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

Effectiveness of the pharmacological therapy to prevent post ERCP acute pancreatitis: a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of the different pharmacological agents in preventing post-ERCP acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

We included clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for prophylaxis of acute post-ERCP pancreatitis. The event evaluated was acute pancreatitis. We conducted a search strategy in MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to nowadays. We reported the information in terms of relative risks (RR) with a 95% confidence interval. We assessed the heterogeneity using the I2 test.

RESULTS

We included 84 studies for analysis (30,463 patients). The mean age was 59.3 years (SD ± 7.01). Heterogeneity between studies was low (I2 = 34.4%) with no inconsistencies (p = 0.2567). Post ERCP pancreatitis was less in prophylaxis with NSAIDs (RR 0.65 95% CI [0.52 to 0.80]), aggressive hydration with Lactate Ringer (RR 0.32 95% CI [0.12-0.86]), NSAIDs + isosorbide dinitrate (RR 0.28 95% CI [0.11-0.71]) and somatostatin and analogues (RR 0.54 [0.43 to 0.68]) compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

NSAIDs, the Combination of NSAIDs + isosorbide dinitrate, somatostatin and analogues, and aggressive hydration with lactate ringer are pharmacological strategies that can prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis when compared to placebo. More clinical trials are required to determine the effectiveness of these drugs.

Incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 145 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) largely remain unknown with changing trends in ERCP use, indication, and techniques. We sought to determine the incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP in consecutive and high-risk patients based on a systemic review and meta-analysis of patients in placebo and no-stent arms of randomized control trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from the inception of each database to June 2022 to identify full-text RCTs evaluating PEP prophylaxes. The incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP from the placebo or no-stent arms of RCTs were recorded for consecutive and high-risk patients. A random-effects meta-analysis for a proportions model was used to calculate PEP incidence, severity, and mortality.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five RCTs were found with 19,038 patients in the placebo or no-stent arms. The overall cumulative incidence of PEP was 10.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.3-11.3), predominantly among the academic centers conducting such RCTs. The cumulative incidences of severe PEP and mortality were .5% (95% CI, .3-.7) and .2% (95% CI, .08-.3), respectively, across 91 RCTs with 14,441 patients. The cumulative incidences of PEP and severe PEP were 14.1% (95% CI, 11.5-17.2) and .8% (95% CI, .4-1.6), respectively, with a mortality rate of .2% (95% CI, 0-.3) across 35 RCTs with 3733 patients at high risk of PEP. The overall trend for the incidence of PEP among patients randomized to placebo or no-stent arms of RCTs has remained unchanged from 1977 to 2022 (P = .48).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall incidence of PEP is 10.2% but is 14.1% among high-risk patients based on this systematic review of placebo or no-stent arms of 145 RCTs; this rate has not changed between 1977 and 2022. Severe PEP and mortality from PEP are relatively uncommon.

An Insight on Pharmacological and Mechanical Preventive Measures of Post-ERCP PANCREATITIS (PEP)—A Review

Pancreatitis is the most common complication following endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP). With the progress of research in many drugs and technologies, promising efficacy has been achieved in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). Recently, combined prevention has received more attention in order to further reduce the incidence of PEP. However, there is no review about the combined prevention of PEP. This review summarizes the medication and ERCP techniques that are used to prevent PEP and emphasizes that appropriate combination prevention approaches should be based on risk stratification.

Emerging Therapies to Prevent Post-ERCP Pancreatitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to evaluate emerging, novel therapies for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Rectal indomethacin reduces the risk of pancreatitis in low- and average-risk patients, who comprise the majority of patients undergoing ERCP. An 8-h protocol of aggressive lactated Ringer's reduces the risk of pancreatitis in average-risk patients. Sublingual nitrate may provide additional benefit to rectal NSAIDs in preventing PEP. A tacrolimus trough > 2.5 ng/mL was recently shown to be associated with a lower risk of PEP in liver transplant patients undergoing ERCP. Routine usage of rectal indomethacin in all patients undergoing ERCP reduces the risk of PEP. Pancreatic-duct stents reduce the risk of PEP in high-risk patients. There is emerging data that aggressive hydration with lactated Ringer's and nitrates may further reduce PEP. Tacrolimus is a promising potential agent to prevent PEP but needs further clinical study.

Naproxen, isosorbide dinitrate and co-administration cannot prevent post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: Randomized controlled trial

Backgrounds/Aims

Acute pancreatitis is the most widespread complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Here, we investigated the efficacy of rectal suppository naproxen, sublingual isosorbide dinitrate and their co-administration in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Methods

This double-blind randomized clinical trial carried out from June 2015 to February 2016 at the Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center in Rasht, Iran. A total of 585 patients were selected from candidates for diagnostic or therapeutic ERCP by using the simple sampling method. Patients divided into three groups. Group A received 500 mg naproxen, group B took 5 mg isosorbide dinitrate, and group C was co-administrated both agents before ERCP. The primary outcome measure was the development of pancreatitis onset of pain in the upper abdomen and increase of serum amylase activity more than 3 times over the upper normal limit (60-100 IU/L) within first the 24 h post-ERCP.

Results

Totally, 80 patients developed PEP included 29 (4.9%), 24 (4.1%), and 27 (4.6%) patients in groups A, B, and C, respectively (p=0.845). Longer ERCP time (p=0.041), using diazepam (p=0.033), a higher number of pancreatic ducts cannulation (p<0.001), pancreatic duct injection (p=0.013), and using pancreatic stent (p=0.004) were the predisposing factors for PEP.

Conclusions

Our findings indicated that prophylactic naproxen suppository or isosorbide dinitrate sublingually or co-administration had no significant difference in the prevention and severity of PEP, however, enhancing the endoscopist’s skills can be effective. Departments and educational hospitals should develop their assessment and quality assurance measures for the training of fellows’ not only technical training but also an understanding of the diagnostic and therapeutic roles of the procedure.

The Interplay between Inflammation, Coagulation and Endothelial Injury in the Early Phase of Acute Pancreatitis: Clinical Implications

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is an inflammatory disease with varied severity, ranging from mild local inflammation to severe systemic involvement resulting in substantial mortality. Early pathologic events in AP, both local and systemic, are associated with vascular derangements, including endothelial activation and injury, dysregulation of vasomotor tone, increased vascular permeability, increased leukocyte migration to tissues, and activation of coagulation. The purpose of the review was to summarize current evidence regarding the interplay between inflammation, coagulation and endothelial dysfunction in the early phase of AP. Practical aspects were emphasized: (1) we summarized available data on diagnostic usefulness of the markers of endothelial dysfunction and activated coagulation in early prediction of severe AP; (2) we reviewed in detail the results of experimental studies and clinical trials targeting coagulation-inflammation interactions in severe AP. Among laboratory tests, d-dimer and angiopoietin-2 measurements seem the most useful in early prediction of severe AP. Although most clinical trials evaluating anticoagulants in treatment of severe AP did not show benefits, they also did not show significantly increased bleeding risk. Promising results of human trials were published for low molecular weight heparin treatment. Several anticoagulants that proved beneficial in animal experiments are thus worth testing in patients.

Prevention of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis: Medications and Techniques

Over the past 2 decades, it increasingly has been recognized that endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the most predictable provocateur of acute pancreatitis, with an incidence of more than 15% in high-risk patients. For this reason, there has been considerable interest in the effect of periprocedural drug administration as well as different ERCP techniques on both the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Although many agents and techniques have shown promise in small clinical studies, the majority of these have failed to yield consistent benefit in larger randomized patient groups. This review summarizes the data on medications and ERCP techniques that have been studied for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Acute Pancreatitis-Progress and Challenges: A Report on an International Symposium

An international symposium entitled "Acute pancreatitis: progress and challenges" was held on November 5, 2014 at the Hapuna Beach Hotel, Big Island, Hawaii, as part of the 45th Anniversary Meeting of the American Pancreatic Association and the Japanese Pancreas Society. The course was organized and directed by Drs. Stephen Pandol, Tooru Shimosegawa, Robert Sutton, Bechien Wu, and Santhi Swaroop Vege. The symposium objectives were to: (1) highlight current issues in management of acute pancreatitis, (2) discuss promising treatments, (3) consider development of quality indicators and improved measures of disease activity, and (4) present a framework for international collaboration for development of new therapies. This article represents a compilation and adaptation of brief summaries prepared by speakers at the symposium with the purpose of broadly disseminating information and initiatives.

[Methods of acute pancreatitis prevention after endoscopic transpapillary interventions]

AIM

To optimize preventive methods of acute postoperative pancreatitis in endoscopic transpapillary interventions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

It is performed parallel unblinded randomized investigation. The first group included 98 patients who underwent endoscopic transpapillary interventions and thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA). The second group consisted of 97 patients in whom opiate analgesic intramuscularly and indomethacin per rectum were applied.

RESULTS

Study revealed that acute pancreatitis has been diagnosed significantly more seldom in patients after TEA than in the second group (OR 0.22, CI 95%, 0.06-0.83). Thus in TEA-group pancreatitis was verified in 3.1% (3 of 98 patients), in the second group - in 12.4% (12 of 97 patients). Incidence of pancreatitis decreased from 23.3% (10 of 43) to 4.3% (2 of 46) among high risk patients (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03-0.75).

CONCLUSION

TEA is effective and justified preventive method in patients with high risk of postoperative pancreatitis. In low risk patients use of indomethacin per rectum is preferred compared with TEA due to its invasiveness.

Anti-Inflammatory Effects of Heparin and Its Derivatives: A Systematic Review

Background. Heparin, used clinically as an anticoagulant, also has anti-inflammatory properties. The purpose of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive review regarding the efficacy and safety of heparin and its derivatives as anti-inflammatory agents. Methods. We searched the following databases up to March 2012: Pub Med, Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid, Elsevier, and Google Scholar using combination of Mesh terms. Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) and trials with quasi-experimental design in clinical setting published in English were included. Quality assessments of RCTs were performed using Jadad score and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist. Results. A total of 280 relevant studies were reviewed and 57 studies met the inclusion criteria. Among them 48 studies were RCTs. About 65% of articles had score of 3 and higher according to Jadad score. Twelve studies had a quality score > 40% according to CONSORT items. Asthma (n = 7), inflammatory bowel disease (n = 5), cardiopulmonary bypass (n = 8), and cataract surgery (n = 6) were the most studied disease condition. Forty studies use unfractionated heparin (UFH) for intervention; the remaining studies use low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). Conclusion. Despite the conflicting results, heparin seems to be a safe and effective anti-inflammatory agent; although it is shown that heparin can decrease the level of inflammatory biomarkers and improves patient conditions, still more data from larger rigorously designed studies are needed to support use of heparin as an anti-inflammatory agent in clinical setting. However, because of the association between inflammation, atherogenesis, thrombogenesis, and cell proliferation, heparin and related compounds with pleiotropic effects may have greater therapeutic efficacy than compounds acting against a single target.

Incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review by using randomized, controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Data regarding the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) are primarily from nonrandomized studies.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP from a systematic review of the placebo or no-stent arms of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs).

DESIGN

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify RCTs evaluating the efficacy of drugs and/or pancreatic stents to prevent PEP.

SETTING

Systematic review of patients enrolled in RCTs evaluating agents for PEP prophylaxis.

PATIENTS

Patients in the placebo or no-stent arms of the RCTs

INTERVENTION

ERCP.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP.

RESULTS

There were 108 RCTs with 13,296 patients in the placebo or no-stent arms. Overall, the PEP incidence was 9.7% and the mortality rate was 0.7%. Severity of PEP was reported for 8857 patients: 5.7%, 2.6%, and 0.5% of cases were mild, moderate, and severe, respectively. The incidence of PEP in 2345 high-risk patients was 14.7% and the severity of PEP was mild, moderate, and severe in 8.6%, 3.9%, and 0.8%, respectively, with a 0.2% mortality rate. The incidence of PEP was 13% in North American RCTs compared with 8.4% in European and 9.9% in Asian RCTs. ERCPs conducted before and after 2000 had a PEP incidence of 7.7% and 10%, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

Difference in PEP risk among patients in the included RCTs.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of PEP and severe PEP is similar in high-risk patients and the overall cohort. Discrepancies in the incidence of PEP across geographic regions require further study.

Prevention and treatment of post-ERCP pancreatitis

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is widely used in the diagnosis and treatment of cholangiopancreatic diseases, and pancreatitis remains the most common and severe complication. It is therefore important to minimize the incidence and severity of pancreatitis. This paper discusses the recent progress in the prevention and treatment 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.

Pre-study protocol MagPEP: a multicentre randomized controlled trial of magnesium sulphate in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis

Background

Acute pancreatitis is the most common complication of diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). In spite of continuing research, no pharmacologic agent capable of effectively reducing the incidence of ERCP-induced pancreatitis has found its way into clinical practise. A number of experimental studies suggest that intrapancreatic calcium concentrations play an important role in the initiation of intracellular protease activation, an initiating step in the course of acute pancreatitis. Magnesium can act as a calcium-antagonist and counteracts effects in calcium signalling. It can thereby attenuate the intracellular activation of proteolytic digestive enzymes in the pancreas and reduces the severity of experimental pancreatitis when administered either intravenously or as a food supplement.

Methods

We designed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study to test whether the administration of intravenous magnesium sulphate before and after ERCP reduces the incidence and the severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis. A total of 502 adult patients with a medical indication for ERCP are to be randomized to receive either 4930 mg magnesium sulphate (= 20 mmol magnesium) or placebo 60 min before and 6 hours after ERCP. The incidence of clinical post-ERCP pancreatitis, hyperlipasemia, pain levels, use of analgetics and length of hospital stay will be evaluated.

Conclusions

If magnesium sulphate is found to be effective in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis, this inexpensive agent with limited adverse effects could be used as a routine pharmacological prophylaxis.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN46556454

Low-dose heparin in the prevention of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

One of the most frequent and serious complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is acute pancreatitis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the preventive effect of low-dose heparin (unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin) on post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) and its side-effects by a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials. Searching PubMed and EMBASE, up to August 2011, two independent reviewers systematically identified prospective clinical trials detecting the effect of prophylactic low-dose heparin on the incidence of PEP, severe PEP, and post-ERCP hemorrhage complications. Four clinical trials fulfilled our selection criteria, with three prospective randomized and one nonrandomized. A meta-analysis of these clinical trials was then performed. A total of 1438 patients were included. Meta-analysis of these trials indicated that there was no significant association between the use of heparin and the reduction of PEP [relative risk (RR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44-1.03, P=0.07] and severe PEP (RR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.15-2.60, P=0.51). However, low-dose heparin did not increase the incidence of post-ERCP hemorrhage complications (RR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.34-2.03, P=0.69). This meta-analysis did not demonstrate a statistically significant benefit of prophylactic heparin use for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. More multicenter trials involving a larger number of patients are needed to show a possible prevention effect of PEP from heparin and its related compounds.

Is high-dose nafamostat mesilate effective for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis, especially in high-risk patients?

OBJECTIVE

Infusion of the protease inhibitor nafamostat mesilate (20 mg) effectively prevents post-ERCP pancreatitis, but only in low-risk groups. This study was performed to evaluate the use of high-dose nafamostat mesilate (50 mg) for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), especially in high-risk groups.

METHODS

A total of 608 patients who underwent ERCP were included; 13 patients were excluded. Patients were divided into 3 groups: controls (group A), infusion with 20 mg of nafamostat mesilate (group B), or infusion with 50 mg of nafamostat mesilate (group C). The incidence of PEP was analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of acute pancreatitis was 7.4% (44/595). There was a significant difference in the incidence of PEP with or without nafamostat mesilate (13.0% vs 4.0% and 5.1%, respectively; P < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis showed that in low-risk patients, the rate of PEP was significantly different with nafamostat (11.9% vs 2.7% and 4.0%, respectively; P = 0.007). In high-risk patients, the rate of PEP was not significantly different among treatment groups (14.6% vs 5.9% vs 6.9%, respectively; P = 0.108).

CONCLUSIONS

Nafamostat mesilate prophylaxis (20 or 50 mg) is effective in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis. However, the preventive effect of high-dose nafamostat mesilate (50 mg) is not significant in high-risk patients.

Recent progress in understanding the pathogenesis of severe acute pancreatitis

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is an acute abdominal disease that is characterized by sudden onset, quick progression, many complications and high mortality. Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) is still regarded as the main cause of death in SAP patients. Nowadays, the mortality rate for patients with SAP in developed countries is 22.7%. In the early 21st century, the mortality reached 15.60%-23.77% in mainland China. However, the etiology, pathogenesis and pathophysiology of SAP remains unclear, resulting in puzzle or perplexity in choosing and developing treatment strategies for SAP. This paper reviews recent progress in understanding the pathogenesis of SAP.

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.

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.

Advances in managing acute pancreatitis

This review highlights advances in acute pancreatitis (AP) made in the past year. We focus on clinical aspects of AP - severe disease especially - and risk stratification tools to guide the clinical care of patients. Most patients with AP have mild disease that requires a diagnostic evaluation, self-limited supportive care, and a short hospital stay. In patients with potentially severe AP, it is important for clinicians to use available risk-stratifying tools to identify high-risk patients and initiate timely interventions such as aggressive fluid resuscitation, close monitoring, early initiation of enteral nutrition, and appropriate use of endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography. This approach decreases morbidity and possibly mortality and is supported by evidence drawn from recent clinical guidelines, historical literature, and the highest quality studies published in the last year.

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.