, and also searched the proceedings of the 2007-2010 American College of Gastroenterology and American Gastroenterological Association meetings, using a predefined search strategy. Data were extracted from all relevant publications.
RESULTS: Of the 799 publications identified, 149 original reports, 99 reviews, and 165 abstracts were included. In all, 32 original reports (21%) used diagnostic criteria consistent with each of the three components of the consensus guidelines. There was a significant increase when comparing original articles published after the release of the guidelines with those published earlier (31 vs. 6%, P < 0.001). The proportion of original articles using 15 eosinophils per high-power field (eos/hpf) as a histological cut-point increased significantly (P = 0.001). There was still substantial variability in biopsy protocols and eosinophil count methodology. The majority of original articles did not report microscope high-power field (HPF) area.
CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of original reports with diagnostic criteria consistent with the consensus guidelines has increased significantly. However, the majority of articles still did not conform to all three of the criteria in the guidelines, and biopsy and eosinophil count protocols continue to demonstrate significant variability. Standardization of biopsy and eosinophil count protocols is needed.