Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 May;7(4):548-556.
doi: 10.1177/2050640619836052. Epub 2019 Mar 5.

The evolution of treatment and complications of esophageal food impaction

Affiliations

The evolution of treatment and complications of esophageal food impaction

Daniel A Schupack et al. United European Gastroenterol J. 2019 May.

Abstract

Background: Esophageal food impaction is relatively common and increasing over time. Treatment ranges from medications to invasive endoscopic therapies. The endoscopic push technique has been advised against in favor of endoscopic retrieval for safety concerns. We sought to assess use patterns and safety of treatments for food impaction in a population-based retrospective review.

Methods: A database of recorded esophageal food impactions in Olmsted County, MN, USA, from 1975-2011 was reviewed for patient demographics, treatment, and complications.

Results: A total of 645 impactions occurred, with increasing incidence over time, peaking at 23.2 per year (2000-2004). Medications (almost exclusively glucagon) were successful in relieving impactions 34.5% of the time when trialed. Urgent endoscopy was common (74.0%), as was the need for endoscopic therapy (67.1%). Endoscopic therapy increased over time, with the endoscopic push technique becoming most common. Esophageal complications (deep mucosal injury or perforation) increased over time but remained rare (peak 11%). There was no difference in complications between push and retrieval techniques.

Conclusions: The endoscopic push technique is safe in comparison to endoscopic retrieval in esophageal food impactions. While complications surrounding impaction have increased, they remain rare. Medication trials are reasonable, as long as they do not delay endoscopy, and may prevent the need for emergent endoscopy in one-third of cases.

Keywords: Endoscopic therapy; eosinophilic esophagitis; esophageal complications; esophageal food impaction; noninvasive therapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Incidence of food impaction over time.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Complications over time.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Successful impaction treatment over time.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Etiology of impaction over time.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Esophageal complications by etiology over time.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Esophageal complications by type of endoscopic therapy over time.

References

    1. Longstreth GF, Longstreth KJ, Yao JF. Esophageal food impaction: Epidemiology and therapy. A retrospective and observational study. Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 53: 193–198. - PubMed
    1. Truskaite K, Dlugoza A. Prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis and lymphocytic esophagitis in adults with esophageal food bolus impaction. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2016; 2016: 9303585. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sperry SL, Crockett SD, Miller CB, et al. Esophageal foreign-body impactions: Epidemiology, time trends and the impact of the increasing prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 985–991. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Birk M, Bauerfeind P, Deprez PH, et al. Removal of foreign bodies in the upper gastrointestinal tract in adults: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) clinical guideline. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 489–496. - PubMed
    1. Mahesh VN, Holloway RH, Nguyen NQ. Changing epidemiology of food bolus impaction: Is eosinophilic esophagitis to blame?. Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 28: 963–966. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances