Search

No abstract available

BACKGROUND: Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a rare, and relatively new, form of chronic pancreatitis. The management of AIP can vary considerably among different centres in daily clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to present a picture of epidemiological, clinical characteristics, outcomes, and the real-life practice in terms of management in several academic and non-academic centres in Italy. METHODS: Data on the clinical presentation, diagnostic work-up, treatments, frequency of relapses, and long-term outcomes were retrospectively collected in a cohort of AIP patients diagnosed at 14 centres in Italy. RESULTS: One hundred and six patients were classified as type 1 AIP, 48 as type 2 AIP, and 19 as not otherwise specified. Epidemiological, clinical, radiological, and serological characteristics, and relapses were similar to those previously reported for different types of AIP. Endoscopic cytohistology was available in 46.2% of cases, and diagnostic for AIP in only 35.2%. Steroid trial to aid diagnosis was administered in 43.3% cases, and effective in 93.3%. Steroid therapy was used in 70.5% of cases, and effective in 92.6% of patients. Maintenance therapy with low dose of steroid (MST) was prescribed in 25.4% of cases at a mean dose of 5 (±1.4) mg/die, and median time of MST was 60 days. Immunosuppressive drugs were rarely used (10.9%), and rituximab in 1.7%. Faecal elastase-1 was evaluated in only 31.2% of patients, and was pathological in 59.2%. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of AIP patients, diagnosis and classification for subtype was frequently possible, confirming the different characteristics of AIP1 and AIP2 previously reported. Nevertheless, we observed a low use of histology and steroid trial for a diagnosis of AIP. Steroid treatment was the most used therapy in our cohort. Immunosuppressants and rituximab were rarely used. The evaluation of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency is underemployed considering its high prevalence.

Objectives Endoscopic ultrasound through-the-needle biopsy (EUS-TTNB) is a useful tool for differential diagnosis among pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs). Cystic fluid cytology (CFC) is recommended by guidelines, but its diagnostic accuracy is about 50%. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the clinical impact of EUS-TTNB in terms of technical success (TS), histological accuracy (HA) and diagnostic yield (DY). Methods Original studies in English language on EUS-TTNB were searched in MEDLINE and EMBASE until October 2019. Diagnostic accuracy of EUS-TTNB for identification of mucinous PCLs was calculated using individual diagnostic data of patients who underwent CFC and surgery. Results Nine studies, including 454 patients who underwent EUS-TTNB, met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. TS and HA of EUS-TTNB were, respectively, 98.5% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 97.3%-99.6%) and 86.7% (95%CI 80.1-93.4). DY was 69.5% (95%CI 59.2-79.7) for EUS-TTNB and 28.7% (95%CI 15.7-41.6) for CFC. Heterogeneity persisted significantly high in most of subgroup analyses. In the multivariate meta-regression, cyst size was independently associated with higher DY. Sensitivity and specificity for mucinous PCLs were 88.6 and 94.7% for EUS-TTNB, and 40 and 100% for CFC. Adverse events rate was 8.6% (95%CI 4.0-13.1). Conclusions This meta-analysis shows that EUS-TTNB is a feasible technique that allows a high rate of adequate specimens to be obtained for histology; in about two-thirds of patients a specific histotype diagnosis could be assessed. The number of adverse events is slightly higher respect to standard EUS-FNA, but complications are very rarely severe.

Background & Aims: Risk for relapse after induction of remission with steroid therapy has been studied extensively in patients with autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP), but findings have been equivocal. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the relapse rate of AIP after initial remission after steroid treatment and to identify factors associated with relapse. Methods: Three reviewers searched MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and EMBASE until July 2018 to identify studies on rate of relapse of AIP after induction of remission with steroid therapy. A pooled estimate was calculated using the DerSimonian and Laird method for a random-effects model. This study was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Results: Thirty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. The median follow-up time was 40.8 months. Fifty-two percent of patients were classified as having type 1 AIP. The pooled estimate of relapse rate was 33% (95% CI, 30%–37%). A higher proportion of patients with type 1 AIP had a relapse compared with patients with type 2 AIP (37.5% vs 15.9%; P < .001). We found significant heterogeneity among studies (P < .01). Long-term maintenance therapy with steroids and study quality were associated independently with AIP relapse, after we adjusted for year of publication by multivariate meta-regression. Conclusions: In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that a large proportion of patients with AIP treated successfully with steroid induction therapy had a relapse (33%)—particularly patients with type 1 AIP (37%). Maintenance steroid therapy lasting longer than 1 year could reduce risk of relapse. However, the data characterizing relapse rates are of limited quality, indicating the need for randomized controlled trials and new immunosuppressive drugs.