Endoscopic ultrasound in patients over 80 years old

Safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic solid mass in the elderly: A single-center retrospective study

AIM

There are few reports on the safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in the elderly. In this study, we investigated the safety of EUS-FNA for pancreatic solid masses in patients aged ≥80 years.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study. A total of 600 patients with pancreatic solid masses who underwent EUS-FNA under midazolam-based sedation at our institution between September 2016 and December 2022 were enrolled in this study. Eligible patients were divided into two groups: an elderly group aged ≥80 (n = 84), as well as a nonelderly group aged ≤79 (n = 516). These two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The elderly group required significantly fewer midazolam doses for sedation (P < 0.001). Adverse events occurred in eight patients (1.3%), including one (1.2%) and seven (1.4%) in the elderly and nonelderly groups, respectively (P = 0.90). There were no cases of early adverse events in the elderly group and six cases (1.2%) in the nonelderly group (P = 0.32). There was one case of late adverse events in both the elderly and nonelderly groups (P = 0.14), and both were needle tract seeding. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the proportion of cases in which percutaneous oxygen saturation decreased to ≤90% during the EUS-FNA.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis suggests that EUS-FNA for pancreatic solid masses can be safely performed in patients aged >80 years without increasing the adverse event rate compared to nonelderly patients aged <80 years. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2023; 23: 836-841.

Evaluation of diagnostic yield of EUS among patients with asymptomatic common bile duct dilation: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Common bile duct (CBD) dilation is a frequent indication for EUS. Among asymptomatic individuals, biliary dilation may not be clinically significant; however, EUS is often relied on for the exclusion of benign and malignant pathology that might require further intervention. The yield of EUS evaluation for this indication is not well characterized and has significant implications for health resource utilization because asymptomatic biliary dilation is prevalent. Through this systematic review, we sought to appraise the yield of EUS evaluation of asymptomatic patients with radiologic evidence of isolated CBD dilation.

METHODS

A protocolled search (PROSPERO: CRD42020193428) extracted original studies from the Cochrane Library, Ovid Embase, Google Scholar, Ovid Medline, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection that described diagnostic yield of EUS among asymptomatic patients with biliary dilation. Cumulative EUS diagnostic yield was calculated through meta-analysis of proportions using inverse variance methods and a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Of 2616 studies, 8 delineated the EUS yield among 224 asymptomatic patients. The cumulative yield of EUS for any pathology was 11.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6%- 21.6%). The EUS yield for benign etiologies was 9.2% (95% CI, 1.1%-21.9%), of which choledocholithiasis comprised 3.4% (95% CI, 0%-11.2%) and malignant etiologies .5% (95% CI, 0%-3.4%) of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS in patients with asymptomatic CBD dilation does yield findings of choledocholithiasis and malignancy, albeit at low rates. A cost-effectiveness analysis is warranted to further guide clinical decision-making in this area.

Endoscopic management of iatrogenic EUS-related duodenal perforations with over-the-scope clips

Background and study aims  Iatrogenic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) perforations are life-threatening adverse event and to date, surgery has been the main treatment for them. The aim of this study was to assess feasibility and safety of conservative treatment with over-the-scope clips (OTSC). Patients and methods  We performed a retrospective study, including iatrogenic EUS duodenal perforation with conservative endoscopic management from 2011 to August 2018. Patients who initial had surgical management were excluded. Results  In 8504 EUS procedure occurred, 13 perforations occurred (0.15 %). Eleven patients were included in the study, all women. Mean patient age was 75 years (range 68 - 88). Eighth of 11 perforations (72.7 %) were due to a radial probe and three of 11 (27.3 %) were due to a curvilinear probe. Eleven procedures (100 %) were performed as diagnostic. Defect size ranged from 10 to 15 mm. All procedures were successful. Three of eleven patients (27 %) had a stay in intensive care unit for less than 72 hours and length of total hospital stay ranged from 3 to 22 days. Conclusion  Conservative endoscopic treatment of Iatrogenic EUS perforation, with OTSC is feasible, efficient and safe.

[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.

Assessment of morbidity and mortality associated with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cystic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

With increased availability of imaging technology, detection of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCL) is on the rise. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) improves the diagnosis accuracy of PCL. Systematic evaluation of morbidity and mortality associated with EUS-FNA for PCL has not been carried out. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of morbidity and mortality associated with EUS-FNA.

METHODS

A literature search for relevant English-language articles was conducted on PubMed and EMBASE databases. Main outcome measures for this analysis were adverse effects of diagnostic EUS-FNA, and the associated morbidity and mortality, in patients with PCL.

RESULTS

Forty studies, with a combined subject population of 5124 patients with PCL, satisfied the inclusion criteria. Overall morbidity as a result of adverse events of EUS-FNA was 2.66% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.84-3.62%), and the associated mortality was 0.19% (95% CI: 0.09-0.32%). Common post-procedure adverse events included pancreatitis 0.92% (95% CI: 0.63-1.28%), hemorrhage 0.69% (95% CI: 0.42-1.02%), pain 0.49% (95% CI: 0.27-0.79%), infection 0.44% (95% CI: 0.27-0.66%), desaturation 0.23% (95% CI: 0.12-0.38%) and perforation 0.21% (95% CI: 0.11-0.36%). There was no peritoneal seeding in our study. Incidence of adverse events associated with prophylactic periprocedural antibiotic use was 2.77% (95% CI: 1.87-3.85%).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNA is a safe procedure for diagnosis of PCL and is associated with a relatively low incidence of adverse events. Most adverse events were mild, self-limiting, and did not require medical intervention.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Biopsy for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Pelvic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Preoperative diagnosis of pelvic lesions remains challenging despite advances in imaging technologies. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biopsy is an effective diagnostic modality for sampling the digestive tract and surrounding areas. However, a meta-analysis summarizing the diagnostic efficacy of EUS-guided biopsy for pelvic lesions has not been published.

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the utility of EUS-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of pelvic lesions.

METHODS

Articles were identified via structured database search; only studies where pelvic lesions were confirmed by surgery or clinical follow-up were included. Data extracted were selected with strict criteria. A fixed-effects model was used to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was also constructed.

RESULTS

Ten studies containing a total of 246 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity of EUS-guided biopsy for differential diagnosis of pelvic masses was 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.94), and the specificity was 0.93 (95% CI 0.86-0.97). The area under the SROC was 0.9631. The combined PLR, NLR, and DOR were 11.75 (95% CI 5.90-23.43), 0.12 (95% CI 0.07-0.20), and 100.06 (95% CI 37.48-267.10) respectively. There is potential presence of publication bias in this meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis shows that EUS-guided biopsy is a powerful tool for differentiating pelvic masses with a high sensitivity and specificity. Furthermore, it is a safe procedure with low rate of complication, although more high-quality prospective studies are required to be done.

Impact of Endoscopic Ultrasound Procedures in Various Pancreatobiliary Disorders in Indonesia Based on a Case Series in a Private Hospital

Background

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a common technique for assessing the pancreas and the biliary system; however, the potential complications have raised concern among endoscopists and patients. Recently, the need of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) as an additional tool of assessment before the ERCP procedure has been increasing. The need of EUS in developing countries is still a matter of debate regarding the cost, investment, and training. Here, we report the significant impact of EUS on several unselected interesting cases of pancreatobiliary disorders.

Method

We selected several interesting cases from the patients who underwent EUS at our private hospital in Jakarta, Indonesia. The EUS procedures were performed by one experienced endosonographer and one EUS trainee who are very experienced with transabdominal ultrasound. The equipment was an Olympus JF UCT 180 EUS scope which was connected to an Aloka IPF-1701C ultrasound machine (Tokyo, Japan).

Results

Five interesting cases were included from patients who underwent EUS due to pancreatobiliary disorders. The cases included recurrent pancreatitis due to pancreatic stone at the small branch that obstructed the main pancreatic duct, common bile duct (CBD) stone with insignificant duct dilatation, pancreatic head cancer with total obstruction at the distal CBD and portal vein infiltration, pancreas divisum in a young girl, and distal CBD mass that caused obstructive jaundice.

Conclusions

The EUS procedure has shown a significant impact in managing patients with pancreatobiliary diseases. In most developing countries, EUS needs to be evaluated further regarding the cost, investment, and training.

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.

Endoscopy in the elderly

With increasing age, the incidence of both benign and malignant gastrointestinal (GI) disease rises. Endoscopic procedures are commonly performed in elderly and very elderly patients to diagnose and treat GI disorders. There are a number of issues to contemplate when considering performing an endoscopic procedure in an elderly patient, including the anticipated benefits of endoscopy as well as the increased risks associated with procedural sedation and some endoscopic procedures. This review will focus on the yield and safety of endoscopic procedures in older adults.

Diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography: Assessment of safety and prevention of complications

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has gained wide acceptance as an important, minimally invasive diagnostic tool in gastroenterology, pulmonology, visceral surgery and oncology. This review focuses on data regarding risks and complications of non-interventional diagnostic EUS and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB). Measures to improve the safety of EUS und EUS-FNB will be discussed. Due to the specific mechanical properties of echoendoscopes in EUS, there is a low but noteworthy risk of perforation. To minimize this risk, endoscopists should be familiar with the specific features of their equipment and their patients’ specific anatomical situations (e.g., tumor stenosis, diverticula). Most diagnostic EUS complications occur during EUS-FNB. Pain, acute pancreatitis, infection and bleeding are the primary adverse effects, occurring in 1% to 2% of patients. Only a few cases of needle tract seeding and peritoneal dissemination have been reported. The mortality associated with EUS and EUS-FNB is 0.02%. The risks associated with EUS-FNB are affected by endoscopist experience and target lesion. EUS-FNB of cystic lesions is associated with an increased risk of infection and hemorrhage. Peri-interventional antibiotics are recommended to prevent cyst infection. Adequate education and training, as well consideration of contraindications, are essential to minimize the risks of EUS and EUS-FNB. Restricting EUS-FNB only to patients in whom the cytopathological results may be expected to change the course of management is the best way of reducing the number of complications.