Colonoscopy in the elderly: low risk, low yield in asymptomatic patients

Surveillance Colonoscopy Findings in Older Adults With a History of Colorectal Adenomas

Importance

Postpolypectomy surveillance is a common colonoscopy indication in older adults; however, guidelines provide little direction on when to stop surveillance in this population.

Objective

To estimate surveillance colonoscopy yields in older adults.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based cross-sectional study included individuals 70 to 85 years of age who received surveillance colonoscopy at a large, community-based US health care system between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019; had an adenoma detected 12 or more months previously; and had at least 1 year of health plan enrollment before surveillance. Individuals were excluded due to prior colorectal cancer (CRC), hereditary CRC syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, or prior colectomy or if the surveillance colonoscopy had an inadequate bowel preparation or was incomplete. Data were analyzed from September 1, 2022, to February 22, 2024.

Exposures

Age (70-74, 75-79, or 80-85 years) at surveillance colonoscopy and prior adenoma finding (ie, advanced adenoma vs nonadvanced adenoma).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were yields of CRC, advanced adenoma, and advanced neoplasia overall (all ages) by age group and by both age group and prior adenoma finding. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with advanced neoplasia detection at surveillance.

Results

Of 9740 surveillance colonoscopies among 9601 patients, 5895 (60.5%) were in men, and 5738 (58.9%), 3225 (33.1%), and 777 (8.0%) were performed in those aged 70-74, 75-79, and 80-85 years, respectively. Overall, CRC yields were found in 28 procedures (0.3%), advanced adenoma in 1141 (11.7%), and advanced neoplasia in 1169 (12.0%); yields did not differ significantly across age groups. Overall, CRC yields were higher for colonoscopies among patients with a prior advanced adenoma vs nonadvanced adenoma (12 of 2305 [0.5%] vs 16 of 7435 [0.2%]; P = .02), and the same was observed for advanced neoplasia (380 of 2305 [16.5%] vs 789 of 7435 [10.6%]; P < .001). Factors associated with advanced neoplasia at surveillance were prior advanced adenoma (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.65; 95% CI, 1.44-1.88), body mass index of 30 or greater vs less than 25 (AOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.44), and having ever smoked tobacco (AOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.30). Asian or Pacific Islander race was inversely associated with advanced neoplasia (AOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.99).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of surveillance colonoscopy yield in older adults, CRC detection was rare regardless of prior adenoma finding, whereas the advanced neoplasia yield was 12.0% overall. Yields were higher among those with a prior advanced adenoma than among those with prior nonadvanced adenoma and did not increase significantly with age. These findings can help inform whether to continue surveillance colonoscopy in older adults.

Yield of Surveillance Colonoscopy in Older Adults with a History of Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefit of surveillance colonoscopy in older adults is not well described.

AIMS

To quantify the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced polyps during surveillance colonoscopy in older adults with a history of colon polyps.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase) for all published studies through May 2020 in adults age > 70 undergoing surveillance colonoscopy. The main outcome was CRC and advanced polyps detection. We performed meta-analysis to pool results by age (>70 vs. 50-70).

RESULTS

The search identified 6239 studies, of which 569 underwent full-text review and 64 data abstraction, of which 19 were included. The risk of detecting CRC (N = 11) was higher in those >70 compared to 50-70 (risk ratio 1.5 (95% CI 1.1-2.2); risk difference 0.8% (95% CI -0.2%-1.8%)). Similarly, the risk of detecting advanced polyps (N = 8) was higher in those >70 compared to 50-70 (risk ratio 1.3 (95% CI 1.2-1.3), risk difference 2.7% (95% CI 1.3%-4.0%)). Most studies did not stratify results by baseline polyp risk.

CONCLUSIONS

The detection of CRC and advanced polyps during surveillance colonoscopy in older individuals was higher than in younger controls; however, the absolute risk increase for both was small. These differences must be weighed against competing medical problems and limited life expectancy in older adults when making decisions about surveillance colonoscopy. More primary data on the risks of CRC and advanced polyps accounting for number of past colonoscopies, prior polyp risk, and duration of time since last polyp are needed.

The efficacy and safety of colonoscopy in nonagenarians: A multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

The number of colonoscopy (CS) for the elderly is increasing. There are only a few reports focusing on CS among the very elderly aged ≥ 90-y. We aimed to analyze the efficacy of CS and of colorectal cancer (CRC) for patients aged ≥ 90-y.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients aged ≥ 90-y receiving CS at eight institutions from October 2016 to September 2017. Bowel preparation, complications, and endoscopic diagnosis were analyzed. The non-elderly group aged between 50-y and 64-y and elderly group aged between 65-y and 79-y were compared to very-elderly group aged ≥ 90-y. Through propensity score matching of sex and CS indications (symptomatic or asymptomatic), the number of CRC and the treatment in each group were analyzed.

RESULTS

We analyzed 125 patients receiving 154 colonoscopies (0.9%) in the very-elderly group from among 16,968 cases. Among 92 cases who received bowel-cleansing solution, good preparations were achieved in 94.5%. The rate of CS-related complications was 1.3% (2/154). The rate of CRC in the very-elderly group was 27.2% (34/125), higher than the non-elderly group (7.2%, 9/125, p < 0.01) and elderly group (8.8%, 11/125, p < 0.01). Therapeutic interventions for CRC in the very-elderly group were performed in 73.5% (24/34) patients. The mean survival of 12 patients with CRC resection was 788 days.

CONCLUSIONS

CS could be performed safely for the very elderly aged ≥ 90-y with careful considerations. CRC was confirmed to be more frequent in this group with over 70% of patients receiving appropriate therapeutic intervention.

Efficacy of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in 398 Patients With Iron Deficiency Anemia Who Lack Gastrointestinal Symptoms: Basrah Experience

Introduction

The diagnosis of iron deficiency anemia (IDA) relies heavily on symptom presentation, and patients lacking typical gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms represent a diagnostic challenge. IDA may be the initial manifestation of underlying pathology. This study sought to evaluate the effectiveness of different GI endoscopic studies in patients with IDA who lack GI symptoms.

Methods

We conducted an observational, multicenter retrospective analysis of 398 asymptomatic IDA patients admitted for GI endoscopic diagnosis from 2006 to 2016. Baseline measurements included hemoglobin, serum ferritin, mean corpuscular volume, serum iron, total iron-binding capacity, and transferrin saturation. We analyzed demographic characteristics, duration of hospital stay, the degree of severity of anemia, and endoscopic findings.

Results

The mean age of the study population was 52±9 years (range, 23 to 85 years), and 53% were men. Most patients were older than 45 years (n=353, 89%) with mild to moderate IDA. Patients underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD, n=102), colonoscopy (n=271), or bidirectional endoscopy (n=25). The mean hospital stay was 2.72±1.66 days. The most common EGD results were atrophic gastritis (n=31), peptic ulcer (n=25), and negative findings (n=25). The most common colonoscopic results were negative findings (n=118), nonspecific colonic inflammatory changes (n=117), and non-bleeding hemorrhoids (n=29). We found no significant association between any endoscopic findings and age, gender, the severity of anemia, and length of hospitalization.

Conclusions

The presence of symptoms is of limited value in guiding diagnostic procedures concerning GI etiologies. Asymptomatic patients with IDA patients should receive an endoscopic examination irrespective of iron parameters, age, or gender for potentially treatable pathologies, especially for patients with suspected malignancies.

Yield and Practice Patterns of Surveillance Colonoscopy Among Older Adults: An Analysis of the GI Quality Improvement Consortium

OBJECTIVES

There is little guidance regarding when to stop surveillance colonoscopy in individuals with a history of adenomas or colorectal cancer (CRC). We evaluated both yield and recommendations for follow-up colonoscopy in a large cohort of older individuals undergoing colonoscopy, using the GI Quality Improvement Consortium registry.

METHODS

We analyzed the yield of colonoscopy in adults aged ≥75 years, comparing those who had an indication of surveillance as opposed to an indication of diagnostic or screening, stratified by 5-year age groups. Our primary outcome was CRC and advanced lesions. We also evaluated recommended follow-up intervals by age and findings.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2017, 376,686 colonoscopies were performed by 3,976 endoscopists at 628 sites, of which 43.2% were for surveillance. Detection of CRC among surveillance patients increased with age from 0.51% (age 75-79 years) to 1.8% (age ≥ 90 years); however, these risks were lower when compared with both the diagnostic and screening for the same age band (P < 0.0001). Yield of advanced lesions also increased by every 5-year interval of age across all groups by indication. Even at the most advanced ages and in those with nonadvanced findings, only a minority of patients were recommended for no further colonoscopy. For example, in patients aged 90 years and older with only low risk findings, 62.9% were recommended to repeat colonoscopy.

DISCUSSION

Surveillance colonoscopy is frequently recommended at advanced ages even when recent findings may be clinically insignificant. Further work is needed to develop guidelines to inform best practice around when to stop surveillance in older adults.

Safety and Efficacy of Low-Volume Preparation in the Elderly: Oral Sulfate Solution on the Day before and Split-Dose Regimens (SEE SAFE) Study

Background/Aims

The use of a low-volume bowel cleansing agent is associated with a greater willingness to undergo repeat colonoscopy. Oral sulfate solution (OSS) is a recently approved low-volume agent; however, its efficacy and safety in the elderly population remain unclear. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of the OSS preparation, in comparison to those of a standard polyethylene glycol (PEG; 4 L) preparation, in elderly patients.

Methods

A multicenter, randomized, investigator-blinded study was conducted. Participants were randomized to receive OSS or 4-L PEG with a split-dose regimen. Bowel cleansing efficacy was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Acceptance, satisfaction, and preparation-related symptoms were recorded. Additionally, blood parameters were analyzed for electrolyte abnormalities and nephrotoxicity.

Results

A total of 193 patients were analyzed. No group differences in overall bowel cleansing efficacy were observed, with “adequate” preparations achieved in 95.9% (93/97) and 94.8% (91/96) of patients in the OSS and 4L PEG groups, respectively (p=0.747). However, mean BBPS scores for the entire (p=0.010) and right colon (p=0.001) were significantly higher in the OSS group than in the 4-L PEG group. The severity of clinical adverse events and frequency of acute kidney injury were similarly low, and no clinically meaningful electrolyte changes were identified. Self-reported scores regarding amount (p<0.001) and feeling (p=0.007), as well as overall satisfaction (p=0.001) and willingness to repeat the preparation (92.8% vs 67.7%, p<0.001), were significantly better in the OSS group than in the 4-L PEG group.

Conclusions

In elderly individuals, OSS with a split-dose regimen has greater acceptability and comparable efficacy in bowel cleansing compared to 4-L PEG. (Clinical trials registration number: NCT03112967)

Can surveillance colonoscopy be discontinued in an elderly population with diminutive polyps?

OBJECTIVES

Surveillance colonoscopy after endoscopic resection (ER) for adenomatous polyps reduces the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, its significance in the elderly population is uncertain. The study aimed to determine whether surveillance colonoscopy should be discontinued in the elderly population.

METHODS

We enrolled 105 patients who underwent baseline colonoscopy between January 2004 and December 2009 and were subsequently followed-up over 5 years in our institution. All had diminutive colorectal polyps and were aged <80 years at baseline colonoscopy and ≥80 years at follow-up in May 2018. Patients who had undergone colectomy or who had inflammatory bowel disease, familial adenomatous polyposis, Lynch syndrome, and no diminutive polyps were excluded. The cumulative incidence of the target lesion was evaluated. Histopathological diagnoses included low-grade dysplasia (LGD), high-grade dysplasia (HGD), and carcinoma.

RESULTS

The target lesion was detected in 15% (16/105) of the patients. There was no invasive carcinoma; however, two HGDs were detected. There were three lesions that had increased from previously detected diminutive lesions, all of which were LGDs. There were no target lesions detected after 84 years of age, and the cumulative incidence was 0.20. The cumulative incidence was significantly higher in the group with HGD than in the group with no target lesions at baseline colonoscopy. There was no HGD after age 79 years, and the cumulative incidence was 0.019.

CONCLUSION

Surveillance colonoscopy for patients with diminutive polyps may be discontinued after age 79 years.

Bowel Preparation for Surveillance Colonoscopy After Colorectal Resection: A New Perspective

Purpose

Inadequate bowel preparation (IBP) is commonly observed during surveillance colonoscopy after colorectal resection. We investigated potential risk factors affecting bowel preparation.

Methods

We studied potential factors affecting bowel preparation quality. The Boston bowel preparation score was used to measure bowel preparation quality. Factors affecting IBP were analyzed, including age, body mass index, time elapsed between surgery and colonoscopy, and amount of bowel preparation drug consumed (conventional-volume vs. low-volume). Odds ratios were calculated for IBP.

Results

This retrospective cohort study included 1,317 patients who underwent colorectal resection due to malignancy. Of these patients, 79% had adequate bowel preparation and 21% had IBP. In multivariate regression analysis, a surveillance colonoscopy within 1 year after surgery and age >80 were used as independent predictors of IBP. IBP rate of the low-volume group was significantly higher than that of the conventional-volume group among patients who underwent a surveillance colonoscopy within 1 year after surgery.

Conclusion

For surveillance colonoscopy after colorectal resection, bowel preparation is affected by factors including colonoscopy timing after surgery and age. We recommend the use of conventional-volume 4-L polyethylene glycol solution when performing a surveillance colonoscopy, especially up to 1 year after surgery.

Colonoscopy in Patients Aged 85 Years or Older: An Observational Study

OBJECTIVES

Colonoscopy is the first-line modality to examine the colon even in the very elderly but may have an increased risk of complications. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of colonoscopy in the very elderly.

METHODS

Patients ≥85y old, who underwent colonoscopy between September 2010 and August 2012 in two tertiary-care hospitals in Japan were enrolled. Main outcome measures were cecal intubation rate, detection rate of adenomas and cancers, treatment, adverse events, and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 207 colonoscopies were performed in 177 patients (females 72, males 105; maximum age 95 years). Of these, 202 attempted to reach the cecum, with success in 92%. Excluding patients with known colorectal neoplasms, invasive cancers were detected in 12%, including T1 lesions in 2% and T2 or deeper in 9%. No cancers were detected in patients referred for surveillance or mild abdominal symptoms. Cancers were found in 25% of patients with positive fecal immunochemical tests, 22% with altered bowel habits, 21% with anemia, and 18% with hematochezia. Treatment of 29 patients with cancer included surgery in 22, endoscopic resection in two and no treatment (due to comorbidities) in five. There were no complications. During 730 days (mean) of follow up, 27 patients died but only three died from recurrent colorectal cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy for patients aged ≥85 years is safe. A relatively high detection rate of cancers was found, and most were treatable and even curable. (UMIN000018575).

Colonoscopy in the very elderly

INTRODUCTION

Colonoscopy is the gold standard test for investigating lower gastrointestinal symptoms and is an important therapeutic tool for colonic polypectomy. This paper is aimed at the general physician and examines the role of colonoscopy in very elderly patients by exploring the particular risks in this population, the yield of colonoscopy and potential alternative investigations.

SOURCES OF DATA

Original research and review articles were identified through selective PubMed searches. Guidelines were identified through interrogation of national and international society websites in addition to PubMed searches.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Advanced age alone is not a reason to avoid investigation. The decision to perform colonoscopy in this population must take into account indication and yield, risks of the procedure and bowel preparation, physical fitness of the patient, potential alternative and the ability to consent. As a general rule, the principle of 'first doing no harm' should be applied and requires balancing of the risks of the procedure and preparation with the benefits of doing the test.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

There is no defined upper age limit at which colonoscopy is contraindicated, however; the National Health Service Bowel Cancer Screening Programme stops inviting patients for screening and surveillance colonoscopy at age 75.

GROWING POINTS AND AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

The concepts of 'first do no harm' and shared decision-making are not new but are increasingly important, particularly in this patient group. It is crucial to provide patients with information about risks, benefits and alternative investigations to empower their decision-making.

Practical gastrointestinal investigation of iron deficiency anaemia

About 10% of oesophagogastroduodenoscopies (OGDs) and colonoscopies are done for investigation of iron deficiency anemia (IDA) . Much of the existing guidance on investigation of IDA predates CRC screening, which has driven significant improvements in colonoscopy quality and completion rates, as well as a reduction in Helicobacter pylori prevalence and increase in PPI usage, and therefore probably needs re-consideration. New investigations, e.g. CT colonography, enteroscopy and capsule endoscopy have also been introduced. Areas covered: This review updates the approach to practical investigation of IDA. Medline was searched using the terms iron deficiency AND anemia AND/OR gastroscopy, colonoscopy, capsule and enteroscopy, together with review of recent relevant published abstracts on the topic. Expert commentary: Gastrointestinal pathology is now a more common cause of IDA than upper GI causes, reflecting better colonoscopy accuracy and completion rates as well as changing disease patterns, and carcinomas are more likely cause IDA than benign adenomas. Increasing use of antiplatelet and anticoagulants is driving greater presentation of IDA. Capsule endoscopy, enteroscopy and CT colonography are increasingly used. Fecal occult blood testing may be a useful simple screening method in the frail, as a negative test can avoid the need for invasive tests.

Upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopies in patients over 85 years of age: Risk-benefit evaluation of a longitudinal cohort

After age 85, upper and lower gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy may be indicated in 5% to 10% of inpatients, but the risk-benefit ratio is unknown. We studied patients older than 85 years undergoing upper and lower GI endoscopy.We analyzed a retrospective cohort of inpatients older than 85 years between 2004 and 2012, all explored by upper and complete lower GI endoscopy. Initial indications, including iron deficiency anemia (IDA), other anemias, GI bleeding, weight loss, and GI symptoms, were noted, as were endoscopy or anesthesia complications, immediate endoscopic diagnosis, and the ability to modify the patients' therapeutics. Deaths and final diagnosis for initial endoscopic indication were analyzed after at least 12 months.We included 55 patients, 78% women, with a median age, reticulocyte count, hemoglobin, and ferritin levels of 87 (85-99), 56 (24-214) g/L, 8.6 (4.8-12.9) g/dL, and 56 (3-799) μg/L, respectively. IDA was the most frequent indication for endoscopy (60%; n = 33). Immediate diagnoses were found in 64% of the patients (n = 35), including 25% with GI cancers (n = 14) and 22% with gastroduodenal ulcers or erosions (n = 12). Cancer diagnosis was associated with lower reticulocyte count (45 vs. 60 G/L; P = .02). Among the 35 diagnoses, 94% (n = 33) led to modifications of the patients' therapeutics, with 29% of the patients deciding on palliative care (n = 10). No endoscopic complications lead to death. Follow-up of >12 months was available in 82% (n = 45) of the patients; among these patients, 40% (n = 27) died after an average 24 ± 18 months. Cancer diagnosis was significantly associated with less ulterior red cell transfusion (0% vs. 28%; P = .02) and fewer further investigations (6.7% vs. 40%; P = .02).Upper and complete lower GI endoscopy in patients older than 85 years appears to be safe, and enables a high rate of immediate diagnosis, with significant modifications of therapeutics. GI cancers represented more than one-third of the endoscopic diagnoses.

ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention of Acute Diarrheal Infections in Adults

Acute diarrheal infections are a common health problem globally and among both individuals in the United States and traveling to developing world countries. Multiple modalities including antibiotic and non-antibiotic therapies have been used to address these common infections. Information on treatment, prevention, diagnostics, and the consequences of acute diarrhea infection has emerged and helps to inform clinical management. In this ACG Clinical Guideline, the authors present an evidence-based approach to diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of acute diarrhea infection in both US-based and travel settings.

Risks and Benefits of Colonoscopy in Patients 90 Years or Older, Compared With Younger Patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Although the numbers of medical procedures performed on extremely elderly patients (90 years or older, nonagenarians) are increasing, there are no data on the performance, diagnostic yield, or safety of colonoscopy for these patients. We compared the performance and safety of diagnostic colonoscopy, as well as lesions detected, in nonagenarians with patients who were 75 to 79 years old.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, we compared data from 76 extremely elderly patients (90 years or older) with data from 140 very elderly patients (75 to 79 years old, controls), all of whom underwent diagnostic colonoscopy from January 2010 through March 2013 at Virginia Mason Medical Center. All colonoscopies were performed by 15 endoscopists. We compared rates of colonoscopy completion, bowel preparation quality, diagnostic yield, and adverse events.

RESULTS

In extremely elderly patients, more colonoscopies were performed under general anesthesia, compared with controls (P < .001). When extremely elderly patients underwent colonoscopies with moderate sedation, lower doses of midazolam and fentanyl were given, compared with controls (P < .001). Colonoscopies were completed in a lower proportion of extremely elderly patients (88.2% vs. 99.3% for controls, P < .001), and these patients had a higher incidence of inadequate bowel preparation (29.7% vs. 15.0% for controls, P = .011). Colonoscopies were also associated with cardiopulmonary events in a higher proportion of extremely elderly patients (P = .006) as well as overall adverse events, compared with controls (P = .002). A higher proportion of extremely elderly patients were found to have advanced neoplasia (28.4% vs. 6.4% of controls, P < .001) as well as any neoplasia (P < .001 vs. controls). A greater percentage of extremely elderly patients also had large lesions (P = .002) and malignancies detected by histology (P < .001 vs. controls). Eleven extremely elderly patients (14.9%) were found to have cancer or high-grade dysplasia by colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients 90 years or older, diagnostic colonoscopy is associated with increased risk for incomplete procedure, inadequate bowel preparation, and adverse events. However, a large proportion of patients are found to have advanced neoplasia and cancer, compared with patients 75 to 79 years old.

Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in the elderly: updates and controversies

Colorectal cancer is common worldwide, and the elderly are disproportionately affected. Increasing age is a risk factor for the development of precancerous adenomas and colorectal cancer, thus raising the issue of screening and surveillance in older patients. Elderly patients are a diverse and heterogeneous group, and special considerations such as comorbid medical conditions, functional status and cognitive ability play a role in deciding on the utility of screening and surveillance. Colorectal cancer screening can be beneficial to patients, but at certain ages and under some circumstances the harm of screening outweighs the benefits. Increasing adverse events, poorer bowel preparation and more incomplete examinations are observed in older patients undergoing colonoscopy for diagnostic, screening and surveillance purposes. Decisions regarding screening, surveillance and treatment for colorectal cancer require a multidisciplinary approach that accounts not only for the patient’s age but also for their overall health, preferences and functional status. This review provides an update and examines the challenges surrounding colorectal cancer diagnosis, screening, and treatment in the elderly.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients aged 75 years and older: risks, complications, and findings--a retrospective study

PURPOSE

Endoscopy of the gastrointestinal tract offers simultaneously diagnostic and therapeutic options and is increasingly performed in elderly patients due to a continuously growth of this population segment. Whereas safety data of diagnostic and interventional endoscopy in patients younger than 65 years are well characterized, only scarce data exist for elderly patients older than 75 years.

METHODS

We analyzed outcomes and complications of endoscopic procedures with focus on colonoscopy in patients aged 75 and older at a single tertiary referral center in Germany between 1996 and 2006.

RESULTS

A total of 3770 endoscopies (2270 gastroscopies, 735 colonoscopies, 765 ERCP) were performed in 1841 patients with a mean age of 79 years (range 75 to 97 years). Seventy-four percent of all patients suffered from relevant comorbidities. Therapeutic interventions were carried out in 43 % of colonoscopies. Complications were observed in approximately 1 %.

CONCLUSION

The observed complication rate in diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic procedures is not increased in elderly patients compared to the reported complication rates in younger patients.

Achieving the best bowel preparation for colonoscopy

Bowel preparation is a core issue in colonoscopy, as it is closely related to the quality of the procedure. Patients often find that bowel preparation is the most unpleasant part of the examination. It is widely accepted that the quality of cleansing must be excellent to facilitate detecting neoplastic lesions. In spite of its importance and potential implications, until recently, bowel preparation has not been the subject of much study. The most commonly used agents are high-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) electrolyte solution and sodium phosphate. There has been some confusion, even in published meta-analyses, regarding which of the two agents provides better cleansing. It is clear now that both PEG and sodium phosphate are effective when administered with proper timing. Consequently, the timing of administration is recognized as one of the central factors to the quality of cleansing. The bowel preparation agent should be administered, at least in part, a few hours in advance of the colonoscopy. Several low volume agents are available, and either new or modified schedules with PEG that usually improve tolerance. Certain adjuvants can also be used to reduce the volume of PEG, or to improve the efficacy of other agents. Other factors apart from the choice of agent can improve the quality of bowel cleansing. For instance, the effect of diet before colonoscopy has not been completely clarified, but an exclusively liquid diet is probably not required, and a low-fiber diet may be preferable because it improves patient satisfaction and the quality of the procedure. Some patients, such as diabetics and persons with heart or kidney disease, require modified procedures and certain precautions. Bowel preparation for pediatric patients is also reviewed here. In such cases, PEG remains the most commonly used agent. As detecting neoplasia is not the main objective with these patients, less intensive preparation may suffice. Special considerations must be made for patients with inflammatory bowel disease, including safety and diagnostic issues, so that the most adequate agent is chosen. Identifying neoplasia is one of the main objectives of colonoscopy with these patients, and the target lesions are often almost invisible with white light endoscopy. Therefore excellent quality preparation is required to find these lesions and to apply advanced methods such as chromoendoscopy. Bowel preparation for patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding represents a challenge, and the strategies available are also reviewed here.

Would you recommend screening colonoscopy for the very elderly?

Life expectancy in Korea has increased, and the number of screening colonoscopies in the elderly has also dramatically increased. The net benefit of colonoscopy in the very elderly (≥80 years of age as defined by the World Health Organization) may be reduced because of the competing risk of mortality due to other diseases. Therefore, the decision to perform screening colonoscopy may be more complex in this age group. As the potential increase in life expectancy due to screening colonoscopy is significantly reduced in the very elderly, this procedure should be limited to those among the very elderly who have substantial life expectancies. Furthermore, considering the common major complications associated with colonoscopy, poor bowel preparation, and the possibility of incomplete colonoscopies in the very elderly, the performance of screening colonoscopy in the very elderly may not be an ideal recommendation. In terms of providing the greatest benefit to the most number of people, patients with the highest potential gain in terms of life expectancy, relative to the diagnostic yield, should be targeted for colonoscopy screening. This review addresses the unique considerations regarding screening colonoscopy in the very elderly and the individualized approach, which involves the weighing of the risks and benefits for each individual with consideration of their overall health status.

Colorectal cancer of the elderly

OPINION STATEMENT

Colorectal cancer (CRC) disproportionately affects the elderly. Older age is a strong risk factor for both the development of precancerous adenomas and CRC, thus raising the issue of screening and surveillance in older patients. However, screening and surveillance decisions in the elderly can be complex and challenging. Elderly patients are a diverse and heterogeneous group and special considerations such as co-morbid medical conditions, functional status, and cognitive ability play a role in one's decisions regarding the utility of screening and surveillance. Such considerations also play a role in factors related to screening modalities, such as colonoscopy, as well as CRC treatment options and regimens. This review addresses many of the unique factors associated with CRC of the elderly and critically examines many of the controversies and challenges surrounding CRC in older patients.

Endoscopy in the elderly: risks, benefits, and yield of common endoscopic procedures

There has been limited research examining the risks, benefits, and use of common endoscopic procedures in the elderly. Furthermore, gastroenterology training programs do not routinely incorporate elderly concerns when dealing with common gastrointestinal issues. There exists a broad array of endoscopic procedures with varying inherent risks that must be weighed with each elderly patient in mind. This article discusses the benefits and drawbacks of the most common procedures and indications for endoscopy including upper endoscopy, colonoscopy, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic ultrasound, percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, and deep enteroscopy.

The impact of age on colorectal cancer incidence, treatment, and outcomes in an equal-access health care system

BACKGROUND

Inferior outcomes in younger patients with colorectal cancer may be associated with multiple factors, including tumor biology, delayed diagnosis, disparities such as access to care, and/or treatment differences.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine age-based colorectal cancer outcomes in an equal-access health care system.

DESIGN

This study is a retrospective large multi-institutional database analysis.

PATIENTS

Patients with colorectal cancer included in the Department of Defense Automated Central Tumor Registry (January 1993 to December 2008) were stratified by age <40, 40 to 49, 50 to 79, and ≥80 years to determine the effect of age on incidence, treatment, and outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were the stage at presentation, adjuvant therapy use, 3- and 5-year disease-free survival, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Some 7948 patients were identified; most (77%) patients were in the 50- to 79-year age group. Overall, 25% presented with stage III disease. Compared with patients aged 50 to 79 and ≥80 years, patients aged <40 and 40 to 49 years presented more frequently with advanced disease (stage III (35% and 35% vs 28% and 26%) and stage IV (24% and 21% vs 18% and 15%); all p < 0.001). Adjuvant chemotherapy use in stage III patients was 62%; those patients ≥80 and 50 to 79 years had decreased use (p < 0.001). Overall recurrence was 8.1% at 3 years and 9.7% at 5 years, with the highest rates in patients <40 years (11.8%; p = 0.007). Overall survival was worse in patients ≥80 years, whereas the remaining cohorts were similar. For stage III disease, patients 40 to 49 years had the highest survival among all cohorts (p < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the lack of specific comorbid information and the limitations inherent to large database reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

In an equal-access system, young age at presentation (<50 years) was associated with advanced stage and higher recurrence of colorectal cancer, but similar survival in comparison with older patients. Although increased adjuvant therapy use in younger patients may partially account for stage-specific increases in survival, the relative decreased chemotherapy use overall requires further evaluation.

Colorectal cancer and the elderly

Colorectal cancer and precancerous adenomas disproportionately affect the elderly, necessitating the need for screening and surveillance in this group. However, screening and surveillance decisions in the elderly can be challenging. Special considerations such as comorbid medical conditions, functional status, and cognitive ability play a role in one's decisions regarding the utility of screening and surveillance as well as the success and safety of various screening modalities. This article explores the evidence for screening and surveillance in the elderly, and addresses key challenges unique to this population.

Yearly diagnostic yield of colonoscopy in patients age 80 years or older, with a special interest in colorectal cancer

AIM

A high diagnostic yield of colonoscopy has been reported in elderly patients, but there is no data on the yearly yield. Our aim was to detect the yearly yield of colonoscopy in elderly patients.

METHODS

All consecutive endoscopies in the years 1992-2009 were included. Important endoscopic diagnoses were defined as colorectal cancer (CRC), polyps, diverticuli and inflammation.

RESULTS

In total, 19 569 endoscopies were performed, of which 1706 (8.7%) were in patients age 80 years or older. The number of women was significantly higher (P < 0.001). The percentage of patients who were 80 years or older was higher than in the general population and remained stable during the study period, though there has been a proportional increase of elderly people in the general population. Inconclusive procedures were present in 106 (6.2%) elderly patients compared with 277 (1.6%) patients under 80 years of age (P < 0.001). There were no significant changes in the consecutive years. A procedure revealing no endoscopic diagnosis was observed less often in patients who were 80 years or older (P < 0.001). CRC was diagnosed in 221 (19.6%) older patients. This figure remained more or less constant each year. Polyps were seen in 448 (8.8%) patients 80 years of age or older. The percentage of patients with diverticuli and inflammation was constant. The number of patients 80 years or older with CRC and polyps rose at a lower rate than the number of older people in the general population.

CONCLUSION

The yield of colonoscopy in patients 80 years or older was high and constant over the years. The number of tumors rose less than expected compared to the increase of elderly in the general population.

Adverse events in older patients undergoing colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies suggest that advancing age is an independent risk factor for experiencing adverse events during colonoscopy. Yet many of these studies are limited by small sample sizes and/or marked variation in reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence rates for specific adverse events in elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy and calculate incidence rate ratios for selected comparison groups.

SETTING AND PATIENTS

Elderly patients undergoing colonoscopy.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Perforation, bleeding, cardiovascular (CV)/pulmonary complications, and mortality.

RESULTS

Our literature search yielded 3328 articles, of which 20 studies met our inclusion criteria. Pooled incidence rates for adverse events (per 1000 colonoscopies) in patients 65 years of age and older were 26.0 (95% CI, 25.0-27.0) for cumulative GI adverse events, 1.0 (95% CI, 0.9-1.5) for perforation, 6.3 (95% CI, 5.7-7.0) for GI bleeding, 19.1 (95% CI, 18.0-20.3) for CV/pulmonary complications, and 1.0 (95% CI, 0.7-2.2) for mortality. Among octogenarians, adverse events (per 1000 colonoscopies) were as follows: cumulative GI adverse event rate of 34.9 (95% CI, 31.9-38.0), perforation rate of 1.5 (95% CI, 1.1-1.9), GI bleeding rate of 2.4 (95% CI, 1.1-4.6), CV/pulmonary complication rate of 28.9 (95% CI, 26.2-31.8), and mortality rate of 0.5 (95% CI, 0.06-1.9). Patients 80 years of age and older experienced higher rates of cumulative GI adverse events (incidence rate ratio 1.7; 95% CI, 1.5-1.9) and had a greater risk of perforation (incidence rate ratio 1.6, 95% CI, 1.2-2.1) compared with younger patients (younger than 80 years of age). There was an increased trend toward higher rates of GI bleeding and CV/pulmonary complications in octogenarians but neither was statistically significant.

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity of studies included and not all complications related to colonoscopy were captured.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients, especially octogenarians, appear to have a higher risk of complications during and after colonoscopy. These data should inform clinical decision making, the consent process, public health policy, and comparative effectiveness analyses.

Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in the elderly patient

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Older age is associated with a rise in colorectal cancer and adenomas, necessitating the need for CRC screening in older patients. However, decisions about CRC screening and surveillance in older adults are often difficult and challenging. The decision requires an individualized assessment that incorporates factors unique to performing colonoscopy in older adults in order to weigh the risks and benefits for each patient according to their overall health and preferences. This review addresses the factors unique to colorectal cancer and performing colonoscopy in older adults that are relevant in weighing the risks and benefits of screening and surveillance in this population.

Most bowel cancer symptoms do not indicate colorectal cancer and polyps: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Bowel symptoms are often considered an indication to perform colonoscopy to identify or rule out colorectal cancer or precancerous polyps. Investigation of bowel symptoms for this purpose is recommended by numerous clinical guidelines. However, the evidence for this practice is unclear. The objective of this study is to systematically review the evidence about the association between bowel symptoms and colorectal cancer or polyps.

METHODS

We searched the literature extensively up to December 2008, using MEDLINE and EMBASE and following references. For inclusion in the review, papers from cross sectional, case control and cohort studies had to provide a 2×2 table of symptoms by diagnosis (colorectal cancer or polyps) or sufficient data from which that table could be constructed. The search procedure, quality appraisal, and data extraction was done twice, with disagreements resolved with another reviewer. Summary ROC analysis was used to assess the diagnostic performance of symptoms to detect colorectal cancer and polyps.

RESULTS

Colorectal cancer was associated with rectal bleeding (AUC 0.66; LR+ 1.9; LR- 0.7) and weight loss (AUC 0.67, LR+ 2.5, LR- 0.9). Neither of these symptoms was associated with the presence of polyps. There was no significant association of colorectal cancer or polyps with change in bowel habit, constipation, diarrhoea or abdominal pain. Neither the clinical setting (primary or specialist care) nor study type was associated with accuracy.Most studies had methodological flaws. There was no consistency in the way symptoms were elicited or interpreted in the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that the common practice of performing colonoscopies to identify cancers in people with bowel symptoms is warranted only for rectal bleeding and the general symptom of weight loss. Bodies preparing guidelines for clinicians and consumers to improve early detection of colorectal cancer need to take into account the limited value of symptoms.

Advances in colorectal cancer screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains the third most commonly diagnosed cancer and second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Declines in CRC incidence and mortality over the past 20 years were attributed to CRC screening. Yet, only slightly more than half of the eligible at-risk population acknowledge being screened. To effectively meet the demands of screening in an enlarging, ethnically diverse, and aging population, a variety of modalities are needed. This article provides a focused assessment of effectiveness, limitations, and alternative available screening methods. New modalities endorsed in the updated guidelines (eg, fecal immunochemical tests, fecal DNA, and CT colonography) are reviewed. In addition, advances and updates in existing tests (eg, guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests and colonoscopy) are evaluated.

Outcome of colonoscopy in elderly African-American patients

BACKGROUND

Average-risk individuals should be offered a screening colonoscopy beginning at 50 years of age. However, there is no clear consensus on an age at which patients should no longer be offered a screening colonoscopy. The purpose of this study was to analyze the outcome of colonoscopy in elderly individuals based on the preprocedure indication.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients who underwent colonoscopy at Howard University Hospital from Jan 1, 2001 to Dec 31, 2005. Patients older than age 75 years were then stratified into two groups: one group classified as average risk for colon cancer and a second group classified as higher risk for finding cancer based on indication. Significant findings from colonoscopy were assigned if the patient was found to have an advanced adenoma, such as villous attributes, high-grade dysplasia, adenoma C1 cm, or cancer. All others findings at colonoscopy were categorized as having nonsignificant findings.

RESULTS

During this period, 922 elderly patients (75 years of age or older) underwent colonoscopy. Based on preprocedure indications, 606 patients were considered higher risk and 316 average risk. Among the preprocedure higher-risk patients, 532 had nonsignificant findings include hemorrhoids, diverticulosis, telangiectasias, lipomas, and inflammatory polyps. Among the preprocedure average-risk patients, 286 had nonsignificant findings. From the 110 patients who underwent screening colonoscopy, 99 patients had nonsignificant findings. Malignancy was found in 42 patients: 33 who had higher-risk indications and 9 who had average-risk indications.

CONCLUSION

Average-risk patients are less likely to have significant findings, including cancer, on colonoscopy.

Application of the BSG guidelines to a colonoscopy waiting list

Abstract Objective Currently priority for colonoscopy is given to diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Surveillance colonoscopies place a significant demand on the service. These are held on a separate waiting list in our institution, which is currently several years behind. The purpose of this study was to apply the BSG guidelines to this waiting list in our institution in order to ascertain whether patients are appropriately listed. Method This was a retrospective review. The patients on the waiting list whose procedures were due in 2004 and 2005 formed the study group. Information on demographics, previous colonoscopies, and indication was taken from the case notes. Results were analysed using Microsoft Excel. Results A total of 172 patients were overdue their colonoscopies. If the BSG guidelines were strictly adhered to, 49% of these patients were inappropriately listed. If applied less rigidly, 42% of patients should not have been on the list. The reasons for removal from the list were as follows: Thirty-nine patients were older than the upper age limit, 23 had had clear colonoscopies after adenomatous polyp follow up, four were listed for diverticular disease follow up, four for metaplastic polyps, one for constipation and one for per rectum (PR) bleed follow up. Conclusion With strict application of the BSG guidelines to a surveillance colonoscopy waiting list, 49% of the patients on the list do not need the procedure. It is recommended that consultant led education and control of the waiting list be used to reduce unnecessary investigations.

Half of elderly patients routinely treated for colorectal cancer receive a sub-standard treatment

BACKGROUND

Several database studies report a lack of care in elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE

To describe the management of elderly patients admitted for colorectal cancer; to identify factors associated with standard management according to recommendations and to study factors influencing the survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All consecutive patients over 75 years managed for a colorectal adenocarcinoma in our hospital from 1995 to 2000 and followed until 2006 were retrospectively included. The appropriateness of the management of their disease according to the recommendations available at that time was assessed. Several risk factors in receiving the standard cancer treatment were tested using univariate and then multivariate logistic regression. Risk factors of survival were studied using univariate and then multivariate survival analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred and ten patients were included. Median age was 82 years (range: 75-96). A surgical treatment was performed in 96 patients. The median overall survival was 32 (1-108) months. A standard cancer treatment according to recommendations was performed in 53 (48%) patients: adjuvant chemotherapy in 6/23 patients with stage III tumour, palliative chemotherapy in 3/18 patients with stage IV tumour and adjuvant radiotherapy in 4/14 patients who had a rectal tumour resection. Multivariate analysis retains tumour stage I or II (OR=7.6, 95% C.I.=[2.9-19.9], p<0.0001) as the only factor associated with standard treatment and presence of metastasis (HR=3.9, 95% C.I. [1.4-10.8], p=0.005), and Charlson's score >3 (HR=28.9, 95% C.I. [2.5-335.6], p=0.001) as independent risk factors of poor survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Fifty two percent of elderly patients have had a sub-standard cancer treatment. The majority had a surgical treatment, but only a few received chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Metastasis, older age and Charlson's comorbidity score are the main prognosis factors of poor survival.

Iron status and colorectal cancer in symptomatic elderly patients

OBJECTIVE

The study aim is to determine the relationship between the prevalence of colorectal cancer and iron status in elderly anemic and non-anemic patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 359 consecutive elderly patients, aged 70 years and more, who presented to a geriatric department and who underwent a total colonoscopy. The histopathologic diagnosis of colorectal carcinoma was the primary outcome measure, and its presence was compared with the iron status, evaluated by serum ferritin and hemoglobin levels.

RESULTS

Less than half of the patients with colorectal carcinoma had iron-deficiency anemia. The prevalence of colorectal carcinoma was similar among patients with a serum ferritin level less than 50 microg/L (16%), between 50 and 100 mirog/L (20%), and greater than 100 microg/L (13%), and was not different between anemic and non-anemic patients. Sex (odds ratio for men 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-3.9) and increasing age (6.6% per year; 95% CI, 1.2-12.4), but not hemoglobin and serum ferritin, were independent risk factors for colorectal carcinoma. Those with a proximal colorectal carcinoma had a lower hemoglobin and ferritin level and a higher prevalence of iron-deficiency anemia compared with patients with a distal colorectal carcinoma.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of colorectal carcinoma is high in anemic and non-anemic elderly symptomatic patients, irrespective of the iron status. Therefore, the decision to order a colonoscopy in older patients should not only be considered in patients with anemia or iron deficiency but also in patients with suspicious symptoms without anemia or iron deficiency.

Splenic Rupture: An Unusual Complication of Colonoscopy

Splenic injury is a known, albeit rare, complication of diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy. Within a 6-month period, we observed two colonoscopic splenic injuries. We report these two cases of splenic injury who presented differently after colonoscopy: one presented as frank hemorrhagic shock, and the other as a subacute splenic hemorrhage with symptomatic anemia. The first patient presented with hemorrhagic shock several hours after a diagnostic colonoscopy and required an emergency splenectomy. The second patient presented with symptomatic anemia several days after a diagnostic colonoscopy and was treated by angiographic embolization. Clinical presentation and discussion of the mechanisms of injury, available treatment options, and strategies for preventing colonoscopic splenic injuries are presented. Awareness of this complication is paramount in early recognition and management of this potentially life-threatening injury.

Colonoscopy in the very elderly: a review of 157 cases

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is currently the best diagnostic modality for evaluating colonic diseases but studies of its use in the very elderly are limited.

METHODS

A single-institution review of all patients aged 85 years or older who underwent colonoscopy from June 2003 to June 2005 was performed. Parameters evaluated included indications for colonoscopy, findings, ability to perform a complete colonoscopy, and immediate and delayed (< or =21 days) complications.

RESULTS

A total of 157 patients aged 85 years or older (median = 87, range = 85-99) underwent colonoscopy during the two-year period. The cecal intubation rate was 90%. Number of cancers detected/indications for colonoscopy include gross or occult bleeding per rectum, 3/51 (5.9%); abnormal physical exam, 1/2 (50%); abnormal abdominal computed tomography, 3/5 (60%); anemia, 1/25 (4.0%); screening, 0/14; previous history of colonic malignancy, 0/10; previous history of polyps, 0/21; change in bowel habits, 0/5; family history of colonic malignancy, 0/6; abdominal pain, 0/4; diarrhea, 0/6; fecal impaction, 0/2; unknown, 0/6. Immediate complications included hemorrhage at a polypectomy site in one patient that was controlled endoscopically, one episode of bradycardia, and one incident of atrial fibrillation. There were no delayed complications resulting from colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that colonoscopy can be safely and successfully performed in the very elderly. In patients with symptoms or suggestive radiographic findings, cancer was detected in 4.0%-60% of cases. No cases of cancer were discovered in those patients who were asymptomatic.