Is Milk Elimination Enough? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of One-Food Elimination Diet in Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

IF 4.4 Q1 Medicine Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) Pub Date : 2026-09-16 DOI:10.3390/medsci14050575
Stefani Tsaggaridou, Constantinos Pitsios
{"title":"Is Milk Elimination Enough? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of One-Food Elimination Diet in Eosinophilic Esophagitis.","authors":"Stefani Tsaggaridou, Constantinos Pitsios","doi":"10.3390/medsci14050575","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objectives: </strong>Dietary management, particularly through food elimination, has emerged as an effective therapeutic strategy for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). In this context, a one-food elimination diet (1-FED) targeting cow's milk has been proposed as a targeted and less restrictive alternative to broader elimination approaches. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to systematically assess the effectiveness of 1-FED in achieving histological remission and to compare its efficacy with broader elimination diets in patients with EoE.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review of the literature was conducted across five databases (PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov). The primary endpoint was histological remission (<15 eosinophils/HPF). Comparative studies were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies met the eligibility criteria for the systematic review, of which seven were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, 156 of 306 patients achieved histological remission following 1-FED, corresponding to a pooled remission rate of 51% (95% CI: 43-60%). Histological remission rates ranged from approximately 34% to 65% across individual studies. Compared with broader elimination diets, 1-FED showed no significant difference in histological remission (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.64-1.58; <i>p</i> = 0.99).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to multi-food elimination diets, 1-FED requires a less restrictive dietary pattern, which may offer practical advantages for treatment adherence in routine clinical practice, although this was not systematically or objectively measured in the included studies. The findings lend preliminary support to a step-up dietary strategy, in which 1-FED may be considered as an initial intervention and broader elimination diets are reserved for patients who fail to achieve remission.</p>","PeriodicalId":74152,"journal":{"name":"Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)","volume":"14 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13609406/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/medsci14050575","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/objectives: Dietary management, particularly through food elimination, has emerged as an effective therapeutic strategy for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). In this context, a one-food elimination diet (1-FED) targeting cow's milk has been proposed as a targeted and less restrictive alternative to broader elimination approaches. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to systematically assess the effectiveness of 1-FED in achieving histological remission and to compare its efficacy with broader elimination diets in patients with EoE.

Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted across five databases (PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov). The primary endpoint was histological remission (<15 eosinophils/HPF). Comparative studies were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.

Results: Eight studies met the eligibility criteria for the systematic review, of which seven were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, 156 of 306 patients achieved histological remission following 1-FED, corresponding to a pooled remission rate of 51% (95% CI: 43-60%). Histological remission rates ranged from approximately 34% to 65% across individual studies. Compared with broader elimination diets, 1-FED showed no significant difference in histological remission (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.64-1.58; p = 0.99).

Conclusions: Compared to multi-food elimination diets, 1-FED requires a less restrictive dietary pattern, which may offer practical advantages for treatment adherence in routine clinical practice, although this was not systematically or objectively measured in the included studies. The findings lend preliminary support to a step-up dietary strategy, in which 1-FED may be considered as an initial intervention and broader elimination diets are reserved for patients who fail to achieve remission.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
消除牛奶就够了吗?单一食物消除饮食治疗嗜酸性食管炎的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Challenges of Effective Clinical Teaching Organization at Public Medical Universities in Poland: A Delphi Method Study. From Sentiment to Signal: Narrative-Physiology Discordance as a Testable Target for Artificial Intelligence in Critical Care. Audiometric Monitoring and Its Determinants in Patients Undergoing Chemoradiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer. Global, Regional, and Country Incidence of Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis in the Contemporary Peritoneal Dialysis Practice: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Comparison of Direct 3D Scans and Plaster Casts in Digital Ankle-Foot Orthosis Workflows.
wanfang
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1