The revised Atlanta criteria more accurately reflect severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis compared to the consensus criteria.
ABSTRACT: Background and objective:Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is the most prevalent complication after ERCP with an incidence of 3.5%. PEP severity is classified according to either the consensus criteria or the revised Atlanta criteria. In this international cohort study we investigated which classification is the strongest predictor of PEP-related mortality. Methods:We reviewed 13,384 consecutive ERCPs performed between 2012 and 2017 in eight hospitals. We gathered data on all pancreatitis-related adverse events and compared the predictive capabilities of both classifications. Furthermore, we investigated the correlation between the two classifications and identified reasons underlying length of stay. Results:The total sample consisted of 387 patients. The revised Atlanta criteria have a higher sensitivity (100 vs. 55%), specificity (98 vs. 72%) and positive predictive value (58 vs. 5%). There is a significant difference (p < 0.001) between the two classifications. In 124 patients (32%), the length of stay was influenced by concomitant diseases. Conclusion:The revised Atlanta classification is superior in predicting mortality and better reflects PEP severity. This has important implications for researchers, clinicians and patients. For the diagnosis of PEP pancreatitis, the consensus criteria remain the golden standard. However, the revised Atlanta criteria are preferable for defining PEP severity.
Project description:Pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Several patients´ or procedure related risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) have been suggested. The aim of this study was to validate the risk factors for PEP in a high-volume center.All patients undergoing first time ERCP at a tertiary referral center between December 2010 and October 2013 were retrospectively included. PEP was defined according to the Atlanta Classification.344 patients were included in the final analysis. The risk to develop PEP was increased in patients with chronic pancreatitis (odds ratio 3.7) and after inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct (odds ratio 2.2), which occurred in 26.5% of the patients. Inadvertent cannulation occurred significantly more frequently in patients with difficult cannulation of the papilla duodeni major (odds ratio 12.7; p<0.001). ERCP on call was associated with an increased risk for difficult cannulation (odds ratio 3.0).Inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct is a procedure related risk factor for PEP. Measurements on preventing inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct should be established and studies on prophylactic measurements should focus particularly on patients with inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct.
Project description:Acute pancreatitis (AP) is common gastrointestinal disease of varied aetiology. The most common cause of AP is gallstones, followed by alcohol abuse as an independent risk factor. With the increased need for invasive techniques to treat pancreatic and bile duct pathologies such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), AP has emerged as the most frequent complication. While severe AP following ERCP is rare (0.5%), if it does develop it has a greater severity index compared to non-ERCP AP. Development of a mild form of AP after ERCP is not considered a clinically relevant condition. Differences in the clinical presentation and prognosis of the mild and severe forms have been found between non-ERCP AP and post-endoscopic pancreatitis (PEP). It has been proposed that AP and PEP may also have different immunological responses to the initial injury. In this review, we summarise the literature on clinical and inflammatory processes in PEP vs non-ERCP AP.
Project description:Background and Aim:The risks of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) are identified as patient- and procedure-related factors. However, the genetic contribution for PEP is still unclear. Recent data show that the polymorphisms of PRSS1-PRSS2 (rs10273639) and MORC4 (rs12688220) are associated with recurrent acute pancreatitis and chronic pancreatitis. We aim to evaluate the association between these polymorphisms and post-ERCP pancreatitis in order to improve better prognosis and better care for these patients. Methods:This is a retrospective, case-control study which includes 49 cases and 97 controls that are age-, procedure-, and risk of PEP-matched with the cases in 1?:?2 fashion. The PEP was diagnosed and graded for severity according to the standard consensus, and the risk factors of PEP were identified according to the ESGE guideline. Polymorphisms at rs10273639 and rs12688220 were evaluated by TaqMan technique and were identified in 133 (40 cases and 93 controls) and 146 patients, respectively. Results:The demographic data between 2 groups are not significantly different. The genotype frequencies of PRSS1-PRSS2 (TT, TC, and CC) are 26, 13, and 1 vs. 67, 25, and 1 in cases and controls, respectively (p = 0.642). The genotype frequencies of MORC4 in female (TT, TC, and CC) are 8, 23, and 5 vs. 12, 26, and 21 in cases and controls, respectively (p = 0.071). The genotype frequencies of MORC4 in male (T and C) are 5 and 8 vs. 21 and 17 in cases and controls, respectively (p = 0.468). The allelic frequencies of MORC4 in combination of both genders (T, C) are 44 and 41 vs. 71 and 84 in cases and control, respectively (p = 0.431). In PEP cases, the allelic frequencies of PRSS1-PRSS2 (T and C) are 59 and 13 vs. 6 and 2 in mild and moderate/severe cases, respectively (p = 0.633). The allelic frequencies of MORC4 (T and C) are 38 and 39 vs. 4 and 4 in mild and moderate/severe cases, respectively (p = 0.972). Conclusion:Polymorphisms at PRSS1-PRSS2 and MORC4 are not associated with the risk or severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis.
Project description:Background and Aim:Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). It is still controversial whether the presence of a trainee would increase the risk of PEP. Additionally, the effects of demographic factors and comorbidities on the risk and severity of PEP are not fully understood. Our aim was to evaluate these factors using national database. Methods:Nationwide Inpatient Sample 2000-2014 was used to identify adult patients admitted with biliary obstruction without acute pancreatitis and had an inpatient ERCP. PEP was defined as having a subsequent diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. The presence of major organs failure marked moderate-severe PEP. Demographic information, hospital characteristics, and ERCP intervention types were collected. Results:We included 654?394 patients. Overall PEP rate was 5.4%. The PEP rate was lower in teaching (4.8%) compared with nonteaching (6.2%, P <?0.001) hospitals. The highest PEP rate was observed among patients undergoing Sphincter of Oddi Manometry (15.1%, odds ratio [OR] = 2.5, P <?0.001) as compared to diagnostic cholangiography (4.4%). Asians and Hispanics had higher rate of PEP (10% and 7.9%, respectively) compared with Caucasians and African Americans (4.9% and 5%, respectively, P <?0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that after controlling for the ERCP intervention types, Asians and Hispanics continued to have higher odds of PEP (OR = 1.3, P <?0.001). Seventeen percent of patients were classified as moderate-severe PEP. Older patients (OR = 3.2, P <?0.001), males (OR = 1.4, P <?0.001), and high comorbidities (1.3, P <?0.001) were major predictors of moderate-severe PEP. Conclusion:No evidence of higher PEP rates in teaching hospitals. Asians and Hispanics had higher PEP rates. Although ERCP intervention type is the major PEP predictor, its severity is dependent on patient characteristics.
Project description:Rectal indomethacin, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, is given to prevent pancreatitis in high-risk patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), based on findings from clinical trials. The European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines recently recommended prophylactic rectal indomethacin for all patients undergoing ERCP, including those at average risk for pancreatitis. We performed a randomized controlled trail to investigate the efficacy of this approach.We performed a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 449 consecutive patients undergoing ERCP at Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, from March 2013 through December 2014. Approximately 70% of the cohort were at average risk for PEP. Subjects were assigned randomly to groups given either a single 100-mg dose of rectal indomethacin (n = 223) or a placebo suppository (n = 226) during the procedure. The primary outcome was the development of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), defined by new upper-abdominal pain, a lipase level more than 3-fold the upper limit of normal, and hospitalization after ERCP for 2 consecutive nights.There were no differences between the groups in baseline clinical or procedural characteristics. Sixteen patients in the indomethacin group (7.2%) and 11 in the placebo group (4.9%) developed PEP (P = .33). Complications and the severity of PEP were similar between groups. Per a priori protocol guidelines, the study was stopped owing to futility.In a randomized controlled study of consecutive patients undergoing ERCP, rectal indomethacin did not prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis. ClincialTrials.gov no: NCT01774604.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication of ERCP and may run a severe course. Evidence suggests that vigorous periprocedural hydration can prevent PEP, but studies to date have significant methodological drawbacks. Importantly, evidence for its added value in patients already receiving prophylactic rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is lacking and the cost-effectiveness of the approach has not been investigated. We hypothesize that combination therapy of rectal NSAIDs and periprocedural hydration would significantly lower the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis compared to rectal NSAIDs alone in moderate- to high-risk patients undergoing ERCP. METHODS:The FLUYT trial is a multicenter, parallel group, open label, superiority randomized controlled trial. A total of 826 moderate- to high-risk patients undergoing ERCP that receive prophylactic rectal NSAIDs will be randomized to a control group (no fluids or normal saline with a maximum of 1.5 mL/kg/h and 3 L/24 h) or intervention group (lactated Ringer's solution with 20 mL/kg over 60 min at start of ERCP, followed by 3 mL/kg/h for 8 h thereafter). The primary endpoint is the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Secondary endpoints include PEP severity, hydration-related complications, and cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION:The FLUYT trial design, including hydration schedule, fluid type, and sample size, maximize its power of identifying a potential difference in post-ERCP pancreatitis incidence in patients receiving prophylactic rectal NSAIDs. TRIAL REGISTRATION:EudraCT: 2015-000829-37 . Registered on 18 February 2015. ISRCTN:13659155 . Registered on 18 May 2015.
Project description:BACKGROUND: Acute pancreatitis is the most common complication of diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Several clinical trials used glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) to prevent the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). However, the results were still controversial. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a meta-analysis of published, full-length, randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of prophylactic GTN on the prevention of PEP, improve the rate of cannulation and the prevention of hyperamylasemia. METHODS: Literature searches were conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Web of Knowledge databases, using keywords "post-ERCP" and "pancreatitis" and limited in randomized controlled trials. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs involving 2649 patients were included. Eleven RCTs compared GTN with placebo for PEP prevention. Meta-analysis showed the overall incidence of PEP was significantly reduced by GTN treatment (RR 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87). Nevertheless, GTN administration did not decrease the incidence of moderate to severe PEP (RR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.42-1.15). Subgroup analyses revealed that GTN administered by sublingual was more effective than transdermal and topical in reducing the incidence of PEP. Besides, the prophylactic effect of GTN was far more obvious in the group of high PEP incidence than in the group of low PEP incidence. Additionally, the incidence of hyperamylasemia was significantly reduced by GTN treatment (RR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54-0.90). No differences of the successful cannulation rate of bile ducts (RR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.99-1.06) attributable to GTN were observed. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic use of GTN reduced the overall incidence of PEP and hyperamylasemia. However, GTN was not helpful for the severity of PEP and the rate of cannulation.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite significant technical and training improvements, the incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) has not significantly dropped. Although many studies have evaluated the efficacy of various agents, e.g. nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, octreotide, antioxidants, administered via various dosages, routes (oral, intrarectal or parenteral), and schedules (before or after the procedure), the results have been conflicting. AIM:To evaluate efficacy of three pharmacologic prophylactic methods for prevention of PEP. METHODS:In this prospective, single-center randomized trial, patients who underwent first-time ERCP for choledocholithiasis were randomly assigned to three groups. The first group received 600 mg N-acetylcysteine 15 min prior to ERCP, and per-rectum administration of 50 mg indomethacin both prior to and after completion of the ERCP. The second group was administered only the 50 mg indomethacin per-rectum both prior to and after the ERCP. The third group was administered per-rectum 100 mg indomethacin only after the ERCP, representing the control group given the guideline-recommended regimen. The primary end-point was PEP prevention. RESULTS:Among the total 211 patients evaluated during the study, 186 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and completed the protocol. The percentages of patients who developed PEP in each of the three groups were not significantly different (? 2 = 2.793, P = 0.247). Among the acute PEP cases, for all groups, 14 patients developed mild pancreatitis (77.77%) and 4 moderate. No severe cases of PEP occurred, and in all PEP cases the resolution was favorable. No adverse events related to the medications (digestive hemorrhage, rectal irritation, or allergies) occurred. CONCLUSION:The efficacies of split-dose indomethacin and combined administration (N-acetylcysteine with indomethacin) for preventing PEP were similar to that of the standard regimen.
Project description:Backgrounds/Aims:Acute pancreatitis is the most widespread complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Here, we investigated the efficacy of rectal suppository naproxen, sublingual isosorbide dinitrate and their co-administration in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Methods:This double-blind randomized clinical trial carried out from June 2015 to February 2016 at the Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center in Rasht, Iran. A total of 585 patients were selected from candidates for diagnostic or therapeutic ERCP by using the simple sampling method. Patients divided into three groups. Group A received 500 mg naproxen, group B took 5 mg isosorbide dinitrate, and group C was co-administrated both agents before ERCP. The primary outcome measure was the development of pancreatitis onset of pain in the upper abdomen and increase of serum amylase activity more than 3 times over the upper normal limit (60-100 IU/L) within first the 24 h post-ERCP. Results:Totally, 80 patients developed PEP included 29 (4.9%), 24 (4.1%), and 27 (4.6%) patients in groups A, B, and C, respectively (p=0.845). Longer ERCP time (p=0.041), using diazepam (p=0.033), a higher number of pancreatic ducts cannulation (p?0.001), pancreatic duct injection (p=0.013), and using pancreatic stent (p=0.004) were the predisposing factors for PEP. Conclusions:Our findings indicated that prophylactic naproxen suppository or isosorbide dinitrate sublingually or co-administration had no significant difference in the prevention and severity of PEP, however, enhancing the endoscopist's skills can be effective. Departments and educational hospitals should develop their assessment and quality assurance measures for the training of fellows' not only technical training but also an understanding of the diagnostic and therapeutic roles of the procedure.
Project description:BACKGROUND: Pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) which can be severe and cause death in approximately 10% of cases. Up to now, six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been found relevant to the effect of allopurinol on prevention of Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). However, these results remained controversial. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a meta-analysis with RCTs published in full text to determine the effectiveness of prophylactic allopurinol of different dosages and administration time in the incidence and severity of PEP. METHODS: Literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library from databases inception to May 2014. RCTs comparing the effect of allopurinol with placebo on prevention of PEP were included. Statistical heterogeneity was quantitatively evaluated by?2 test with the significance set P<0.10 or I2>50%. RESULTS: Six RCTs consisting of 1974 participants were eventually included. The incidences of PEP in allopurinol group and placebo group were 8.4%(83/986) and 9.9%(98/988) respectively. Meta-analysis showed no evident prevention effect of allopurinol on the incidence of PEP (RR 0.75, 95%CI 0.39-1.42) with significant heterogeneity (I2?=?70.4%, P?=?0.005). When studies were stratified according to the dosages and administration time of allopurinol they applied, there was still no evident prevention effect of allopurinol on mild, moderate or severe PEP. However, statistically substantial heterogeneity was presented in the subgroup of moderate PEP when the effect of high dose of allopurinol was analyzed (Imoderate2?=?82.3%, Pmoderate?=?0.018). Statistically significant heterogeneity was also observed in subgroup of mild PEP, when the effect of long adminstration time of allopurinol was investigated (Imild2?=?62.8%, Pmild?=?0.068). CONCLUSION: The prophylactic use of allopurinol in different dosages and administration time had no effect in preventing incidence and severity of PEP.