After playing phone tag for a few days, Dr. P called and had some okay news to share. Scope results:
(A) Distal esophagus (bottom of the esophagus)
(B) Proximal esophagus (top of the esophagus)
Sample A came back with 33 eosinophils per high powered field. Sample B came back zero!
Comparing from May's scope, his lower esophagus showed some inflammation. His upper esophagus remained unchanged.
For the score keepers:
-4th scope in a row with his upper esophagus remained CLEAR!!!!
-no medicine changes were made from January
Dr. P expressed concern over the inflammation and declared fish unsafe for Lucas. While Lucas didn't exhibit any outward symptoms that we are used to, it would've been just a matter of time if we continued with fish. I thought Lucas would be bummed by the news but he surprised me with a resounding cheer that fish is unsafe for him.
Lucas has expressed to us that he really has no interest in trialing tree nuts and I told Dr. P. Anything beyond tree nuts will get us into foods that have caused skin reactions to or are known triggers. Dr. P had me ask Lucas what he really wanted to trial. Lucas exclaimed, "EGGS!!!!" Dr. P also said that Lucas is now at the age where he can help make decisions in regards to which foods he wants to trial.
With the inflammation, we are to give Lucas a month off from trialing anything new. Then we can start eggs. If Lucas starts exhibiting outward symptoms, then we'll know for certain that eggs are unsafe. If he doesn't show any outward symptoms, then we'll scope (4months instead of 3months). If eggs are deemed unsafe by either, then we will halt trials for an unspecified amount of time. If eggs prove to be safe, then we'll try something else.
While the results were not what we hoped for, Lucas and I both aren't disappointed. We gave fish a try and unfortunately they are a trigger food. We will be hopeful about eggs but will not be disappointed if they fail.
He's one for two when it comes to trials.