Beers versus STOPP criteria in polyharmacy community-dwelling older patients

Objective: To assess potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) using Beers (2012 version) and STOPP (2008 version) criteria in polypharmacy, community-dwelling, older patients. Methods: From the information collected in the invoicing data of the prescriptions and the electronic medical records, a sample was selected of 223 ≥ 65-year-old patients who were taking simultaneously 10 or more drugs per day. Beers and STOPP criteria were separately applied, and the results obtained with the two methods were compared. Results: A total of 141 (63.2%) patients presented at least one Beers criterion. The two most frequently observed Beers criteria independent of diagnosis were the use of benzodiazepines and the use of non-COX-2-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. With regard to Beers criteria considering diagnosis, the most frequent were the use of anticholinergic drugs in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms or benign prostatic hyperplasia, and the use of benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, Zolpidem or H2-antihistamines, in patients with dementia or cognitive impairment. A total of 165 (73.9%) patients had at least one PIP according to the STOPP criteria. Duplicate drug classes and long-term use of long-acting benzodiazepines were the two most frequent STOPP criteria. Discussion: Our study identified a high frequency of PIP in poly-medicated community-dwelling older patients. Simultaneous application of Beers and STOPP criteria represents a useful tool to improve prescribing in this population group.

Endoscopic band ligation without resection in selected patients for small and superficial upper gastrointestinal tract lesions

Background and aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) in carefully selected patients who would benefit from this method of resection. Methods: Patients with early upper gastrointestinal and small (< 15 mm) lesions treated with EBL (Duette® Multi-Band Mucosectomy) were prospectively recruited and retrospectively analyzed between 2010 and 2015. All cases were discussed in a multidisciplinary cancer committee and it was concluded that, owing to patient conditions, surgery was not possible and that not conducting histology would not change the clinical management. A first endoscopic control with biopsies was planned at 4-8 weeks. If there was no persistence of the lesion, new controls were programmed at 6 and 12 months. Results: The group (n = 12) included 5 esophagus lesions (adenosquamous carcinoma, n = 1; carcinoma squamous, n = 2; adenocarcinoma, n = 2); 4 gastric lesions (high grade dysplasia, n = 1; adenocarcinoma, n = 2; neuroendocrine tumor [NET], n = 1), and 3 duodenal lesions (NETs) (n = 3). The mean tumor diameter was 9.6 ± 2.8 mm (range 4-15). Only one minor adverse event was described. At first follow-up (4-8 weeks), there was 91.6% and 75% of endoscopic and histological remission, respectively. At 6-month follow-up there was 70% of both endoscopic remission and negative biopsies. And at 12 months, there was 100% and 75% of endoscopic and histological remission, respectively. Persisting lesions were T1 cancers. The median follow-up was 30.6 months. Conclusion: EBL without resection is an easy and safe technique that should be considered in patients with multiple morbidities and small superficial UGI lesions.