Search

ObjectiveLumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are believed to clinically improve endoscopic transluminal drainage of infected necrosis when compared with double-pigtail plastic stents. However, comparative data from prospective studies are very limited.DesignPatients with infected necrotising pancreatitis, who underwent an endoscopic step-up approach with LAMS within a multicentre prospective cohort study were compared with the data of 51 patients in the randomised TENSION trial who had been assigned to the endoscopic step-up approach with double-pigtail plastic stents. The clinical study protocol was otherwise identical for both groups. Primary end point was the need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy. Secondary end points included mortality, major complications, hospital stay and healthcare costs.ResultsA total of 53 patients were treated with LAMS in 16 hospitals during 27 months. The need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy was 64% (n=34) and was not different from the previous trial using plastic stents (53%, n=27)), also after correction for baseline characteristics (OR 1.21 (95% CI 0.45 to 3.23)). Secondary end points did not differ between groups either, which also included bleeding requiring intervention—5 patients (9%) after LAMS placement vs 11 patients (22%) after placement of plastic stents (relative risk 0.44; 95% CI 0.16 to 1.17). Total healthcare costs were also comparable (mean difference −€6348, bias-corrected and accelerated 95% CI −€26 386 to €10 121).ConclusionOur comparison of two patient groups from two multicentre prospective studies with a similar design suggests that LAMS do not reduce the need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy when compared with double-pigtail plastic stents in patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis. Also, the rate of bleeding complications was comparable.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the incidence, risk factors, clinical course and treatment of perforation and fistula of the gastrointestinal tract in a large unselected cohort of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis.SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Perforation and fistula of the gastrointestinal (GI)-tract may occur in necrotizing pancreatitis. Data from large unselected patient populations on the incidence, risk factors, clinical outcomes, and treatment are lacking.METHODS: We performed a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective database of 896 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. GI-tract perforation and fistula were defined as spontaneous or iatrogenic discontinuation of the gastrointestinal wall. Multivariable logistic regression was used to explore risk factors and to adjust for confounders to explore associations of the GI-tract perforation and fistula on the clinical course.RESULTS: A perforation or fistula of the GI-tract was identified in 139 (16%) patients, located in the stomach in 23 (14%), duodenum in 56 (35%), jejunum or ileum in 18 (11%) and colon in 64 (40%). Risk factors were high C-reactive protein within 48-hours after admission (OR 1.19 [95%CI 1.01-1.39]) and early organ-failure (OR 2.76 [95%CI 1.78-4.29]). Prior invasive intervention was a risk factor for developing a perforation or fistula of the lower GI-tract (OR 2.60 [95% CI 1.04-6.60]). While perforation or fistula of the upper GI-tract appeared to be protective for persistent ICU-admission (OR 0.11 [95%CI 0.02-0.44]) and persistent organ failure (OR 0.15 [95%CI 0.02-0.58]), perforation or fistula of the lower GI-tract was associated with a higher rate of new onset organ failure (OR 2.47 [95%CI 1.23-4.84]). When the stomach or duodenum was affected, treatment was mostly conservative (n=54, 68%). Treatment was mostly surgical when the colon was affected (n=38, 59%).CONCLUSIONS: Perforation and fistula of the GI-tract occurred in one out of six patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. Risk factors were high C-reactive protein within 48 hours and early organ-failure. Prior intervention was identified as a risk factor for perforation or fistula of the lower GI-tract. The clinical course was mostly affected by involvement of the lower GI-tract.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the procedure of choice to remove sludge/stones from the common bile duct (CBD). In a small but clinically important proportion of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis ERCP is negative. This is undesirable because of ERCP associated morbidity. We aimed to map the diagnostic pathway leading up to ERCP and evaluate ERCP outcome.We established a prospective multicenter cohort of patients with suspected CBD stones. We assessed the determinants that were associated with CBD sludge or stone detection upon ERCP.We established a cohort of 707 patients with suspected CBD sludge or stones (62% female, median age 59 years). ERCP was negative for CBD sludge or stones in 155 patients (22%). Patients with positive ERCPs frequently had pre-procedural endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) imaging (44% vs. 35%; P = 0.045). The likelihood of ERCP sludge and stones detection was higher when the time interval between EUS or MRCP and ERCP was less than 2 days (odds ratio 2.35; 95% CI 1.25-4.44; P = 0.008; number needed to harm 7.7).Even in the current era of society guidelines and use of advanced imaging CBD sludge or stones are absent in one out of five ERCPs performed for suspected CBD stones. The proportion of unnecessary ERCPs is lower in case of pre-procedural EUS or MRCP. A shorter time interval between EUS or MRCP increases the yield of ERCP for suspected CBD stones and should, therefore, preferably be performed within 2 days before ERCP.

Background Occult biliary disease has been suggested as a frequent underlying cause of idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). Cholecystectomy has been proposed as a strategy to prevent recurrent IAP. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy of cholecystectomy in reducing the risk of recurrent IAP. Methods PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically for studies including patients with IAP treated by cholecystectomy, with data on recurrence of pancreatitis. Studies published before 1980 or including chronic pancreatitis and case reports were excluded. The primary outcome was recurrence rate. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Meta‐analyses were undertaken to calculate risk ratios using a random‐effects model with the inverse‐variance method. Results Overall, ten studies were included, of which nine were used in pooled analyses. The study population consisted of 524 patients with 126 cholecystectomies. Of these 524 patients, 154 (29·4 (95 per cent c.i. 25·5 to 33·3) per cent) had recurrent disease. The recurrence rate was significantly lower after cholecystectomy than after conservative management (14 of 126 (11·1 per cent) versus 140 of 398 (35·2 per cent); risk ratio 0·44, 95 per cent c.i. 0·27 to 0·71). Even in patients in whom IAP was diagnosed after more extensive diagnostic testing, including endoscopic ultrasonography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, the recurrence rate appeared to be lower after cholecystectomy (4 of 36 (11 per cent) versus 42 of 108 (38·9 per cent); risk ratio 0·41, 0·16 to 1·07). Conclusion Cholecystectomy after an episode of IAP reduces the risk of recurrent pancreatitis. This implies that current diagnostics are insufficient to exclude a biliary cause., Idiopathic acute pancreatitis recurs more often than acute pancreatitis of known cause. In at least some of these patients, standard diagnostics (laboratory tests, transabdominal ultrasonography) may fail to detect biliary disease. The literature on cholecystectomy as a preventive measure for recurrence of pancreatitis in presumed idiopathic acute pancreatitis was reviewed systematically. Cholecystectomy can reduce pancreatitis

BACKGROUND: Current recommendations on training in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography are predicated on a performance-centred approach designed to ensure that trainees achieve appropriate skills. We aimed to analyse how competence in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is defined in the literature and what proportion of trainees actually reach this threshold. METHODS: We conducted a systematic MEDLINE search for studies reporting on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography training programmes in a clinical setting. The main outcome measure was threshold for achieving competence in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; the secondary outcome measure was assessment of trainee performance. Quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. RESULTS: Of 522 initially identified articles, 20 were included in the analysis; most studies showed a high risk of bias. Cannulation rate of the desired duct was the main marker of competence in all studies; however, only 8/20 studies reported on the performance of individual trainees, who achieved their respective standard of competence in only 25.6% of reported cases. CONCLUSIONS: Current literature identifies cannulation rate of a native papilla to be the most appropriate measure of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography competence; however, most trainees do not reach predefined competence thresholds. Furthermore, due to the limitations of available studies, the most appropriate competence measure remains subject for debate.

Acute pancreatitis (AP), chronic pancreatitis (CP) and pancreatic cancer are three distinct pancreatic diseases with different prognoses and treatment options. However, it may be difficult to differentiate between benign and malignant disease. AP may be a first symptom of pancreatic cancer, particularly in patients between the ages of 56 and 75 with presumed idiopathic AP who had a concomitant diagnosis of new-onset diabetes mellitus or patients who present with CP at diagnosis of AP. In these patients, additional imaging is warranted, preferably by endoscopic ultrasonography. CP may lead to pancreatic cancer through oncogenic mutations, mostly in patients with hereditary CP, and in patients in whom risk factors for pancreatic cancer (e.g., nicotine and alcohol abuse) are also present. Patients with PRSS1-mediated CP and patients with a history of autosomal dominant hereditary CP without known genetic mutations may be considered for surveillance for pancreatic cancer. Pancreatic inflammation may mimic pancreatic cancer by appearing as a focal mass-forming lesion on imaging. Differentiation between the above mentioned benign and malignant disease may be facilitated by specific features like the duct-penetrating sign and the duct-to-parenchyma ratio. Research efforts are aimed towards developing a superior discriminant between pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer in the form of imaging modalities or biomarkers. This may aid clinicians in timely diagnosing pancreatic cancer in a potentially curable stage.

Previous meta-analyses on palliative treatment of malignant colorectal obstruction with Self-Expandable Metal Stent (SEMS) or emergency surgery reported contradictory results for morbidity, and frequently included extracolonic obstruction. Therefore, the current meta-analysis aimed to exclusively analyze palliative treatment for primary obstructive colorectal cancer, with early complication rate as a primary outcome. A systematic literature search was performed on studies comparing palliative SEMS and emergency surgery. Corresponding authors were contacted for additional data. Eighteen studies were selected (1518 patients). Early complication rate was 13.6 % for SEMS and 25.5 % for emergency surgery (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.46, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.74). Mortality was 3.9 % and 9.4 % (OR 0.44, 0.28-0.69). Stomas were present in 14.3 % and 51.4 % of patients (OR 0.17, 0.09-0.31). More late complications occurred after SEMS (23.2 % versus 9.8 %, OR 2.55, 1.70-3.83), mostly due to SEMS obstruction. In conclusion, SEMS placement seems the preferred treatment of obstructing colorectal cancer in the palliative setting.

Introduction: After standard diagnostic work-up, the aetiology of acute pancreatitis remains unknown in 16–27% of cases, a condition referred to as idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). Determining the aetiology of pancreatitis is essential, as it may direct treatment in the acute phase and guides interventions to prevent recurrent pancreatitis. Methods: Between 2008 and 2015, patients with acute pancreatitis were registered prospectively in 19 Dutch hospitals. Patients who had a negative initial diagnostic work-up with regard to the underlying aetiology of their pancreatitis were labelled ‘presumed’ IAP. The aim of this study was to assess the use of diagnostic modalities and their yield to establish an aetiology in ‘presumed’ IAP, and to assess recurrence rates both with and without treatment. Results: Out of the 1632 registered patients, 191 patients had a first episode of ‘presumed’ IAP, of whom 176 (92%) underwent additional diagnostic testing: CT (n = 124, diagnostic yield 8%), EUS (n = 62, yield 35%), MRI/MRCP (n = 56, yield 33%), repeat ultrasound (n = 97, yield 21%), IgG4 (n = 54, yield 9%) and ERCP (n = 15, yield 47%). In 64 of 176 patients (36%) an aetiological diagnosis was established, mostly biliary (n = 39). In 13 out of 176 of patients (7%) a neoplasm was diagnosed. If additional diagnostic workup revealed an aetiology, the recurrence rate was lower in the treated patients than in the patients without a definite aetiology (15% versus 43%, p = 0.014). Conclusion: Additional diagnostic testing revealed an aetiology in one-third of ‘presumed’ IAP patients. The aetiology found was mostly biliary, but occasionally neoplasms were found. Identification of an aetiology with subsequent treatment reduced the rate of recurrence.

IntroductionIdiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) remains a dilemma for physicians as it is uncertain whether patients with IAP may actually have an occult aetiology. It is unclear to what extent additional diagnostic modalities such as endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) are warranted after a first episode of IAP in order to uncover this aetiology. Failure to timely determine treatable aetiologies delays appropriate treatment and might subsequently cause recurrence of acute pancreatitis. Therefore, the aim of the Pancreatitis of Idiopathic origin: Clinical added value of endoscopic UltraSonography (PICUS) Study is to determine the value of routine EUS in determining the aetiology of pancreatitis in patients with a first episode of IAP.Methods and analysisPICUS is designed as a multicentre prospective cohort study of 106 patients with a first episode of IAP after complete standard diagnostic work-up, in whom a diagnostic EUS will be performed. Standard diagnostic work-up will include a complete personal and family history, laboratory tests including serum alanine aminotransferase, calcium and triglyceride levels and imaging by transabdominal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography after clinical recovery from the acute pancreatitis episode. The primary outcome measure is detection of aetiology by EUS. Secondary outcome measures include pancreatitis recurrence rate, severity of recurrent pancreatitis, readmission, additional interventions, complications, length of hospital stay, quality of life, mortality and costs, during a follow-up period of 12 months.Ethics and disseminationPICUS is conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki and Guideline for Good Clinical Practice. Five medical ethics review committees assessed PICUS (Medical Ethics Review Committee of Academic Medical Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Radboud University Medical Center, Erasmus Medical Center and Maastricht University Medical Center). The results will be submitted for publication in an international peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNetherlands Trial Registry (NL7066). Prospectively registered.

Supplemental material, UEG890462 Supplemetal Material for The diagnostic work-up and outcomes of ‘presumed’ idiopathic acute pancreatitis: A post-hoc analysis of a multicentre observational cohort by Nora D Hallensleben, Devica S Umans, Stefan AW Bouwense, Robert C Verdonk, Tessa EH Romkens, Ben J Witteman, Matthijs P Schwartz, Marcel B Spanier, Robert Laheij, Hjalmar C van Santvoort, Marc G Besselink, Jeanin E van Hooft, Marco J Bruno and for the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group: the Saint-Antoine IBD network in United European Gastroenterology Journal