Diclofenac reduces the incidence of acute pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Pharmacologic prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: protease inhibitors and NSAIDs in a meta-analysis

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis is the most frequent complication of ERCP. Several meta-analyses have examined the effects of protease inhibitors (gabexate mesilate, ulinastatin, and nafamostat mesilate) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on post-ERCP pancreatitis, but the results have been confusing. Since the previous meta-analysis, several new studies have been published on this topic. To provide an updated quantitative assessment of the effectiveness of protease inhibitors and NSAIDs in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials for patients at risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Twenty-six articles were included in this meta-analysis. Nafamostat mesilate (summary RR = 0.41; 95 %CI 0.28-0.59; n = 4 studies) and NSAIDs (summary RR = 0.58; 95 %CI = 0.44-0.76; n = 7 studies) were associated with decreased risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis in the high-quality studies. However, gabexate mesilate (summary RR = 0.64; 95 %CI = 0.36-1.13; n = 6 studies) and ulinastatin (summary RR = 0.65; 95 %CI = 0.33-1.30; n = 2 studies) were not associated with decreased risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis in the high-quality studies. This is the first meta-analysis to compare the effects of three protease inhibitors. Solid evidence supports the use of nafamostat mesilate and NSAIDs for preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis.

A meta-analysis on the role of rectal diclofenac and indomethacin in the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Clinical trials evaluating the protective effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) have yielded inconclusive results. Our objective was to conduct a meta-analysis of the data to date to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rectal NSAIDs for PEP prophylaxis. We did a systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect method because of the absence of significant heterogeneity in the included trials. Seven randomized, controlled trials involving 2133 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that rectal NSAIDs decreased the overall incidence of PEP (risk ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.57; P < 0.01). The number needed to treat was 11. The NSAID prophylaxis also decreased the incidence of moderate to severe PEP (risk ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.63; P < 0.01). The number needed to treat was 34. No differences of the adverse events attributable to NSAIDs were observed. In conclusion, prophylactic use of rectal NSAIDs reduces the incidence and severity of PEP. There is neither a difference in efficacy between rectal indomethacin and diclofenac nor a difference in efficacy between the timing of administration of rectal NSAIDs, that is, immediate pre-ERCP and post-ERCP.

Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis

Post-procedure pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) and carries a high morbidity and mortality occurring in at least 3%-5% of all procedures. We reviewed the available literature searching for “ERCP” and “pancreatitis” and “post-ERCP pancreatitis”. in PubMed and Medline. This review looks at the diagnosis, risk factors, causes and methods of preventing post-procedure pancreatitis. These include the evidence for patient selection, endoscopic techniques and pharmacological prophylaxis of ERCP induced pancreatitis. Selecting the right patient for the procedure by a risk benefits assessment is the best way of avoiding unnecessary ERCPs. Risk is particularly high in young women with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD). Many of the trials reviewed have rather few numbers of subjects and hence difficult to appraise. Meta-analyses have helped screen for promising modalities of prophylaxis. At present, evidence is emerging that pancreatic stenting of patients with SOD and rectally administered nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in a large unselected trial reduce the risk of post-procedure pancreatitis. A recent meta-analysis have demonstrated that rectally administered indomethecin, just before or after ERCP is associated with significantly lower rate of pancreatitis compared with placebo [OR = 0.49 (0.34-0.71); P = 0.0002]. Number needed to treat was 20. It is likely that one of these prophylactic measures will begin to be increasingly practised in high risk groups.

Rectal NSAIDs for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Acute pancreatitis is the most frequent complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP).

METHODS

PubMed and Embase databases were searched through April 2013. Results are reported as relative risk (RR) or weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). The primary outcome measure was the incidence of PEP. Secondary outcome measures included the severity of PEP and serum amylase level 2 h, 24 h after ERCP.

RESULTS

Seven trials containing 1846 patients were eligible. Rectal NSAIDs significantly reduced the incidence of PEP (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34-0.61, P < 0.001). The results were maintained in subsequent subgroup analysis. Rectal NSAIDs also was associated with a reduction in the incidence of mild PEP (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.35-0.83, P = 0.005), moderate to severe PEP (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.22-0.70, P = 0.002), or serum amylase level 2 h after ERCP (WMD -91.09 IU/L, 95% CI -149.78 to -32.40, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal NSAIDs reduced the incidence and severity of PEP, as well as serum amylase level 2 h after ERCP.

Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis

Pancreatitis is one of the most common complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). A variety of patient-related and procedure-related factors have been identified to risk-stratify patients. Several measures can be undertaken in order to decrease the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk groups. These measures include pancreatic duct stenting and rectal indomethacin, amongst others.

Preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis is a common and potentially devastating complication of ERCP. Advances in risk stratification, patient selection, procedure technique, and prophylactic interventions have substantially improved the endoscopists' ability to prevent this complication. This article presents the evidence-based approaches to preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis and suggests timely research questions in this important area.

Bauhinia variegata leaf extracts exhibit considerable antibacterial, antioxidant, and anticancer activities

The present study reports the phytochemical profiling, antimicrobial, antioxidant, and anticancer activities of Bauhinia variegata leaf extracts. The reducing sugar, anthraquinone, and saponins were observed in polar extracts, while terpenoids and alkaloids were present in nonpolar and ethanol extracts. Total flavonoid contents in various extracts were found in the range of 11-222.67 mg QE/g. In disc diffusion assays, petroleum ether and chloroform fractions exhibited considerable inhibition against Klebsiella pneumoniae. Several other extracts also showed antibacterial activity against pathogenic strains of E. coli, Proteus spp. and Pseudomonas spp. Minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) values of potential extracts were found between 3.5 and 28.40 mg/mL. The lowest MBC (3.5 mg/mL) was recorded for ethanol extract against Pseudomonas spp. The antioxidant activity of the extracts was compared with standard antioxidants. Dose dependent response was observed in reducing power of extracts. Polar extracts demonstrated appreciable metal ion chelating activity at lower concentrations (10-40 μg/mL). Many extracts showed significant antioxidant response in beta carotene bleaching assay. AQ fraction of B. variegata showed pronounced cytotoxic effect against DU-145, HOP-62, IGR-OV-1, MCF-7, and THP-1 human cancer cell lines with 90-99% cell growth inhibitory activity. Ethyl acetate fraction also produced considerable cytotoxicity against MCF-7 and THP-1 cell lines. The study demonstrates notable antibacterial, antioxidant, and anticancer activities in B. variegata leaf extracts.

American College of Gastroenterology guideline: management of acute pancreatitis

This guideline presents recommendations for the management of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). During the past decade, there have been new understandings and developments in the diagnosis, etiology, and early and late management of the disease. As the diagnosis of AP is most often established by clinical symptoms and laboratory testing, contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the pancreas should be reserved for patients in whom the diagnosis is unclear or who fail to improve clinically. Hemodynamic status should be assessed immediately upon presentation and resuscitative measures begun as needed. Patients with organ failure and/or the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) should be admitted to an intensive care unit or intermediary care setting whenever possible. Aggressive hydration should be provided to all patients, unless cardiovascular and/or renal comorbidites preclude it. Early aggressive intravenous hydration is most beneficial within the first 12-24 h, and may have little benefit beyond. Patients with AP and concurrent acute cholangitis should undergo endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) within 24 h of admission. Pancreatic duct stents and/or postprocedure rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) suppositories should be utilized to lower the risk of severe post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients. Routine use of prophylactic antibiotics in patients with severe AP and/or sterile necrosis is not recommended. In patients with infected necrosis, antibiotics known to penetrate pancreatic necrosis may be useful in delaying intervention, thus decreasing morbidity and mortality. In mild AP, oral feedings can be started immediately if there is no nausea and vomiting. In severe AP, enteral nutrition is recommended to prevent infectious complications, whereas parenteral nutrition should be avoided. Asymptomatic pancreatic and/or extrapancreatic necrosis and/or pseudocysts do not warrant intervention regardless of size, location, and/or extension. In stable patients with infected necrosis, surgical, radiologic, and/or endoscopic drainage should be delayed, preferably for 4 weeks, to allow the development of a wall around the necrosis.

Rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are superior to pancreatic duct stents in preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Placement of pancreatic duct (PD) stents prevents pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). There is evidence that rectal administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) also prevents post-ERCP pancreatitis, but the 2 approaches alone have not been compared directly. We conducted a network meta-analysis to indirectly compare the efficacies of these procedures.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched by 2 independent reviewers to identify full-length clinical studies, published in English, investigating use of PD stent placement and rectal NSAIDs to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis. We identified 29 studies (22 of PD stents and 7 of NSAIDs). We used network meta-analysis to compare rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis among patients who received only rectal NSAIDs, only PD stents, or both.

RESULTS

Placement of PD stents and rectal administration of NSAIDs were each superior to placebo in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis. The combination of rectal NSAIDs and stents was not superior to either approach alone. Pooled results showed that rectal NSAIDs alone were superior to PD stents alone in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis (odds ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a network meta-analysis, rectal NSAIDs alone are superior to PD stents alone in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis, and should be considered first-line therapy for selected patients. However, these findings were limited by the small number of studies assessed (only 29 studies), potential publication bias, and the indirect nature of the comparison. High-quality, randomized, controlled trials are needed to compare these 2 interventions and confirm these findings.

Prevention and management of adverse events of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a therapeutic procedure with the potential for a variety of adverse events, including acute pancreatitis, perforation, bleeding, and cardiopulmonary complications, which are well-established risk factors. It has become standard that patients undergoing ERCP are carefully selected based on appropriate indications. Once an ERCP is undertaken, preprocedure and intraprocedure risks should be assessed and appropriate risk-reducing modalities, such as prophylactic pancreatic stent placement and rectal indomethacin, should be used if patient or procedural factors suggest an increased risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Can postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis be prevented by a pharmacological approach?

Acute pancreatitis remains the most frequent complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), with reported incidence rates that have changed little over several decades. Patient- and procedure-related risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) are well-defined. Effective measures to prevent PEP have been identified, including improvements in cannulation techniques and pancreatic stenting, as well as pharmacological intervention. Pharmacotherapy has been widely studied in the prevention of PEP, but the effect in averting PEP has been inconclusive. Although pharmacological prophylaxis is appealing, attempts to find an ideal drug are incomplete. Most available data on the efficacy of pharmacological agents for PEP prophylaxis have been obtained from patients at average risk for PEP. However, recently, a randomized prospective controlled trial of rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to prevent PEP in high-risk patients was published. The results revealed that rectal indomethacin reduced the incidence of PEP significantly. Thus, rectal administration of diclofenac or indomethacin immediately before or after ERCP is used routinely to prevent PEP. However, additional studies with NSAIDs using large numbers of subjects are necessary to confirm the prophylactic effect of these drugs and to establish whether they act synergistically with other prophylactic interventions, including pancreatic stenting.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is still controversial.

OBJECTIVE

We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NSAIDs for PEP prophylaxis.

DESIGN

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies published updated to June 2012.

SETTING

Meta-analysis.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing ERCP.

INTERVENTIONS

NSAIDs use for the prevention of PEP.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Overall incidence of PEP, incidence of moderate to severe PEP, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs involving 2269 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that NSAID use decreased the overall incidence of PEP (risk ratio [RR], 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38-0.86; P = .007). The absolute risk reduction was 5.9%. The number needed to treat was 17. Heterogeneity among the studies was substantial. However, after removing the main source of heterogeneity, the prophylactic efficacy was similar (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.41-0.68; P < .001). NSAID use also decreased the incidence of moderate to severe PEP (RR 0.46; 95% CI, 0.28-0.75; P = .002). The absolute risk reduction was 3.0%. The number needed to treat was 34. No differences of the adverse events attributable to NSAIDs were observed.

LIMITATIONS

Inclusion of low-quality studies, different type and route of administration of the NSAIDs, study heterogeneity, inconsistent use of pancreatic stenting.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic use of NSAIDs reduces the incidence and severity of PEP.

Losartan to prevent hyperenzymemia after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopan-creatography: A randomized clinical trial

AIM: To study if the angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) losartan counteracts pancreatic hyperenzymemia as measured 24 h after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

METHODS: A triple-blind and placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was performed at two Swedish hospitals in 2006-2008. Patients over 18 years of age undergoing ERCP, excluding those with current pancreatitis, current use of ARB, and severe disease, such as sepsis, liver and renal failure. One oral dose of 50 mg losartan or placebo was given one hour before ERCP. The relative risk of hyperenzymemia 24 h after ERCP was estimated using multivariable logistic regression, and expressed as odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), including adjustment for potential remaining confounding.

RESULTS: Among 76 participating patients, 38 were randomized to the losartan and the placebo group, respectively. The incidence rates of hyperenzymemia and acute pancreatitis among all 76 participating patients were 21% and 12%, respectively. Hyperenzymemia was detected in 9 and 7 patients in the losartan and placebo group, respectively. There were no major differences between the comparison groups regarding cannulation difficulty, findings, or proportion of patients requiring drainage of the bile ducts. There were, however, more pancreatic duct injections, a greater extent of pancreatography, and more biliary sphincterotomies in the losartan group than in the placebo group. Losartan was not associated with risk of hyperenzymemia compared to the placebo group after multi-varible logistic regression analysis (odds ratio 1.6, 95%CI 0.3-7.8).

CONCLUSION: In this randomized trial 50 mg losartan given orally had no prophylactic effect on development of hyperenzymemia after ERCP.

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography pancreatitis: Is time for a new preventive approach?

Acute pancreatitis is the most common serious complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) and its incidence may exceed 25% in some high-risk patient subsets. In some patients, pancreatitis may follow a severe course with pancreatic necrosis, multiorgan failure, permanent disability and even death. Hence, approaches which minimize both the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis are worth pursuing. Pancreatic stents have been used with some success in the prevention of post-ERCP, while so far pharmacological trials have yielded disappointing results. A recent multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial has shown that rectally administered indomethacin is effective in reducing the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis, the occurrence of episodes of moderate-to-severe pancreatitis and the length of hospital stay in high-risk patients. These results together with the demonstration that rectal administration of indomethacin is not associated with enhanced risk of bleeding strongly support the use of this drug in the prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

[Effects of rectal indomethacin in the prevention of post-ERCP acute pancreatitis]

Recently non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have seemed to reduce the frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis in some prospective controlled trials, but the results have to be confirmed by further studies.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of rectally administered indomethacin for the reduction of incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

METHOD

A prospective randomized placebo-controlled study was conducted in 228 patients who underwent ERCP. Patients were randomized to receive a suppository containing 100 mg indomethacin or an inert placebo 10 mins before ERCP. Patients were evaluated clinically and biochemically by using serum amylase levels measured 24 h after the procedure.

RESULTS

Pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia occurred more frequently in the placebo group, but the difference was not significant. In respect to the rate of pancreatitis, this tendency could particularly be observed in females, in patients older than 60 years and in patients with BMI lower than 25; however, it completely failed in cases with pancreatic duct filling or in those with pancreatic EST.

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal indomethacin given before ERCP did not prove to be statistically effective in the reduction of the incidence of post-procedure pancreatitis. Further, controlled multicenter studies are required to assess safely the potential efficacy of indomethacin in the prevention of pancreatitis following ERCP.

Indomethacin for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis prophylaxis: Is it the magic bullet?

Acute pancreatitis is a common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Pancreatic duct stent insertion after ERCP has been widely accepted as the standard of care for the prevention of this complication in high-risk patients. Unfortunately, the placement of pancreatic stents requires higher level of endoscopic expertise and is not always feasible due to anatomic considerations. Therefore, effective non-invasive pharmacologic prophylaxis remains appealing, particularly if it is inexpensive, easily administered, has a low risk side effect profile and is widely available. There have been multiple studies evaluating potential pharmacologic candidates for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) prophylaxis, most of them yielding disappointing results. A recently published large, multi-center, randomized controlled trial reported that in high risk patients a single dose of rectal indomethacin administered immediately after the ERCP significantly decreased the incidence of PEP compare to placebo.

NSAIDs for prevention of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Ready for prime time?

Acute pancreatitis is the most common and the most fearful complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis has therefore been of great interest to endoscopists performing ERCP procedures. So far, only pancreatic duct stenting during ERCP and rectal administration of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) prior to or immediately after ERCP have been consistently shown to be effective for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. This commentary focuses on a short discussion about the rates, mechanisms, and risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis, and effective means for its prevention with emphasis on the use of NSAIDs including a recent clinical trial published in The New England Journal of Medicine by Elmunzer et al^[11].

Low-dose rectal diclofenac for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis is a common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (specifically, 100 mg of diclofenac or indomethacin) have shown promising prophylactic activity in post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). However, the 100-mg dose is higher than that ordinarily used in Japan.

METHODS

We performed a prospective randomized controlled study to evaluate the efficacy of low-dose rectal diclofenac for the prevention of PEP. Patients who were scheduled to undergo ERCP were randomized to receive a saline infusion either with 50 mg of rectal diclofenac (diclofenac group) or without (control group) 30 min before ERCP. The dose of diclofenac was reduced to 25 mg in patients weighing <50 kg. The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of PEP.

RESULTS

Enrollment was terminated early because the planned interim analysis found a statistically significant intergroup difference in the occurrence of PEP. A total of 104 patients were eligible for this study; 51 patients received rectal diclofenac. Twelve patients (11.5%) developed PEP: 3.9% (2/51) in the diclofenac group and 18.9% (10/53) in the control group (p = 0.017). After ERCP, the incidence of hyperamylasemia was not significantly different between the two groups. Post-ERCP pain was significantly more frequent in the control group than in the diclofenac group (37.7 vs. 7.8%, respectively; p < 0.001). There were no adverse events related to diclofenac.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose rectal diclofenac can prevent PEP.

A randomized trial of rectal indomethacin to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Preliminary research suggests that rectally administered nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs may reduce the incidence of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial, we assigned patients at elevated risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis to receive a single dose of rectal indomethacin or placebo immediately after ERCP. Patients were determined to be at high risk on the basis of validated patient- and procedure-related risk factors. The primary outcome was post-ERCP pancreatitis, which was defined as new upper abdominal pain, an elevation in pancreatic enzymes to at least three times the upper limit of the normal range 24 hours after the procedure, and hospitalization for at least 2 nights.

RESULTS

A total of 602 patients were enrolled and completed follow-up. The majority of patients (82%) had a clinical suspicion of sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Post-ERCP pancreatitis developed in 27 of 295 patients (9.2%) in the indomethacin group and in 52 of 307 patients (16.9%) in the placebo group (P=0.005). Moderate-to-severe pancreatitis developed in 13 patients (4.4%) in the indomethacin group and in 27 patients (8.8%) in the placebo group (P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis, rectal indomethacin significantly reduced the incidence of the condition. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00820612.).

The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with pancreatic disease

Given the significant risk of pancreatitis and the advent of high-fidelity diagnostic techniques, ERCP is now reserved as a therapeutic procedure for those with pancreatic disease. Early ERCP benefits those with gallstone pancreatitis who present with or develop cholangitis or biliary obstruction. Among those with idiopathic pancreatitis, ERCP may be used to confirm and treat SOD, microlithiasis, and structural anomalies, including pancreas divisum. Pancreatic endotherapy is a consideration to decrease pain in those with pancreatic duct obstruction, although surgical decompression may be more durable, particularly in those with severe disease. Pancreatic duct leaks may respond to endoscopic drainage, but optimal therapy is achieved if a bridging stent can be placed. Finally, using a wire-guided technique and pancreatic duct stents in high-risk patients, particularly in cases of suspected SOD, may minimize the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Impact of introduction of wire-guided cannulation in therapeutic biliary endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Wire-guided cannulation (WGC) might increase the biliary cannulation rate and decrease the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). We assessed the learning curve for WGC in therapeutic biliary ERCP (study 1) and compared WGC and conventional contrast-assisted cannulation (CC) by a matched case-control study (study 2).

METHODS

Prospectively collected data of 500 therapeutic biliary ERCP cases (250 consecutive cases of WGC and 250 matched controls of CC) were retrospectively studied. Rate and time of biliary cannulation, total procedure time, PEP, and hyperamylasemia were analyzed.

RESULTS

In study 1, biliary cannulation by WGC was successful in 96% of the first 50 cases, with a median time to cannulation of 3 min. Rates of hyperamylasemia were within 10% after 100 WGC. In study 2, there were no significant differences in the overall cannulation rate and PEP between WGC and CC, but the total procedure time was shorter in WGC (30 vs 35 min, P = 0.059). Rates of hyperamylasemia and the change in serum amylase levels was lower (9% vs 14%, P = 0.069, and + 62.8 U/L vs+ 169.5 U/L, P = 0.043) in WGC, which was more prominent in experienced endoscopists (9% vs 17%, P = 0.025, and + 68.9 U/L vs+ 229.3 U/L, P = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of WGC was effective in the first 50 cases and did not increase the rate of PEP in biliary therapeutic ERCP.

Use of udenafil is not associated with a reduction in post-ERCP pancreatitis: results of a randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

Udenafil, a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor, may decrease sphincter of Oddi tone and allow efficient cannulation.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether prophylactic udenafil reduces the rates of occurrence of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study.

SETTING

Three academic medical centers.

PATIENTS

From November 2008 to November 2010, a total of 278 patients who underwent ERCP were analyzed.

INTERVENTION

ERCP.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT

Rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

RESULTS

Demographic features, indications for ERCP, and therapeutic procedures were similar in each group. The overall rate of pancreatitis was 7.9% (22/278). There was no significant difference in the rate (8.0% [11/137] vs 7.8% [11/141], P = .944) and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis between the udenafil and placebo groups. Severe pancreatitis developed in 1 patient in the placebo group. On both univariate and multivariate analyses, age 40 years or younger, suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, complete pancreatic duct opacification, and failed cannulation were associated with post-ERCP pancreatitis. Only mild udenafil-related complications occurred, including flushing (n = 3) and headache (n = 3).

LIMITATIONS

Unselected patient group, overestimation of the rate of pancreatitis in the placebo group.

CONCLUSION

Udenafil was not effective for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis in this study. (

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

KCT0000021.).

Nafamostat mesilate for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Pancreatitis is the most common major complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Efforts have been made to identify pharmacologic agents capable of reducing its incidence and severity. The aim of this trial was to determine whether prophylactic nafamostat mesilate, a synthetic protease inhibitor, would reduce the frequency and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

METHODS

A total of 286 patients were randomized to receive either intravenous nafamostat mesilate or placebo 60 minutes before ERCP and for 6 hours after ERCP. A database was prospectively collected by a defined protocol. Standardized criteria were used to diagnose and grade the severity of pancreatitis.

RESULTS

The groups were similar with regard to patient demographics and to patient and procedure risk factors for pancreatitis. The overall incidence of pancreatitis was 5.9%. It occurred in 4 (2.8%) of 143 patients in the nafamostat group and in 13 (9.1%) of 143 patients in the control group (P = 0.03). Pancreatitis was graded mild in 2.1% and moderate in 0.7% of the nafamostat group and mild in 7.0% and moderate in 2.1% of the control group. There was no significant difference between the groups in the severity of pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic intravenous nafamostat mesilate reduces the frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Diclofenac inhibits tumor growth in a murine model of pancreatic cancer by modulation of VEGF levels and arginase activity

Background

Diclofenac is one of the oldest anti-inflammatory drugs in use. In addition to its inhibition of cyclooxygenases (COX), diclofenac potently inhibits phospholipase A₂ (PLA₂), thus yielding a broad anti-inflammatory effect. Since inflammation is an important factor in the development of pancreatic tumors we explored the potential of diclofenac to inhibit tumor growth in mice inoculated with PANCO2 cells orthotopically.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We found that diclofenac treatment (30 mg/kg/bw for 11 days) of mice inoculated with PANC02 cells, reduced the tumor weight by 60%, correlating with increased apoptosis of tumor cells. Since this effect was not observed in vitro on cultured PANCO2 cells, we theorized that diclofenac beneficial treatment involved other mediators present in vivo. Indeed, diclofenac drastically decreased tumor vascularization by downregulating VEGF in the tumor and in abdominal cavity fluid. Furthermore, diclofenac directly inhibited vascular sprouting ex vivo. Surprisingly, in contrast to other COX-2 inhibitors, diclofenac increased arginase activity/arginase 1 protein content in tumor stroma cells, peritoneal macrophages and white blood cells by 2.4, 4.8 and 2 fold, respectively. We propose that the subsequent arginine depletion and decrease in NO levels, both in serum and peritoneal cavity, adds to tumor growth inhibition by malnourishment and poor vasculature development.

Conclusion/Significance

In conclusion, diclofenac shows pronounced antitumoral properties in pancreatic cancer model that can contribute to further treatment development. The ability of diclofenac to induce arginase activity in tumor stroma, peritoneal macrophages and white blood cells provides a tool to study a controversial issue of pro-and antitumoral effects of arginine depletion.

Prophylactic injection of hypertonic saline-epinephrine oral to the papilla for prevention of postsphincterotomy bleeding

GOALS/BACKGROUND

Endoscopic injection of hypertonic saline-epinephrine (HSE) solution oral to the papilla effectively arrests uncontrolled bleeding after endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a prophylactic injection of HSE solution oral to the papilla before ES for prevention of post-ES bleeding.

STUDY

Patients scheduled for ES were recruited into this study. Before ES, patients randomly underwent a single submucosal injection of HSE solution (1 mL) 1 to 2-cm oral to the papilla (injection group) or no injection (noninjection group). After ES, patients were prospectively evaluated for occurrence of post-ES complications such as bleeding, perforation, and pancreatitis between the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients were randomized to the injection group (n=60) or the noninjection group (n=60). The 2 groups were similar with respect to all background variables. Bleeding occurred in 10 patients (8.3%), and the incidence of bleeding was significantly higher in the noninjection group (9/60) than in the injection group (1/60) (P=0.017). Retroperitoneal perforation occurred in 1 patient (injection group) (0.83%). Pancreatitis occurred in 10 patients (8.3%), and the incidence of pancreatitis tended to be higher in the noninjection group (8/60) than in the injection group (2/60) (P=0.095).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic injection of HSE solution oral to the papilla before ES is a simple and inexpensive method, and is effective for prevention of post-ES bleeding.

Treatment of acute pancreatitis: an attempted historical review

This attempt at a historical review of the treatment of acute pancreatitis summarizes the findings of studies carried out in decades long past and shows their impact on the therapy of this disease today. It identifies in retrospect the correct avenues of research and the blind alleys, and describes the ebb and flow of interest in various forms of management. Acquaintance with the work of previous investigators may prevent the unnecessary rediscovery of old principles of treatment. Not all of the studies discussed can be found with search engines: they come from the author's personal library, collected over his 40 years as an active pancreatologist, and from the knowledge of the early literature bequeathed to him by his teachers and mentors.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography associated pancreatitis: A 15-year review

The aim of this article is to review the literature regarding post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. We searched for and evaluated all articles describing the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathophysiology, morbidity, mortality and prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in adult patients using the PubMed database. Search terms included endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, pancreatitis, ampulla of vater, endoscopic sphincterotomy, balloon dilatation, cholangiography, adverse events, standards and utilization. We limited our review of articles to those published between January 1, 1994 and August 15, 2009 regarding human adults and written in the English language. Publications from the reference sections were reviewed and included if they were salient and fell into the time period of interest. Between the dates queried, seventeen large (> 500 patients) prospective and four large retrospective trials were conducted. PEP occurred in 1%-15% in the prospective trials and in 1%-4% in the retrospective trials. PEP was also reduced with pancreatic duct stent placement and outcomes were improved with endoscopic sphincterotomy compared to balloon sphincter dilation in the setting of choledocholithiasis. Approximately 34 pharmacologic agents have been evaluated for the prevention of PEP over the last fifteen years in 63 trials. Although 22 of 63 trials published during our period of review suggested a reduction in PEP, no pharmacologic therapy has been widely accepted in clinical use in decreasing the development of PEP. In conclusion, PEP is a well-recognized complication of ERCP. Medical treatment for prevention has been disappointing. Proper patient selection and pancreatic duct stenting have been shown to reduce the complication rate in randomized clinical trials.

Recent advances in the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis with NSAIDs

Acute pancreatitis is one of the most common complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and often results in prolonged hospitalization and further intervention. Trials of many pharmacological therapies for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) have yielded disappointing results. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are potent inhibitors of prostaglandin synthesis, phospholipase A2 and neutrophil-endothelial interaction. Recently, prospective clinical trials evaluating NSAIDs in the prevention of PEP have yielded positive results, indicating their promising future in clinical use.

NSAIDs and Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review

The resulting pain is the main symptom of acute pancreatitis and it should be alleviated as soon as possible. NSAIDs are the first line therapy for pain and they are generally administered to acute pancreatitis patients upon admission to the hospital. In addition, these drugs have also been used to prevent post-endoscopic cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) acute pancreatitis. On the other hand, there are several reports indicating that NSAIDs may be the actual cause of acute pancreatitis. We carried out a literature search on PubMed/MEDLINE; all full text papers published in from January 1966 to November 2009 on the use of NSAIDs in acute pancreatitis were collected; the literature search was also supplemented by a review of the bibliographies of the papers evaluated. Thus, in this article, we will systematically review the current literature in order to better illustrate the role of NSAIDs in acute pancreatitis, in particular: i) NSAIDs as a cause of acute pancreatitis; ii) their use to prevent post-retrograde ERCP pancreatitis and iii) their efficacy for pain relief in the acute illness of the pancreas.

Nafamostat for Prophylaxis against Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis Compared with Gabexate

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The protease inhibitors, nafamostat and gabexate, have been used to prevent pancreatitis related to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). In vitro, nafamostat inhibits the pancreatic protease activities 10-100 times more potently than gabexate. We evaluated the efficacy of nafamostat for prophylaxis against post-ERCP pancreatitis in comparison with gabexate.

METHODS

Five hundred patients (208 patients in the nafamostat-treated group and 292 in the gabexate-treated group) were analyzed retrospectively after selective exclusion. The incidences of pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia after the ERCP were compared between the nafamostat and gabexate groups.

RESULTS

The incidences of acute pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia were 9.1% and 40.9%, respectively, in the nafamostat-treated group, and 8.6% and 39.4% in the gabexate-treated group. The frequencies of post-ERCP pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia did not differ significantly between the two groups, Post-ERCP pancreatitis in two group did not vary according to the different ERCP procedures. The mean serum amylase level at 6 h after ERCP was significantly lower in the nafamostat-treated group than in the gabexate-treated group (p=0.020). However, the difference in serum amylase level did not persist at 18 h and 36 h post-ERCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of nafamostat before ERCP was not inferior to gabexate in protecting against the development of pancreatitis.

Efficacy of intramuscular diclofenac and fluid replacement in prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis

AIM: To assess the efficacy of intramuscular diclofenac and fluid replacement for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis.

METHODS: A prospective, placebo-controlled study was conducted in 80 patients who underwent ERCP. Patients were randomized to receive parenteral diclofenac at a loading dose of 75 mg followed by the infusion of 5-10 mL/kg per hour isotonic saline over 4 h after the procedure, or the infusion of 500 mL isotonic saline as placebo. Patients were evaluated clinically, and serum amylase levels were measured 4, 8 and 24 h after the procedure.

RESULTS: The two groups were matched for age, sex, underlying disease, ERCP findings, and type of treatment. The overall incidence of pancreatitis was 7.5% in the diclofenac group and 17.5% in the placebo group (12.5% in total). There were no significant differences in the incidence of pancreatitis and other variables between the two groups. In the subgroup analysis, the frequency of pancreatitis in the patients without sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) was significantly lower in the diclofenac group than in the control group (P = 0.047).

CONCLUSION: Intramuscular diclofenac and fluid replacement lowered the rate of pancreatitis in patients without SOD.

Does glyceryl nitrate prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis? A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial

OBJECTIVE

Acute pancreatitis is the most dreaded complication of ERCP. Two studies have shown a significant effect of glyceryl nitrate (GN) in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). We wanted to evaluate this promising effect in a larger study with a realistically precalculated incidence of PEP.

DESIGN/PATIENTS

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter study including patients from 14 European centers was performed. A total of 820 patients were entered; 806 were randomized.

INTERVENTION

The active drug was transdermal GN (Discotrine/Minitran, 3M Pharma) 15 mg/24 hours; placebo (PL) was an identical-looking patch applied before ERCP. A total of 401 patients received GN; 405 received PL.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients had PEP (5.8%), 18 (4.5%) in the GN group and 29 (7.1%) in the PL group. The relative risk reduction of PEP in the GN group of 36% (95% CI, 11%-65%) compared with the PL group was not statistically significant (P = .11). Thirteen had mild pancreatitis (4 in the GN group, 9 in the PL group), 26 had moderate pancreatitis (9 in the GN group, 17 in the PL group), and 8 had severe pancreatitis (5 in the GN group, 3 in the PL group). Headache (P < .001) and hypotension (P = .006) were more common in the GN group. Significant variables predictive of PEP were not having biliary stones extracted; hypotension after ERCP; morphine, propofol, glucagon, and general anesthesia during the procedure; or no sufentanil during the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial showed no statistically significant preventive effect of GN on PEP. Because of a considerable risk of a type II error, an effect of GN may have been overlooked. (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00121901.).

Risk of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic biliary drainage

BACKGROUND

Pancreatitis is the most common and serious complication to occur after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). It is often associated with additional diagnostic modalities and/or treatment of obstructive jaundice. The aim of this study was to determine the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis associated with pancreaticobiliary examination and endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD).

METHODS

A total of 740 consecutive ERCP procedures performed in 477 patients were analysed for the occurrence of pancreatitis. These included 470 EBD procedures and 167 procedures to further evaluate the pancreaticobiliary tract using brush cytology and/or biopsy, intraductal ultrasound and/or peroral cholangioscopy or peroral pancreatoscopy. The occurrence of post-ERCP pancreatitis was analysed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis was 3.9% (29 of 740 procedures). The risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis were: being female (6.5%; odds ratio [OR] 2.5, P= 0.02); first EBD procedure without endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) (6.9%; OR 3.0, P= 0.003), and performing additional diagnostic procedures on the pancreatobiliary duct (9.6%; OR 4.6, P < 0.0001). Pancreatitis after subsequent draining procedures was rare (0.4%; OR for first-time drainage 16.6, P= 0.0003). Furthermore, pancreatitis was not recognized in 59 patients who underwent ES. Seven patients with post-EBD pancreatitis were treated with additional ES.

CONCLUSIONS

Invasive diagnostic examinations of the pancreaticobiliary duct and first-time perampullary biliary drainage without ES were high-risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis. Endoscopic sphincterotomy may be of use to prevent post-EBD pancreatitis.

Efficacy of recombinant human interleukin-10 in prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in subjects with increased risk

OBJECTIVES

Pancreatitis is the most common major complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Inflammatory cytokines are released during acute pancreatitis. Interleukin-10 (IL-10) is a potent inhibitor of cytokines and has been shown to attenuate pancreatitis in animal models and pilot human studies. This study aimed to determine whether prophylactic IL-10 administration reduces the frequency and/or severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients.

METHODS

A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted. Patients received IL-10 at a dose of either 8 or 20 microg/kg or placebo as a single intravenous injection 15 to 30 minutes before ERCP. Standardized criteria were used to diagnose and grade the severity of postprocedure pancreatitis.

RESULTS

A total of 305 of the planned total enrollment of 948 patients were randomized. There was a 15%, 22%, and 14% incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis in the IL-10 (8 microg/kg), IL-10 (20 microg/kg), and placebo treatment groups, respectively (P = 0.83 for IL-10 8 microg/kg vs placebo and 0.14 for IL-10 20 microg/kg vs placebo). Due to apparent lack of efficacy, the study was terminated at an interim analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

: There was no apparent benefit of IL-10 treatment when compared with placebo in reducing the incidence of post-ERCP acute pancreatitis in subjects with increased risk.

Nafamostat mesylate in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis and risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatitis is a major complication of ERCP.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether nafamostat mesylate prophylaxis decreases the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP).

DESIGN

A single-center, randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial.

SETTING

A large tertiary-referral center.

PATIENTS

From January 2005 to December 2007, a total of 704 patients who underwent ERCP were analyzed.

INTERVENTION

Patients received continuous infusion of 500 mL of 5% dextrose solution with 20 mg of nafamostat mesylate (354 patients) or without 20 mg of nafamostat mesylate (350 patients). Serum amylase and lipase levels were checked before ERCP, 4 and 24 hours after ERCP, and when clinically indicated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The incidence of PEP and risk factors associated with the development of PEP.

RESULTS

The incidence of acute pancreatitis was 5.4%. There was a significant difference in the incidence of PEP between the nafamostat mesylate and control groups (3.3% vs 7.4%, respectively; P = .018). Univariate analysis identified history of acute pancreatitis (P < .001), difficult cannulation (P = .023), periampullary diverticulum (P = .004), age younger than 40 years (P = .009), and >/=5 pancreatic-duct contrast injections (odds ratio [OR] 2.736, P = .012) as statistically significant risk factors.

LIMITATIONS

A single-center study.

CONCLUSIONS

Nafamostat mesylate prophylaxis is partially effective in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis. Independent risk factors for PEP are a history of acute pancreatitis and multiple pancreatic-duct contrast injections.

Epinephrine sprayed on the papilla for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Epinephrine sprayed on the papilla may reduce papillary edema and thus prevent acute pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of this technique for prevention of post- ERCP pancreatitis.

METHODS

Patients scheduled for ERCP were recruited into this study. We randomized the patients to have 10 ml of either 0.02% epinephrine (epinephrine group) or saline (control group) sprayed on the papilla after diagnostic ERCP and prospectively analyzed the occurrence of post-ERCP pancreatitis between the groups. We recorded duct visualization, presence of pancreatic acinarization, number of injections into the pancreatic duct, total volume of contrast used, and procedure duration.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to visualization of the bile duct and/or the main and accessory pancreatic ducts, presence of pancreatic acinarization, number of injections into the pancreatic duct, total volume of contrast used, and procedure duration. Overall, post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 4 of the 370 patients (1.1%). The incidence of pancreatitis tended to be higher in the control group (4/185) than in the epinephrine group (0/185) (P = 0.1230).

CONCLUSIONS

Epinephrine sprayed on the papilla tended to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis, although it was not statistically significant because of the low incidence of pancreatitis. Further studies on the efficacy of this technique in patients at high risk for pancreatitis, and on other volumes and/or concentrations of epinephrine, are warranted.

Evaluation of recombinant platelet-activating factor acetylhydrolase for reducing the incidence and severity of post-ERCP acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatitis is the most common major complication of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP. Platelet-activating factor (PAF) has been implicated in the pathophysiologic events associated with acute pancreatitis. Animal and human studies suggested that recombinant PAF acetylhydrolase (rPAF-AH) might ameliorate the severity of acute pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to determine whether prophylactic rPAF-AH administration reduces the frequency or severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients.

DESIGN

Randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients received rPAF-AH at a dose of either 1 or 5 mg/kg or placebo. Patients were administered a single intravenous infusion over 10 minutes of study drug or placebo <1 hour before ERCP.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Standardized criteria were used to diagnose and grade the severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Adverse events were prospectively recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 600 patients were enrolled. There were no statistically significant differences among the treatment groups with respect to patient demographics, ERCP indications, and patient and procedure risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis with the following exceptions: the rPAF-AH 5 mg/kg group had significantly fewer patients younger than 40 years old and scheduled to undergo a therapeutic ERCP involving the pancreatic sphincter or duct. Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 17.5%, 15.9%, and 19.6% of patients receiving rPAF-AH (1 mg/kg), rPAF-AH (5 mg/kg), and placebo, respectively (P = .59 for rPAF-AH 1 mg/kg vs placebo and P = .337 for rPAF-AH 5 mg/kg vs placebo). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups with regard to the severity of pancreatitis, frequency of amylase/lipase elevation more than 3 times normal, or abdominal pain.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no apparent benefit of rPAF-AH treatment compared with placebo in reducing the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis in subjects at increased risk.

Role of diclofenac in reducing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Acute pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiography presents a unique opportunity for prophylaxis and early modification of the disease process because the initial triggering event is temporally well defined and takes place in the hospital. We report a prospective, single-center, randomized, double-blind controlled trial to determine if rectal diclofenac reduces the incidence of pancreatitis following cholangiopancreatography.

METHODS

Entry to the trial was restricted to patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. Immediately after endoscopy, patients were given a suppository containing either 100 mg diclofenac or placebo. Estimation of serum amylase level and clinical evaluation were performed in all patients.

RESULTS

One hundred patients entered the trial, and 50 received rectal diclofenac. Fifteen patients developed pancreatitis (15%), of whom two received rectal diclofenac and 13 received placebo (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This trial shows that rectal diclofenac given immediately after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography can reduce the incidence of acute pancreatitis.

Pharmacological approach to acute pancreatitis

The aim of the present review is to summarize the current knowledge regarding pharmacological prevention and treatment of acute pancreatitis (AP) based on experimental animal models and clinical trials. Somatostatin (SS) and octreotide inhibit the exocrine production of pancreatic enzymes and may be useful as prophylaxis against Post Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis (PEP). The protease inhibitor Gabexate mesilate (GM) is used routinely as treatment to AP in some countries, but randomized clinical trials and a meta-analysis do not support this practice. Nitroglycerin (NGL) is a nitrogen oxide (NO) donor, which relaxes the sphincter of Oddi. Studies show conflicting results when applied prior to ERCP and a large multicenter randomized study is warranted. Steroids administered as prophylaxis against PEP has been validated without effect in several randomized trials. The non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) indomethacin and diclofenac have in randomized studies showed potential as prophylaxis against PEP. Interleukin 10 (IL-10) is a cytokine with anti-inflammatory properties but two trials testing IL-10 as prophylaxis to PEP have returned conflicting results. Antibodies against tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) have a potential as rescue therapy but no clinical trials are currently being conducted. The antibiotics beta-lactams and quinolones reduce mortality when necrosis is present in pancreas and may also reduce incidence of infected necrosis. Evidence based pharmacological treatment of AP is limited and studies on the effect of potent anti-inflammatory drugs are warranted.

Allopurinol to prevent pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is associated with a risk of pancreatitis (PEP). Animal studies suggest that (single-dose) allopurinol (xanthine oxidase inhibitor with high oral bioavailability and long-lasting active metabolites) may reduce this risk; human study results are conflicting. The aim of this study was to determine if allopurinol decreases the rate of PEP.

METHODS

Patients referred for ERCP to 9 endoscopists at 2 tertiary centers were randomized to receive either allopurinol 300 mg or identical placebo orally 60 minutes before ERCP, stratified according to high-risk ERCP (manometry or pancreatic therapy). The primary outcome (PEP) was adjudicated blindly; pancreatitis was defined according to the Cotton consensus, and evaluated at 48 hours and 30 days. Secondary outcomes included severe PEP, length of stay, and mortality (nil). The trial was terminated after the blinded (midpoint) interim analysis, as recommended by the independent data and safety monitoring committee.

RESULTS

We randomized 586 subjects, 293 to each arm. The crude PEP rates were 5.5% (allopurinol) and 4.1% (placebo), (P = .44; difference = 1.4%; 95% confidence interval, -2.1% to 4.8%). The Mantel-Haenszel combined risk ratio for PEP with allopurinol, considering stratification, was 1.37 (95% confidence interval, 0.65-2.86). Subgroup analyses suggested nonsignificant trends toward possible benefit in the high-risk group, and possible harm for the remaining subjects. Logistic regression found pancreatic therapy, pancreatic injection, and prior PEP to be the only independent predictors of PEP.

CONCLUSIONS

Allopurinol does not appear to reduce the overall risk of PEP; however, its potential benefit in the high-risk group (but potential harm for non-high-risk patients) means further study is required.

The Atlanta Classification of acute pancreatitis revisited

BACKGROUND

In a complex disease such as acute pancreatitis, correct terminology and clear definitions are important. The clinically based Atlanta Classification was formulated in 1992, but in recent years it has been increasingly criticized. No formal evaluation of the use of the Atlanta definitions in the literature has ever been performed.

METHODS

A Medline literature search sought studies published after 1993. Guidelines, review articles and their cross-references were reviewed to assess whether the Atlanta or alternative definitions were used.

RESULTS

A total of 447 articles was assessed, including 12 guidelines and 82 reviews. Alternative definitions of predicted severity of acute pancreatitis, actual severity and organ failure were used in more than half of the studies. There was a large variation in the interpretation of the Atlanta definitions of local complications, especially relating to the content of peripancreatic collections.

CONCLUSION

The Atlanta definitions for acute pancreatitis are often used inappropriately, and alternative definitions are frequently applied. Such lack of consensus illustrates the need for a revision of the Atlanta Classification.

Low-dose heparin for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

As suggested by observational and animal studies, heparin has antiinflammatory effects that could prevent acute post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. Low-molecular-weight heparin did not reduce the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis in a controlled study. The current study aimed to determine whether prophylactic administration of low-dose unfractionated heparin, which has potentially more antiinflammatory capability, can prevent acute post-ERCP pancreatitis.

METHODS

Patients scheduled for ERCP in the authors' department were randomized to receive unfractionated heparin (5,000 IU) or placebo (saline solution 0.5 ml) administered subcutaneously 20 to 30 min before the ERCP. Patients who had undergone endoscopic sphincterotomy in the past were excluded from the study. Post-ERCP pancreatitis was defined according to criteria established by Cotton: abdominal pain combined with a threefold elevation of blood amylase 24 h after the ERCP.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 106 patients. One patient was excluded from the analysis due to inaccessible papilla of Vater, leaving 51 patients in the heparin group and 54 in the placebo group, for a total of 105 patients (62 women and 43 men) with a mean age of 64.6 years. The rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis was not different between the groups (heparin, 4 patients, 7.8%; placebo, 4 patients, 7.4%). Two patients in each group experienced mild bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

The study did not demonstrate a significant effect of low-dose unfractionated heparin in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. A multicenter trial with a larger number of patients is needed to demonstrate a benefit from this drug.

Efficacy of diclofenac in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis in predominantly high-risk patients: a randomized double-blind prospective trial

BACKGROUND

Pancreatitis is one of the major complications of ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy. It has been shown that nonsteriodal anti-inflammatory drugs are potent inhibitors of phospholipase A(2), activity which is increased in pancreatitis. A previous study showed reduction of post-ERCP pancreatitis with administration of rectal diclofenac.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine whether prophylactic oral diclofenac will reduce the incidence and the severity of ERCP-induced pancreatitis, especially in high-risk patients.

DESIGN

Single-center, randomized, double-blinded, prospective study.

SETTING

Indiana University Medical Center.

PATIENTS

A total of 207 evaluable patients were randomized to receive either diclofenac 50 mg or placebo by mouth 30 to 90 minutes before and 4 to 6 hours after ERCP.

RESULTS

The groups were similar with regard to patient demographics and to patient and procedure risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis. The overall incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis was 16.4%. It occurred in 17 of 102 patients in the control group (16.7%) and in 17 of 105 patients in diclofenac group (16.2%). The pancreatitis was graded mild in 9.8%, moderate in 5.9%, and severe 1.0% of the control group, and mild in 10.5%, moderate in 4.8%, and severe in 1.0% of the diclofenac group. In high-risk patients, the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis was 17.3%. It occurred in 18.0% (16/89) in the control group and in 17.8% (16/90) in the diclofenac group. There was no significant difference between the groups in the frequency or severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis in overall and high-risk patients; however, the power of the study was less than 45%.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic orally administered diclofenac was not observed to affect the frequency or severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients.

Pancreatic sphincterotomy: Technique, indications, and complications

Pancreatic sphincterotomy serves as the cornerstone of endoscopic therapy of the pancreas. Historically, its indications have been less well-defined than those of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy, yet it plays a definite and useful role in diseases such as chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic-type sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. In the appropriate setting, it may be used as a single therapeutic maneuver, or in conjunction with other endoscopic techniques such as pancreatic stone extraction or stent placement. The current standard of practice utilizes two different methods of performing pancreatic sphincterotomy: a pull-type sphincterotome technique without prior stent placement, and a needle-knife sphincterotome technique over an existing stent. The complications associated with pancreatic sphincterotomy are many, although acute pancreatitis appears to be the most common and the most serious of the early complications. As such, it continues to be reserved for those endoscopists who perform a relatively high-volume of therapeutic pancreaticobiliary endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography.

Early successes and late failures in the prevention of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Acute pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The only way to prevent this complication is to avoid an ERCP all together. Because of the risks involved, a careful consideration should be given to the indication for ERCP and the potential risk/benefit ratio of the test. Once a decision to perform an ERCP is made, the procedure should be carried out with meticulous care by an experienced endoscopist, and with a minimum of pancreatic duct opacification. Several pharmacologic agents have been tested, but to date the most important method of reducing post ERCP pancreatitis is the placement of pancreatic stent. Pancreatic stents should be placed in all patients at high risk of this complication such as those undergoing pancreatic sphincterotomy, pancreatic duct manipulation and intervention, and patients with suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Pancreatic stents should be also considered in patients requiring precut sphincterotomy to gain biliary access.

Incidence, risk factors, and prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis

Pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Because of the potential risks and consequences of post-ERCP pancreatitis, considerable efforts have been made to define patient- and procedure-related factors that may be associated with an increased risk of this complication, along with determining interventions that can be done to reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Efficacy of postprocedure administration of gabexate mesylate in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a randomized, controlled, multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Gabexate mesylate reduces the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Patient-related risk factors associated with pancreatitis can be identified before ERCP, but the procedure-related factors are recognized only at the end of the procedure. This study's aim was to evaluate whether gabexate mesylate administered after ERCP reduces the incidence of pancreatitis.

DESIGN

Randomized, prospective, double-blind, multicenter trial.

SETTING

Tertiary care centers.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION

A total of 608 patients undergoing ERCP were treated with gabexate mesylate 500 mg within 1 hour before ERCP (group A, 203 patients) or within 1 hour after ERCP (group B, 203), or with saline solution (group C, 202).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The incidence and severity of pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia, as well as factors associated with the development of pancreatitis.

RESULTS

The groups were similar for demographic characteristics, indications to ERCP, risk factors for pancreatitis, and therapeutic procedures. The incidence of pancreatitis was 3.9% in group A, 3.4% in group B, and 9.4% in group C (P<.01). Two patients (in groups A and C) developed necrotizing pancreatitis, and 1 died. Hyperamylasemia occurred in 23.6% in groups A and B, and in 24.7% in group C. Levels of amylase, the incidence of abdominal pain, and other complications occurred similarly. Female sex (odds ratios [OR] 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-5.9) and difficult cannulation (OR 5.6, 95% CI 2.6-12.3) were independently associated with pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of gabexate mesylate after ERCP protects against the development of pancreatitis similarly to the preprocedure administration. Factors associated with pancreatitis were mainly recognized after ERCP. We suggest administering gabexate mesylate after ERCP only in those patients recognized to be at risk of developing pancreatitis.