Propensity score matching analysis for adverse events of EUS-guided biliary drainage in advanced elderly patients (PEACE study).
EUS
EUS-guided biliary drainage
adverse event
elderly
sedation
Journal
Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology
ISSN: 1756-283X
Titre abrégé: Therap Adv Gastroenterol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101478893
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
23
11
2021
accepted:
15
03
2022
entrez:
23
5
2022
pubmed:
24
5
2022
medline:
24
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Several studies have suggested that elderly patients, as well as younger patients, can be safely treated using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has not been clinically evaluated for very elderly patients. The present multicenter, retrospective study aimed to determine the safety of EUS-BD for advanced elderly patients. Patients who underwent EUS-BD during this period were retrospectively enrolled, and they were divided into two groups based on age: group A (age < 75 years) and group B (age ⩾ 75). In this study, capnographic monitoring was used only for elderly patients (age ⩾ 75 years). A total of 271 patients who underwent EUS-BD were enrolled in this study (group A = 177, group B = 94). The types of adverse events that were associated with EUS-BD was observed in 38 patients, and they did not differ significantly between two groups ( In conclusion, EUS-BD could be safety performed in advanced elderly patients, the same as in younger patients. Also, capnographic monitoring might be helpful in case of sedation by a gastroenterologist in a non-intubated patient. Further prospective, randomized studies are needed to confirm these conclusions.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Several studies have suggested that elderly patients, as well as younger patients, can be safely treated using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has not been clinically evaluated for very elderly patients. The present multicenter, retrospective study aimed to determine the safety of EUS-BD for advanced elderly patients.
Method
UNASSIGNED
Patients who underwent EUS-BD during this period were retrospectively enrolled, and they were divided into two groups based on age: group A (age < 75 years) and group B (age ⩾ 75). In this study, capnographic monitoring was used only for elderly patients (age ⩾ 75 years).
Results
UNASSIGNED
A total of 271 patients who underwent EUS-BD were enrolled in this study (group A = 177, group B = 94). The types of adverse events that were associated with EUS-BD was observed in 38 patients, and they did not differ significantly between two groups (
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
In conclusion, EUS-BD could be safety performed in advanced elderly patients, the same as in younger patients. Also, capnographic monitoring might be helpful in case of sedation by a gastroenterologist in a non-intubated patient. Further prospective, randomized studies are needed to confirm these conclusions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35601802
doi: 10.1177/17562848221092612
pii: 10.1177_17562848221092612
pmc: PMC9118405
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
17562848221092612Informations de copyright
© The Author(s), 2022.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Eisuke Iwasaki is an associate editor of Digestive Endoscopy. Takeshi Ogura, Hirotoshi Ishiwatari, Nao Fujimori, Eisuke Iwasaki, Kazuma Ishikawa, Tatsunori Satoh, Junichi Kaneko, Junya Sato, Takamasa Oono, Kazuhide Matsumoto, Seiichiro Fukuhara, Atsuto Kayashima, Akitoshi Hakoda, Kazuhide Higuchi have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Références
Gastrointest Endosc. 2018 Aug;88(2):277-282
pubmed: 29605722
World J Gastroenterol. 2016 Oct 7;22(37):8382-8388
pubmed: 27729744
Endosc Ultrasound. 2018 Nov-Dec;7(6):356-365
pubmed: 30531022
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2019 Apr;53(4):243-250
pubmed: 30681639
J Clin Monit Comput. 2017 Apr;31(2):435-442
pubmed: 26961501
Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2017 Jan;10(1):42-53
pubmed: 28286558
Gastroenterology. 2009 May;136(5):1568-76; quiz 1819-20
pubmed: 19422079
Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Dec;64(6):899-905
pubmed: 17140895
Dig Endosc. 2019 Apr;31 Suppl 1:55-64
pubmed: 30994239
Dig Endosc. 2020 Jan;32(2):263-274
pubmed: 31643105
Br Med J. 1974 Jun 22;2(5920):656-9
pubmed: 4835444
Endosc Ultrasound. 2018 Nov-Dec;7(6):376-382
pubmed: 29882518
Dig Dis Sci. 2016 Jul;61(7):2094-101
pubmed: 26873537
Am J Clin Oncol. 1982 Dec;5(6):649-55
pubmed: 7165009
Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2018 Apr;28(2):171-185
pubmed: 29519330
Gut. 2007 Jun;56(6):821-9
pubmed: 17145737
Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2016 May;32(3):232-7
pubmed: 26959514
Gastrointest Endosc. 2020 Sep;92(3):623-631.e1
pubmed: 32278705
Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Mar;71(3):446-54
pubmed: 20189503
Endosc Int Open. 2019 Nov;7(11):E1432-E1441
pubmed: 31673615
Am J Gastroenterol. 2018 Jul;113(7):987-997
pubmed: 29961772
Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2017 Jun;10(6):483-493
pubmed: 28567118
Surg Endosc. 2017 Nov;31(11):4764-4772
pubmed: 28424912
Endoscopy. 2016 Jan;48(1):42-50
pubmed: 26415090
Anesthesiology. 2002 Apr;96(4):1004-17
pubmed: 11964611
Gut. 2018 Jul;67(7):1209-1228
pubmed: 29463614
Endosc Int Open. 2019 Nov;7(11):E1563-E1573
pubmed: 31723579
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Mar;35(3):401-407
pubmed: 31222832
Endoscopy. 2001 Jan;33(1):31-8
pubmed: 11204985