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

Colonoscopy in the nonagenarian population

BACKGROUND

With increasing life expectancy, there is an increasing proportion of nonagenarians undergoing both elective and emergency surgical procedures. The decision as to whom will benefit from surgical procedures is however difficult to ascertain and still remains a challenge to clinicians. This study is aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of colonoscopy in the nonagenarian population, and to determine if the outcomes are acceptable for us to continue to offer such interventions.

METHODS

Retrospective study of patients of Dr. G.R (Gastroenterologist) and Dr. W.B (Colorectal Surgeon) between 1 January 2018 and 31 November 2022. All patients who were ≥90 years old and had a colonoscopy was included in the study. Exclusion criteria were patients who were less than 90 years old, had a flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy as part of their surgical procedure.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

post-colonoscopy complications and length of stay.

SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

reasons for colonoscopy, significant colonoscopy findings, 30-day morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were included in the study. Median age was 91 (90-100) years old. 33.3% of the patients were males. Seventy percent of the patients were ASA 3. Median length of hospital stay was 1 day. 11.7% of patients were found to have colorectal malignancy. There were no complications after the colonoscopy. There were no 30-day re-admission, morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSION

Colonoscopy can be performed safely in carefully selected nonagenarian patients with acceptable low complication rates.

Efficacy and safety of 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid for bowel preparation in elderly: comparison with oral sulfate solution

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Recently, 1 L of polyethylene glycol (PEG) plus ascorbic acid (Asc) has been introduced in Korea as a colonoscopy preparation agent. Data on its efficacy and safety in older adults have been limited. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 1 L PEG/Asc in older adults by comparing it with oral sulfate solution (OSS).

METHODS

A prospective multicenter randomized study was conducted with subjects aged ≥ 65 years who underwent colonoscopy. The participants were randomized to receive 1 L PEG/Asc or OSS. The primary endpoint was successful bowel preparation, defined as total Boston Bowel Preparation Scale ≥ 6, and ≥ 2 at each segment. Patient satisfaction, adverse events, and renal function changes were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Among the 106 patients, 104 were finally included in the analysis. Overall, successful bowel preparation was achieved in 96.2% of both 1 L PEG/Asc and OSS groups. The satisfaction scores for taste, total amount ingested, overall feeling, and willingness to repeat the same regimen were not significantly different between the groups. Adverse events of moderate or higher severity occurred in 16 and 10 cases in the 1 L PEG/Asc and OSS group, respectively. There were no significant changes in electrolyte levels or renal function from baseline.

CONCLUSION

The successful bowel preparation rate was > 90% in both groups without severe adverse effects and significant changes in renal function. As a new low-dose preparation regimen for colonoscopy in older adults, 1 L PEG/Asc, is as effective and safe as OSS.

Safety and importance of colonoscopy in nonagenarians

BACKGROUND

With the growth of the aging population, the need for colonoscopies in nonagenarians is rising. However, few data on colonoscopies in extremely elderly individuals are available. To better acknowledge the role of colonoscopies in this specific group of patients, we conducted this study to evaluate the safety and clinical impact of colonoscopy in nonagenarian patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study comparing nonagenarians who received colonoscopy in a tertiary medical center in Taiwan in 2016 with 76- to 80-year-old patients (relatively elderly patients) who were 1:1 propensity score matched by sex as the control subjects. The postcolonoscopy 30-day adverse events, mortality, and long-term survival were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 137 nonagenarians and 137 relatively elderly patients were included. The nonagenarians receiving colonoscopy were more likely to be hospitalized (40.1% vs 19.7%, p < 0.001), and the adjusted colonoscopy completion rates were comparable in both groups (92.0% vs 97.1%, p = 0.063). The overall adverse event rate and postcolonoscopy 30-day mortality rates were low in both groups (2.9% vs 1.5%, p = 0.409 and 2.2% vs 1.5%, p = 0.652, respectively). A total of 18.2% of the nonagenarians were diagnosed with advanced neoplasia. Among the nonagenarians diagnosed with colorectal cancer, the patients receiving surgery had a significantly lower risk of death than the patients receiving conservative management (hazards ratio 0.1044, 0.01275-0.8529, p = 0.0352).

CONCLUSION

Colonoscopy in patients older than 90 years is generally safe. Colonoscopy findings that led to surgery in nonagenarians diagnosed with colorectal cancer were associated with survival benefits.

Risk Factors Associated with Colorectal Cancer in Octogenarians Can Help Stratify the Need for Colonoscopy

Objective Colonoscopy is increasingly performed in octogenarians for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC), but its benefits may be outweighed by its risks. The aim of the present study was to identify the risk factors for CRC in octogenarians presenting for colonoscopy to help stratify the need for this procedure.

Methods A retrospective analysis of 434 patients aged ≥ 80 years referred for a colonoscopy between January 2018 and December 2019. Comparisons were made between those with and without CRC and advanced adenoma (AA). The primary endpoint was to identify the clinical variables predictive of CRC and AA, and the secondary endpoints were complications and death 30 days after the procedure.

Results Colonoscopy was performed in 434 octogenarians, predominantly for symptoms, with CRC in 65 (15.0%) patients. Iron deficiency was associated with a higher risk of having CRC identified on colonoscopy (odds ratio [OR]: 2.33; 95% confidence interval [95%CI] =  1.36–4.00), but not symptoms such as bleeding, weight loss, or diarrhea. A colonoscopy in the last 10 years was protective, with a lower risk of CRC (OR: 0.45; 95%CI = 0.22–0.93). Patients with both normal iron stores and a colonoscopy within 10 years had a 92.5% chance of not having CRC. No variables were predictive of AA. Patients with complications, including death, were older and more likely to have underlying cardiorespiratory disease.

Conclusion Iron status and colonoscopy within 10 years can be used to predict the risk of CRC in octogenarians. Those with low predicted risk, especially if older and with cardiorespiratory disease, should be considered for non-invasive tests, such as computed tomography (CT) colonography, over colonoscopy.

Risk of metachronous neoplasia on surveillance colonoscopy among young and older patients after polypectomy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Few reports address the appropriate colonoscopy surveillance interval for individuals <50-years-old. We compared the risk of metachronous neoplasia among young (<50 years), adult (50-74 years) and older (≥75 y) age groups.

METHODS

This was a single center retrospective cohort study. Eligible subjects underwent their first colonoscopy with polypectomy between 2005 and 2014 and had at least one surveillance colonoscopy 3-5 years later. Patients (N = 495) were stratified at baseline into low-risk adenoma (LRA) and advanced adenoma groups. Study outcomes were overall and high-risk neoplasia at surveillance colonoscopy.

RESULTS

In the baseline LRA-group (N = 201), the 5-year risk of metachronous high-risk neoplasia was 12.5%, 15.2% and 22.5% (P = 0.426) in the young, adult and older age groups, respectively. In the baseline advanced adenoma group (N = 294), the 3-year risk of metachronous high-risk neoplasia was 13.3%, 14.8% and 25.3% (P = 0.041), respectively. In multivariate analysis, the only risk factor for metachronous high-risk neoplasia was older age (OR 1.876, CI 1.087-3.238; P = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the comparable risk of metachronous high-risk neoplasia in young and adult patients, surveillance recommendations after polypectomy should not differ. Since this risk is higher among older people, more frequent surveillance schedule can be considered for this age group but should be individualized.

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)

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.

Second look at Streptococcus sanguinis and the colon

Although the link between Streptococcus bovis bacteraemia and colon cancer is well established, bacteraemia from other viridans group streptococci that commonly colonise colonic mucosa may also herald occult malignancy. We present a case of Streptococcus sanguinis bacteraemia in an elderly man with new anaemia that led to the detection and removal of a high-grade colon neoplasm. This case contributes to a growing body of literature contending that unexplained streptococcal bacteraemia merits a thorough workup that may include relatively invasive procedures such as endoscopy. Diagnostic colonoscopy provides an opportunity to prevent invasive malignancy that may outweigh bleeding and perforation risks in elderly patients.

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.