Purpose: To determine the clinical usefulness of esophagram with calculation of esophageal diameter in patients with symptomatic esophageal eosinophilic infiltration (EEI). Methods: Patients who presented with dysphagia between 2004 and 2012 were identified. All patients had at least 15 eosinophils per high powered field on esophageal biopsy and were evaluated with an esophagram. In addition, all patients were clinically evaluated by a single investigator (JAA). A small caliber esophagus (SCE) was defined as an esophageal maximal diameter (EDmax) less than or equal to 21 mm. EGD sensitivity and specificity were evaluated against a gold standard of esophagram. Gender, food impaction and frequency, impaction requiring emergent endoscopic removal, PPI use at time of EGD, prior corticosteroid treatment, gross endoscopic findings, skin testing, body mass index and serum eosinophil count were evaluated as potential univariate predictors of small caliber esophagus using Fisher's exact test. The patient's clinical course was reviewed retrospectively. Results: Of the 63 patients identified, 30 had a small caliber esophagus using an EDmax of less than or equal to 21 mm. EGD had poor sensitivity (14.3%, 95% CI 4.8-30.3%) for detection of a small caliber esophagus and only modest specificity (82.1%, 95% CI 63.1-93.9%) (Table 1). Female gender (p=0.012), food impaction (p=0.041), food impaction frequency (p<0.001), emergency endoscopic removal of food impaction (p<0.024), endoscopic rings (p=0.031) were all predictors of a small caliber esophagus. Univariate variables that are not predictors of a small caliber esophagus include proton pump inhibitor treatment at the time of EGD, corticosteroid treatment prior to EGD, furrows on endoscopic exam, skin testing, age at time of EGD, body mass index, and serum eosinophil count (Table 2). 7 patients had persistent dysphagia post PPI and/or topical steroid therapy and eventually underwent esophageal dilation. At esophagram 5 had focal narrowing, 2 had diffuse SCE with an EDmax esophageal diameter of 15 mm; 5/7 were perceived as having normal esophageal diameter at EGD. 6/7 had a minimal diameter of less than or equal to 13 mm. All 6 patients on treatment (budesonide 5, PPI 1) had < 10 eos/hpf at the time of dilation. 6/7 reported clinical improvement in their dysphagia. The nonresponding patient had a concomitant esophageal motility disorder.Table: Sensitivity and specificity of EGDTable: [36] Univariate variables that do not predict small caliber esophagusConclusion: 1. SCE may be predicted by female gender, food impaction, food impaction frequency, emergent endoscopic removal of food impaction, and endoscopic rings. 2. Esophagography frequently detects clinically important SCE that is not detected with endoscopy.