Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Endoscopy in the Elderly: a Cautionary Approach, When to Stop

  • Intractable Disease in the Elderly: When Conventional Therapy Fails (S Katz, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

Performing endoscopic procedures in the elderly carries known enhanced risk compared to the general population. Weighing the benefits against the risks is easy when a patient is in immediate danger, but a gray area arises in screening protocols in an elderly patient of average risk. In this review, we compare national and international guidelines in average risk screening procedures (colonoscopic colorectal screening, Barrett’s surveillance) to find consensus for screening practice in the elderly. With minor differences between societal guidelines, it is widely agreed that 75 years is the appropriate age to begin to weigh risks and benefits according to a patient’s state of health and comorbidities. For colorectal screening, most guidelines advocate complete cessation of screening after the age of 85 years. Such consensus must take into account an aging population where patients are living healthier for longer and thus may be appropriate candidates for screening procedures even if beyond designated ages of screening cessation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Adolph RJ. The elderly, the very elderly and traditional practice patterns. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1990;16(4):793–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Travis AC, Pievsky D, Saltzman JR. Endoscopy in the elderly. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107(10):1495–501. quiz 1494, 1502.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Stein HJ, Siewert JR. Barrett’s esophagus: pathogenesis, epidemiology, functional abnormalities, malignant degeneration, and surgical management. Dysphagia. 1993;8(3):276–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cameron AJ, Souto EO, Smyrk TC. Small adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction: association with intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97(6):1375–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Portale G et al. Comparison of the clinical and histological characteristics and survival of distal esophageal-gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma in patients with and without barrett mucosa. Arch Surg. 2005;140(6):570–4. discussion 574-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wang KK, Sampliner RE, G. Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of. Updated guidelines 2008 for the diagnosis, surveillance and therapy of Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103(3):788–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. van der Burgh A et al. Oesophageal cancer is an uncommon cause of death in patients with Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut. 1996;39(1):5–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Cameron AJ et al. Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction and Barrett’s esophagus. Gastroenterology. 1995;109(5):1541–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cameron AJ et al. Prevalence of columnar-lined (Barrett’s) esophagus. Comparison of population-based clinical and autopsy findings. Gastroenterology. 1990;99(4):918–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hage M et al. Oesophageal cancer incidence and mortality in patients with long-segment Barrett’s oesophagus after a mean follow-up of 12.7 years. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2004;39(12):1175–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sikkema M et al. Risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma and mortality in patients with Barrett’s esophagus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;8(3):235–44. quiz e32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Conio M et al. Secular trends in the epidemiology and outcome of Barrett’s oesophagus in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Gut. 2001;48(3):304–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Csendes A et al. Prevalence of Barrett’s esophagus by endoscopy and histologic studies: a prospective evaluation of 306 control subjects and 376 patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux. Dis Esophagus. 2000;13(1):5–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hvid-Jensen F et al. Incidence of adenocarcinoma among patients with Barrett’s esophagus. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(15):1375–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Caygill CP et al. A single centre’s 20 years’ experience of columnar-lined (Barrett’s) oesophagus diagnosis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1999;11(12):1355–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yousef F et al. The incidence of esophageal cancer and high-grade dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;168(3):237–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Armstrong D et al. Canadian Consensus Conference on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease in adults—update 2004. Can J Gastroenterol. 2005;19(1):15–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. American Gastroenterological A et al. American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement on the management of Barrett’s esophagus. Gastroenterology. 2011;140(3):1084–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Boyer J et al. French Society of Digestive Endoscopy SFED guideline: monitoring of patients with Barrett’s esophagus. Endoscopy. 2007;39(9):840–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hirota WK et al. ASGE guideline: the role of endoscopy in the surveillance of premalignant conditions of the upper GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63(4):570–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Committee, A.S.o.P. et al. The role of endoscopy in Barrett’s esophagus and other premalignant conditions of the esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76(6):1087–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fitzgerald RC et al. British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut. 2014;63(1):7–42. Most recent guidelines from the British Society of Gastroenterology.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sharma P et al. Quality indicators for the management of Barrett’s esophagus, dysplasia, and esophageal adenocarcinoma: international consensus recommendations from the American Gastroenterological Association Symposium. Gastroenterology. 2015;149(6):1599–606. Most recent guidelines from the American Gastroenterological Association.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Ladas SD et al. Ethical issues in endoscopy: patient satisfaction, safety in elderly patients, palliation, and relations with industry. Second European Symposium on Ethics in Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy, Kos, Greece, July 2006. Endoscopy. 2007;39(6):556–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Committee, A.S.o.P. et al. Modifications in endoscopic practice for the elderly. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;78(1):1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Theocharis GJ et al. Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in octogenarians: clinical outcome and factors related to mortality. World J Gastroenterol. 2008;14(25):4047–53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Van Kouwen MC et al. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients aged 85 years or more. Results of a feasibility study in a district general hospital. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2003;37(1):45–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Seinela L et al. Reasons for and outcome of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients aged 85 years or more: retrospective study. BMJ. 1998;317(7158):575–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Clarke GA et al. The indications, utilization and safety of gastrointestinal endoscopy in an extremely elderly patient cohort. Endoscopy. 2001;33(7):580–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lee TC et al. Age is not a discriminating factor for outcomes of therapeutic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Hepatogastroenterology. 2007;54(77):1319–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lockhart SP et al. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in the elderly. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1985;290(6464):283.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Muravchick S. The elderly outpatient: current anesthetic implications. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2002;15(6):621–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Abraham NS et al. Sedation versus no sedation in the performance of diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a Canadian randomized controlled cost-outcome study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99(9):1692–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Carey EJ, Sorbi D. Unsedated endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2004;14(2):369–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Dumortier J et al. Unsedated transnasal EGD in daily practice: results with 1100 consecutive patients. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;57(2):198–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Garcia RT et al. Unsedated ultrathin EGD is well accepted when compared with conventional sedated EGD: a multicenter randomized trial. Gastroenterology. 2003;125(6):1606–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Howlander N. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2012. Bethesda: National Cancer Institute; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Harewood GC, Lawlor GO. Incident rates of colonic neoplasia according to age and gender: implications for surveillance colonoscopy intervals. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2005;39(10):894–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Harewood GC, Lawlor GO, Larson MV. Incident rates of colonic neoplasia in older patients: when should we stop screening? J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;21(6):1021–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Maheshwari S, Patel T, Patel P. Screening for colorectal cancer in elderly persons: who should we screen and when can we stop? J Aging Health. 2008;20(1):126–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kahi CJ et al. Survival of elderly persons undergoing colonoscopy: implications for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;66(3):544–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Ko CW, Sonnenberg A. Comparing risks and benefits of colorectal cancer screening in elderly patients. Gastroenterology. 2005;129(4):1163–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Day LW, Velayos F. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in the elderly: updates and controversies. Gut Liver. 2015;9(2):143–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Lee DW et al. Patient-controlled sedation versus intravenous sedation for colonoscopy in elderly patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56(5):629–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Wilson JA. Colon cancer screening in the elderly: when do we stop? Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 2010;121:94–103.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Romero RV, Mahadeva S. Factors influencing quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;5(2):39–46.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Inadomi JM, Sonnenberg A. The impact of colorectal cancer screening on life expectancy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000;51(5):517–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Terret C et al. Effects of comorbidity on screening and early diagnosis of cancer in elderly people. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(1):80–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Lieberman DA et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2012;143(3):844–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Cairns SR et al. Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in moderate and high risk groups (update from 2002). Gut. 2010;59(5):666–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Qaseem A et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: a guidance statement from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(5):378–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Care, C.T.F.o.P.H. Recommendations on screening for colorectal cancer in primary care. CMAJ. 2016;188(5):340–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Leddin DJ et al. Canadian Association of Gastroenterology position statement on screening individuals at average risk for developing colorectal cancer: 2010. Can J Gastroenterol. 2010;24(12):705–14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. von Karsa L, Patnick J, Segnan N. European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. First Edition—Executive summary. Endoscopy. 2012;44 Suppl 3:SE1–8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. NY-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, PH 7, 7th Floor, 622 W168th St, New York, NY, 10032, USA

    Rita Abdelmessih MD, Christopher D. Packey MD, PhD & Garrett Lawlor MD

Authors
  1. Rita Abdelmessih MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher D. Packey MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Garrett Lawlor MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Garrett Lawlor MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Rita Abdelmessih, Christopher D. Packey, and Garrett Lawlor declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Intractable Disease in the Elderly: When Conventional Therapy Fails

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abdelmessih, R., Packey, C.D. & Lawlor, G. Endoscopy in the Elderly: a Cautionary Approach, When to Stop. Curr Treat Options Gastro 14, 305–314 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-016-0101-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-016-0101-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation