Upper GI endoscopy in elderly patients: predictive factors of relevant endoscopic findings

Upper endoscopy in elderly patients: a multicentre, cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Both macroscopic and histological lesions are frequently detected at upper endoscopy in elderly patients. We assessed the prevalence of main endoscopic and histological alterations in elderly (> 65 years old) patients.

METHODS

In this study, clinical, endoscopic and histological features of patients referred for upper endoscopy in clinical practice were retrieved. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were executed. Comparisons with previous data were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1336 underwent upper endoscopy in the 28 participating centres. At endoscopy, at least one macroscopic lesion was present in overall 420 (31.4%) patients. Erosive gastritis (13.3%) and erosive oesophagitis (9.8%) were the most prevalent lesions, whilst Barrett's oesophagus, gastric ulcer, duodenal ulcer and erosive duodenitis were observed in 1.8%, 2%, 1.4% and 3.1% patients, respectively. Nine (0.6%) cases of oesophageal, 25 (1.8%) gastric and 2 (0.1%) duodenal neoplasia were detected. At histology, Helicobacter pylori infection was diagnosed in 99 (15.9%) patients, and extensive precancerous lesions on gastric mucosa were detected in 80 (14.5%) patients. Endoscopic lesions were more frequent in males, at first endoscopy and in those with alarm symptoms and lower during PPI therapy. At multivariate analysis, PPI therapy significantly reduced the probability of finding endoscopic lesions (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.46-0.99; P = 0.04), whilst neoplastic lesions were associated with presence of alarm symptoms (OR: 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1-2.1; P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the frequency of erosive and neoplastic lesions remained high in elderly patients, whilst the prevalence of both H. pylori infection and peptic ulcer was decreased.

Evaluation of Esophageal Dysphagia in Elderly Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

While guidelines exist for the evaluation and management of esophageal dysphagia in the general population, dysphagia disproportionately affects the elderly. In this article, we reviewed the literature on evaluating esophageal dysphagia in elderly patients and proposed a diagnostic algorithm based on this evidence.

RECENT FINDINGS

In older patients, dysphagia is often well compensated for by altered eating habits and physiologic changes, underreported by patients, and missed by healthcare providers. Once identified, dysphagia should be differentiated into oropharyngeal and esophageal dysphagia to guide diagnostic workup. For esophageal dysphagia, this review proposes starting with endoscopy with biopsies, given its relative safety even in older patients and potential for interventional therapy. If endoscopy shows a structural or mechanical cause, then further cross-sectional imaging should be considered to assess for extrinsic compression, and same session endoscopic dilation should be considered for strictures. If biopsies and endoscopy are normal, then esophageal dysmotility is more likely, and high-resolution manometry and additional workup should be performed following the updated Chicago Classification. Even after diagnosis of the root cause, complications including malnutrition and aspiration pneumonia should also be assessed and monitored, as they both result from and can further contribute to dysphagia. The successful evaluation of esophageal dysphagia in elderly patients requires a thorough, standardized approach to collecting a history, selection of appropriate diagnostic workup, and assessment of risk of potential complications, including malnutrition and aspiration.

Safety of oesophagogastroduodenoscopy in a nonagenarian population

BACKGROUND

invasive gastrointestinal (GI) procedures are increasingly performed on much older patients but data regarding oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) in this population are limited. We compared the indications, safety and benefits of OGD for nonagenarians compared to octogenarians.

METHODS

an observational retrospective review of patients who underwent OGD between 2013 and 2018 at a gastroenterology institute in one large hospital. Patients aged 90 and above 'nonagenarians' were compared to those aged 80-89 'octogenarians'.

RESULTS

472 patients (231 nonagenarians and 241 octogenarians), median age of 91 for nonagenarians (201 aged 90-94, 30 aged 95 and older) and 82 (174 aged 80-84, 67 aged 85-89) for octogenarians. GI bleeding was a more common and dyspepsia, a less common, indication for nonagenarians compared to octogenarians (55 and 7%, versus 43 and 18%). Significant findings and need for endoscopic treatments were both more commonly found in nonagenarians compared to octogenarians (25 and 24% versus 15 and 8%, respectively). General anaesthesia was more commonly given to nonagenarians (35 versus 10%). Immediate complications and 30-day mortality rate were similar between the groups: (2.6% of nonagenarians versus 1.6% of octogenarians). Of 30 patients aged 95 and older, 13% had late adverse events, compared to 1% of the overall cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

OGD appears safe in nonagenarians. Pathological findings and endoscopic interventions are more common. Decisions regarding OGD should not be based on age alone.

Efficacy and safety of etomidate-midazolam for screening colonoscopy in the elderly: A prospective double-blinded randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Recent studies have shown that etomidate is associated with fewer serious adverse events than propofol and has a noninferior sedative effect. We investigated whether etomidate-midazolam is associated with fewer cardiopulmonary adverse events and has noninferior efficacy compared to propofol-midazolam for screening colonoscopy in the elderly.

METHODS

A prospective, single-center, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial was performed. Patients aged over 65 years who were scheduled to undergo screening colonoscopy were randomized to receive either etomidate or propofol based on midazolam. The primary outcome was all cardiopulmonary adverse events. The secondary outcomes were vital sign fluctuation (VSF), adverse events disturbing the procedure, and sedation-related outcomes.

RESULTS

The incidence of cardiopulmonary adverse events was higher in the propofol group (72.6%) than in the etomidate group (54.8%) (P = .040). VSF was detected in 17 (27.4%) and 31 (50.0%) patients in the etomidate and propofol groups, respectively (P = .010). The incidence rate of adverse events disturbing the procedure was significantly higher in the etomidate group (25.8%) than in the propofol group (8.1%) (P = .008). Moreover, the incidence rate of myoclonus was significantly higher in the etomidate group (16.1%) than in the propofol group (1.6%) (P = .004). There was no statistical significance between the 2 groups with respect to sedation times and sedation-related outcomes including patients' and endoscopist's satisfaction. In the multivariate analysis, the etomidate group had significantly low odds ratio (OR) associated with VSF (OR: 0.407, confidence interval: 0.179-0.926, P = .032).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend using etomidate-midazolam in patients with high ASA score or vulnerable to risk factors; propofol-midazolam may be used as a guideline in patients with low ASA score.

[Gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients of advanced age]

The dramatic increase in life expectancy is leading to a significant increase in the use of gastrointestinal endoscopy in the elderly. Taking into account these demographic changes, the use of gastrointestinal endoscopy in this age group is of great importance. Although these procedures are generally safe and well tolerated even in very elderly patients, the onset of physiological changes associated with aging and the increased prevalence of cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities raise the risk of sedation related complications in these patients. Age alone is not a contraindication for performing any endoscopic procedure. However, elderly patients have their own peculiarities that require a detailed review of the characteristics, risks and benefits of endoscopic procedures in this specific context.

Complications and outcomes of routine endoscopy in the very elderly

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 In Japan, the elderly population has been increasing annually. The number of elderly patients for whom esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy (CS) is indicated also has been rising. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of routine endoscopy in a cohort of octogenarians aged 85 years and older - defined by the World Health Organization as the very elderly.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 A total of 5,586 patients underwent EGDs, and 2,484 patients underwent CSs performed at the Keio University Hospital from January to September 2014. One hundred eighty-five EGDs and 70 of the CS were performed in the very elderly. Six hundred nine EGDs and 262 CS were performed on younger patients (aged forties). Statistical analysis was performed by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

 On univariate analysis, the rate of adverse events (AEs) in the very elderly was significantly higher compared to the younger group (6.3 % vs. 1.1 %; P  < 0.01). Moreover, the very elderly cohort received substantial therapeutic intervention as compared to the younger (16.9 % vs. 6.9 %; P  < 0.01). On multivariate analysis, independent risk factors of AEs included: very elderly patients (odds ratio (OR) 3.30, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.05 - 10.35), inpatients (OR 3.22, 95 % CI 1.34 - 7.74), and use of pethidine hydrochloride prescription (OR 3.44, 95 % CI 1.51 - 7.81).

CONCLUSIONS

 Routine endoscopy in the very elderly incurs a significant risk of AEs, particularly when combined with pethidine hydrochloride prescription.

[Duodenal ulcers, gastric ulcers and Helicobacter pylori]

The mortality in elderly patients over the age of 80 years with peptic ulcers in the case of complications, such as bleeding and perforation is higher than in the general population. Duodenal ulcers are associated with Helicobacter pylori infections in 90% of cases and in 70% of gastric ulcers. The treatment of elderly patients is often difficult due to multimorbidity and polypharmacy and necessitates a geriatric approach. Ulcers are often caused by medication with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetylsalicylic acid. Despite the fact that progress in therapy has improved the prevalence and prognosis, the treatment of elderly patients with ulcers is complex.

Prevalence of lesions detected at upper endoscopy: an Italian survey

BACKGROUND

Prevalence of gastroduodenal lesions is changing in the last decades. Prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy may be involved in such a phenomenon. We assessed gastroduodenal lesions prevalence in a nationwide study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent upper endoscopy for the first time in 24 Italian centres between January 2012 and 31 March 2012 were enrolled. Prevalence of gastric ulcer (GU), duodenal ulcer (DU), gastric erosions (GE), duodenal erosions (DE), gastric polyp (GP), Barrett's oesophagus (BE), and neoplasia was assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 1054 (M/F: 388/666; Mean age: 57.5 ± 5 years) patients were enrolled. H. pylori infection was detected in 356 (33.9%) patients, 358 (34%) were taking NSAIDs, and 532 (50.5%) PPIs. PPI therapy was associated with a significantly lower H. pylori detection rate (27.8% vs 39.8%; OR: 0.6, 95% CI 0.45-0.77; P<0.001). GU, DU, GE, DE, GP and BE were detected in 17 (1.6%), 13 (1.2%), 150 (14.2%), 50 (4.7%), 51 (4.8%) and 17 (1.6%), respectively. Moreover, 3 (0.3%) distal gastric cancers were observed. H. pylori infection remained the most prevalent factor for all gastroduodenal lesions, but gastric polyp. One third of patients with GU and GE were taking only NSAIDs therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of peptic ulcer was very low (<3%), with a similar rate between DU and GU. As many as half patients were on ongoing PPI therapy. Such a therapy could affect both the detection rate of H. pylori infection and the real prevalence of gastroduodenal lesions.

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.