Safety and Efficacy of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Patients with Performance Status 4

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Over 2.5 million gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures are carried out in the United Kingdom (UK) every year. Procedures are carried out with local anaesthetic r with sedation. Sedation is commonly used for gastrointestinal endoscopy, but the type and amount of sedation administered is influenced by the complexity and nature of the procedure and patient factors. The elective and emergency nature of endoscopy procedures and local resources also have a significant impact on the delivery of sedation. In the UK, the vast majority of sedated procedures are carried out using benzodiazepines, with or without opiates, whereas deeper sedation using propofol or general anaesthetic requires the involvement of an anaesthetic team. Patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy need to have good understanding of the options for sedation, including the option for no sedation and alternatives, balancing the intended aims of the procedure and reducing the risk of complications. These guidelines were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Endoscopy Committee with input from major stakeholders, to provide a detailed update, incorporating recent advances in sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy.This guideline covers aspects from pre-assessment of the elective 'well' patient to patients with significant comorbidity requiring emergency procedures. Types of sedation are discussed, procedure and room requirements and the recovery period, providing guidance to enhance safety and minimise complications. These guidelines are intended to inform practising clinicians and all staff involved in the delivery of gastrointestinal endoscopy with an expectation that this guideline will be revised in 5-years' time.

Efficacy and Safety of Electrohydraulic Lithotripsy Using Peroral Cholangioscopy under Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Guidance in Older Adults: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Background and objectives: The safety of electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) in older adults remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of EHL using peroral cholangioscopy (POCS) under endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) guidance in older adults aged ≥80 years. Materials and Methods: This retrospective clinical study was conducted at a single center. Fifty patients with common bile duct stones who underwent EHL using POCS under ERCP guidance at our institution, between April 2017 and September 2022, were enrolled in this study. The eligible patients were divided into an elderly group (n = 21, age ≥80 years) and a non-elderly group (n = 29, age ≤79 years), and were analyzed. Results: A total of 33 and 40 EHL procedures were performed in the elderly and non-elderly groups, respectively. After excluding cases in which stone removal was performed at other institutions, complete removal of common bile duct stones was confirmed in 93.8% and 100% of the elderly and non-elderly groups, respectively (p = 0.20). The mean number of ERCPs required for complete removal of bile duct stones was 2.9 and 4.3 in the elderly and non-elderly groups, respectively (p = 0.17). In the EHL session, the overall occurrence of adverse events was eight and seven in the elderly (24.2%) and non-elderly (17.5%) groups, respectively; however, the difference was insignificant (p = 0.48). Conclusions: EHL using POCS under ERCP guidance is effective in patients aged ≥80 years and there was no significant increase in adverse event rates compared to those aged ≤79 years.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for bile duct stones in patients with a performance status score of 3 or 4

BACKGROUND

As the aging population grows worldwide, the rates of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for common bile duct stones (CBDS) in older patients with a poor performance status (PS) have been increasing. However, the data on the safety and efficacy of ERCP for CBDS in patients with a PS score of 3 or 4 are lacking, with only a few studies having investigated this issue among patients with poor PS.

AIM

To examine the safety and efficacy of ERCP for CBDS in patients with a PS score of 3 or 4.

METHODS

This study utilized a retrospective multi-centered design of three institutions in Japan for 8 years to identify a total of 1343 patients with CBDS having native papillae who underwent therapeutic ERCP. As a result, 1113 patients with a PS 0-2 and 230 patients with a PS 3-4 were included. One-to-one propensity-score matching was performed to compare the safety and efficacy of ERCP for CBDS between patients with a PS 0-2 and those with a PS 3-4.

RESULTS

The overall ERCP-related complication rates in all patients and propensity score-matched patients with a PS 0-2 and 3-4 were 9.0% (100/1113) and 7.0% (16/230; P = 0.37), and 4.6% (9/196) and 6.6% (13/196; P = 0.51), respectively. In the propensity score-matched patients, complications were significantly more severe in the group with a PS 3-4 than in the group with a PS 0-2 group (P = 0.042). Risk factors for complications were indications of ERCP and absence of antibiotics in the multivariate analysis. Therapeutic success rates, including complete CBDS removal and permanent biliary stent placement, in propensity score-matched patients with a PS 0-2 and 3-4 were 97.4% (191/196) and 97.4% (191/196), respectively (P = 1.0).

CONCLUSION

ERCP for CBDS can be effectively performed in patients with a PS 3 or 4. Nevertheless, the indication for ERCP in such patients should be carefully considered with prophylactic antibiotics.