The Indications, Utilization and Safety of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in an Extremely Elderly Patient Cohort

Background: In developed nations, increasing proportions of the population now reach advanced age. Physicians may be reluctant to refer such patients for noncritical diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, on the basis of perceived diminution of tolerance, safety and substantive benefits in these patients. We aimed to review the utility and safety of gastrointestinal endoscopy in an extremely elderly cohort.

Methods: The study involved 214 consecutive participants aged 85 years or more, between 1995 and 1997. They were identified using a prospective database linked to the endoscopy reporting system. Procedure type, indication, use of sedation, complications, and outcomes were evaluated.

Results: The median age was 87 (85 - 94, σ = 2). The female:male ratio was 3:2; 185 had undergone one procedure and 29 two or more; and 65 % of procedures were performed on an outpatient basis. Of the inpatient procedures, 10 % of all procedures were performed emergently, predominantly for upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Midazolam was administered to 129 patients (60 %), at a median dose of 2 mg (range 1 - 11); of these, 75 (35 %) also received a median dose of 25 μg fentanyl (range 12.5 - 125). Colonoscopy (n = 95) was the most frequently performed procedure, followed by esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) (n = 64) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (n = 21). There was no procedure-related mortality. The incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis was 5 %, colonic perforation 1 %, and cardiopulmonary complications in sedated patients, 0.6 %. The majority underwent procedures which related to active management of ongoing medical problems, and procedures were performed for palliative indications in only 15 (7 %) patients.

Conclusions: Gastrointestinal endoscopy is extremely safe and well tolerated in extremely elderly patients. Age alone should not influence decisions relating to its utilization.

References

• 1 US Census Bureau .1998 Population estimates. Dept. of Commerce 1998
• 2 Trias M, Targarona E M, Ros E, et al. Prospective evaluation of a minimally invasive approach for treatment of bile-duct calculi in the high-risk patient.  Surg Endosc. 1997;  11 (6) 632-635
• 3 Burtin P, Bour B, Charlois T, et al. Colonic investigations in the elderly: colonoscopy or barium enema?.  Aging. 1995;  7 (4) 190-194
• 4 Bergman J J, Rauws E A, Tijssen J G, et al. Biliary endoprostheses in elderly patients with endoscopically irretrievable common bile duct stones: report on 117 patients.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1995;  42 (3) 195-201
• 5 Solomon S A. Isaac T. Banerjee AK. Oxygen desaturation during endoscopy in the elderly (comment).  J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1993;  27 (2) 200
• 6 Winawer S J, Fletcher R H, Miller L, et al. Colorectal cancer screening: clinical guidelines and rationale.  Gastroenterology. 1997;  112 594-642
• 7 Vandervoort J, Tham T CK, Wong R CK, et al. Prospective analysis of risk factors for pancreatitis after diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;  43 A400
• 8 Vandervoort J, Tham T CK, Wong R CK, et al. Risk factors for pancreatitis after endoscopic manipulation of the pancreatic duct.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;  43 A414
• 9 Chan M F. Complications of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 1996;  6 (2) 287-303
• 10 Lee J G, Leung J W, Cotton P B. Acute cardiovascular complications of endoscopy: prevalence and clinical characteristics.  Dig Dis. 1995;  13 (2) 130-135
• 11 Cappell M S. Gastrointestinal endoscopy in high-risk patients.  Dig Dis. 1996;  14 (4) 228-244