Evidence Hub

Prevalence and Predictive Factors of Histopathological Complications in Children with Esophageal Atresia

Petit LM, Righini-Grunder F, Ezri J, Jantchou P, Aspirot A, Soglio DD, Faure C

European journal of pediatric surgery : official journal of Austrian Association of Pediatric Surgery ... [et al] = Zeitschrift fur Kinderchirurgie, 2019

77 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic follow-up after esophageal atresia (EA) tracheoesophageal fistula (TEF) repair is recommended to detect esophageal histopathological complications. We investigated the prevalence of histopathologically proven esophageal complications (peptic esophagitis, gastric metaplasia, and eosinophilic esophagitis) and assessed the predictors of these complications in children with EA-TEF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective longitudinal cohort study performed between September 2005 and December 2014 comprising 77 children with EA-TEF followed-up until February 2017. Univariate analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon's rank-sum test for continuous variables and the Pearson's chi-square test for categorical variables. Multivariable analysis was performed using a Cox regression hazard model. The association between clinical factors and histopathologically proven complications was estimated using a Cox regression hazard model with time until the appearance of complications as the time scale.

RESULTS: All 77 children received proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) (n = 73) or H2 receptor antagonists (H2RA). A total of 252 endoscopies were performed in 73 children (median 2.6/child, range: 1-29). Median age at study completion was 4.9 years (range: 2.3-11.5 years). Histopathologically proven complications occurred in 38 children (52%): peptic esophagitis (n = 32, 44%), eosinophilic esophagitis (n = 15, 21%), and gastric metaplasia (n = 9, 12%). A total of 82%…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 77 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free