Acute Cholangitis. In: Sartelli M, Bassetti M, Martin-loeches I, editors. Abdominal Sepsis. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018. pp. 65-81. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-59704-1_7]

Predicting Hospitalization, Organ Dysfunction, and Mortality in Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Acute Pancreatitis: Are SIRS and qSOFA Reliable Tools?

Background: Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) has shown constant incidence throughout time, despite advances in endoscopic technology, devices, or personal skills of the operating endoscopists, with prevention and prediction of severity in PEP being constant concerns. Several prospective studies have investigated the role of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria or the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score in the PEP severity assessment. However, there are no clearly defined tools for the prediction of PEP severity. Methods: A total of 403 patients were prospectively monitored 60 days after ERCP for the detection of PEP development. Consequently, we evaluated the lengths of stay, incidence of organic dysfunction, and mortality rates of these patients. The predictive power of the univariate model was evaluated by using the receiver operating characteristic curve and analyzing the area under the curve (AUC). Results: Incidence of PEP was similar to that reported in the majority of trials. The 60-day survival rate of PEP patients reached 82.8%. A qSOFA score ≥ 1 is a very good predictor for organ dysfunction (AUC 0.993, p < 0.0001). SIRS can also be considered a significant predictor for organic dysfunctions in PEP patients (AUC 0.926, p < 0.0001). However, only qSOFA was found to significantly predict mortality in PEP patients (AUC 0.885, p = 0.003), with SIRS criteria showing a much lower predictive power. Neither SIRS nor qSOFA showed any predictive value for the length of stay of PEP patients. Conclusion: Our study offers novel information about severity prediction in PEP patients. Both SIRS criteria and qSOFA showed good predictive value for organic dysfunction, mortality, and hospitalization.

Validation of Tokyo Guidelines 2007 and Tokyo Guidelines 2013/2018 Criteria for Acute Cholangitis and Predictors of In-Hospital Mortality

BACKGROUND

Acute cholangitis (AC) is a common emergency with a significant mortality risk. The Tokyo Guidelines (TG) provide recommendations for diagnosis, severity stratification, and management of AC. However, validation of the TG remains poor. This study aims to validate TG07, TG13, and TG18 criteria and identify predictors of in-hospital mortality in patients with AC.

METHODS

This is a retrospective audit of patients with a discharge diagnosis of AC in the year 2016. Demographic, clinical, investigation, management and mortality data were documented. We performed a multinomial logistic regression analysis with stepwise variable selection to identify severity predictors for in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-two patients with a median age of 75.9 years (IQR 64.8-82.8) years were included for analysis. TG13/TG18 diagnostic criteria were more sensitive than TG07 diagnostic criteria (85.1 vs. 75.2%; p < 0.006). The majority of the patients (n = 178; 67.9%) presented with abdominal pain, pyrexia (n = 156; 59.5%), and vomiting (n = 123; 46.9%). Blood cultures were positive in 95 (36.3%) patients, and 79 (83.2%) patients had monomicrobial growth. The 30-day, 90-day, and in-hospital mortality numbers were 3 (1.1%), 11 (4.2%), and 15 (5.7%), respectively. In multivariate analysis, type 2 diabetes mellitus (OR = 12.531; 95% CI 0.354-116.015; p = 0.026), systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg (OR = 10.108; 95% CI 1.094-93.395; p = 0.041), Glasgow coma score <15 (OR = 38.16; 95% CI 1.804-807.191; p = 0.019), and malignancy (OR = 14.135; 95% CI 1.017-196.394; p = 0.049) predicted in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

TG13/18 diagnostic criteria are more sensitive than TG07 diagnostic criteria. Type 2 diabetes mellitus, systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg, Glasgow coma score <15, and malignant etiology predict in-hospital mortality in patients with AC. These predictors could be considered in acute stratification and treatment of patients with AC.

Elderly patients (≥ 80 years) with acute calculous cholangitis have similar outcomes as non-elderly patients (< 80 years): Propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute cholangitis (AC) is a disease spectrum with varying extent of severity. Age ≥ 75 years forms part of the criteria for moderate (Grade II) severity in both the Tokyo Guidelines (TG13 and TG18). Aging is associated with reduced physiological reserves, frailty, and sarcopenia. However, there is evidence that age itself is not the determinant of inferior outcomes in elective and emergency biliary diseases. There is a paucity of reports comparing clinical outcomes amongst elderly patients vs non-elderly patients with AC.

AIM

To investigate the effect of age (≥ 80 years) on AC's morbidity and mortality using propensity score matching (PSM).

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective cohort study of all patients diagnosed with calculous AC (January 2016 to December 2016) and ≥ 80 years old (January 2012 to December 2016) at a tertiary university-affiliated teaching hospital. Inclusion criteria were patients who were treated for suspected or confirmed AC secondary to biliary stones. Patients with AC on a background of hepatobiliary malignancy, indwelling permanent metallic biliary stents, or concomitant pancreatitis were excluded. Elderly patients were defined as ≥ 80 years old in our study. A 1:1 PSM analysis was performed to reduce selection bias and address confounding factors. Study variables include comorbidities, vital parameters, laboratory and radiological investigations, and type of biliary decompression, including the time for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Primary outcomes include in-hospital mortality, 30-d and 90-d mortality. Length of hospital stay (LOS) was the secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Four hundred fifty-seven patients with AC were included in this study (318 elderly, 139 non-elderly). PSM analysis resulted in a total of 224 patients (112 elderly, 112 non-elderly). The adoption of ERCP between elderly and non-elderly was similar in both the unmatched (elderly 64.8%, non-elderly 61.9%, P = 0.551) and matched cohorts (elderly 68.8% and non-elderly 58%, P = 0.096). The overall in-hospital mortality, 30-d mortality and 90-d mortality was 4.6%, 7.4% and 8.5% respectively, with no statistically significant differences between the elderly and non-elderly in both the unmatched and matched cohorts. LOS was longer in the unmatched cohort [elderly 8 d, interquartile range (IQR) 6-13, vs non-elderly 8 d, IQR 5-11, P = 0.040], but was comparable in the matched cohort (elderly 7.5 d, IQR 5-11, vs non-elderly 8 d, IQR 5-11, P = 0.982). Subgroup analysis of patients who underwent ERCP demonstrated the majority of the patients (n = 159/292, 54.5%) had delayed ERCP (> 72 h from presentation). There was no significant difference in LOS, 30-d mortality, 90-d mortality, and in-hospital mortality in patients who had delayed ERCP in both the unmatched and matched cohort (matched cohort: in-hospital mortality [n = 1/42 (2.4%) vs 1/26 (3.8%), P = 0.728], 30-d mortality [n = 2/42 (4.8%) vs 2/26 (7.7%), P = 0.618], 90-d mortality [n = 2/42 (4.8%) vs 2/26 (7.7%), P = 0.618], and LOS (median 8.5 d, IQR 6-11.3, vs 8.5 d, IQR 6-15.3, P = 0.929).

CONCLUSION

Mortality is indifferent in the elderly (≥ 80 years old) and non-elderly patients (< 80 years old) with AC.