EUS and ERCP complication rates are not increased in elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: Further studies evaluating the safety of advanced endoscopic procedures in elderly patients are needed. AIM: To evaluate the safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the elderly. METHODS: The study population, consisting of 1,000 patients who underwent ERCP or EUS, was divided into two cohorts. The elderly cohort consisted of patients ≥ 75 years old. The nonelderly cohort consisted of patients <75 years old. The data collected included demographic information, type of procedure completed, procedure medication used, and endoscopic intervention performed. Complications included any event which occurred during the procedure or up to 1 month post procedure. RESULTS: A total of 600 ERCPs and 400 EUS were included. The mean age of the elderly cohort was 80 years (range 75-95 years, n = 184) versus 54 years (range 13-74 years, n = 816) for the nonelderly cohort. The ERCP complication rate was 10.0% in the elderly versus 10.6% (P = 1.0) for the nonelderly. The EUS complication rate was 4.8% in the elderly versus 3.1% in the nonelderly (P = 0.49). The overall complication rates were identical at 7.6% (P = 1.0). Sedation doses were lower for the elderly cohort (P < 0.001). There was a higher rate of procedure bleeding in the elderly cohort (P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Advanced age is not a contraindication for advanced endoscopic procedures. There is no significant increase in the rate of overall procedure-related complications seen with either ERCP or EUS in elderly patients; however, elderly patients have a higher risk of bleeding. Less procedure-related sedation medication is required for elderly patients.

Predictors of early recurrence of benign esophageal strictures.

OBJECTIVE: In the era of liberal proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use, benign esophageal strictures remain a significant management problem, with 30-40% of patients experiencing symptomatic recurrence within 1 yr of successful dilation. We therefore sought to examine predictors of early recurrence of benign esophageal strictures after endoscopic dilation. METHODS: Predictors for stricture recurrence were examined in 87 consecutive outpatients undergoing initial dilation over a 1-yr period. Patients with symptomatic recurrence of dysphagia requiring repeat dilation within 1 yr of initial successful dilation (cases) were compared to patients who did not require redilation (controls). Predictors were assessed by univariate and multivariate analysis. Kaplan-Meier analysis of significant predictors using time to first redilation was also performed. RESULTS: Of the patients, 36 required repeat dilation within 1 yr, whereas 51 did not (median follow-up, 33 months). Of all strictures, 67 (77%) were peptic, with the remainder caused by radiation, drug-related injury, or congenital stenosis, among other causes. In multivariate analysis, nonpeptic strictures were significant predictors for early recurrence, as was a narrower stricture diameter. For peptic strictures, the persistence of heartburn after dilation and the presence of a hiatal hernia were significant predictors. Of all peptic strictures, 84% of patients were on PPIs after dilation, with no difference between cases and controls. Of all patients with persistent heartburn after dilation, 90% were on PPIs. CONCLUSIONS: The persistence of heartburn after dilation is a strong predictor for early symptomatic recurrence of benign esophageal peptic strictures, despite a high rate of PPI use. This may suggest persistent acid reflux requiring optimization of acid reduction therapy. Alternatively, combined acid and alkaline reflux may account for progressive injury despite PPI therapy. Esophageal pH studies may be invaluable in making the distinction between acid and non-acidic (alkaline) reflux. Nonpeptic strictures are also more likely to have early recurrences and are therefore more difficult to manage.