Prophylaxis of pancreatitis with intravenous ketoprofen in a consecutive population of ERCP patients: a randomized double-blind 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.

NSAIDs do not reduce severity among post-ERCP pancreatitis patients

OBJECTIVE

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most studied chemoprophylaxis for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP). While previous systematic reviews have shown NSAIDs reduce PEP, their impact on moderate to severe PEP (MSPEP) is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to understand the impact of NSAIDs on MSPEP among patients who developed PEP. We later surveyed physicians' understanding of that impact.

DESIGN

A systematic search for randomized trials using NSAIDs for PEP prevention was conducted. Pooled-prevalence and Odds-ratio of PEP, MSPEP were compared between treated vs. control groups. Analysis was performed using R software. Random-effects model was used for all variables. Physicians were surveyed via email before and after reviewing our results.

RESULTS

7688 patients in 25 trials were included. PEP was significantly reduced to 0.598 (95%CI, 0.47-0.76) in the NSAIDs group. Overall burden of MSPEP was reduced among all patients undergoing ERCP: OR 0.59 (95%CI, 0.42-0.83). However, NSAIDs didn't affect the proportion of MSPEP among those who developed PEP (p = 0.658). Rectal Indomethacin and diclofenac reduced PEP but not MSPEP. Efficacy didn't vary by risk, timing of administration, or bias-risk. Survey revealed a change in the impression of the effect of NSAIDs on MSPEP after reviewing our results.

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal diclofenac or indomethacin before or after ERCP reduce the overall burden of MSPEP by reducing the pool of PEP from which it can arise. However, the proportion of MSPEP among patients who developed PEP is unaffected. Therefore, NSAIDs prevent initiation of PEP, but do not affect severity among those that develop PEP. Alternative modalities are needed to reduce MSPEP among patients who develop PEP.

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.

Feasibility of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation to remove difficult stones in patients with nondilated distal bile ducts

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend not performing papillary large balloon dilation in patients with nondilated distal bile ducts.

AIM

To assess the feasibility of balloon dilation to remove difficult stones in patients with nondilated distal bile ducts.

METHODS

Data from 1289 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures were obtained from two prospective studies. While 258 cases had difficult stones (> 1 cm, multiple > 8, impacted, or having a thin distal duct), 191 underwent biliary dilation up to 15 mm after endoscopic sphincterotomy. Cholangiographies of these cases were retrospectively reviewed in order to classify the distal bile duct and both the stone size and number. Primary outcomes were clearance rate at first ERCP and complications.

RESULTS

Of the 191 patients (122 women and 69 men; mean age: 60 years) who underwent biliary dilation for difficult stones, 113 (59%) had a nondilated or tapered distal duct. Patients with a dilated distal duct were older than those with nondilated distal ducts (mean 68 and 52 years of age, respectively; P < 0.05), had more stones (median 4 and 2 stones per patient, respectively; P < 0.05), and had less need for additional mechanical lithotripsy (6.4% vs 25%, respectively; P < 0.05). Clearance rate at first ERCP was comparable between patients with a dilated (73/78; 94%) and nondilated distal ducts (103/113; 91%). Procedures were faster in patients with a dilated distal duct (mean 17 vs 24 min, respectively; P < 0.005). Complications were similar in both groups (6.4% vs 7.1%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Large balloon dilation for difficult stones is feasible in patients with a nondilated or even tapered distal duct.

Application of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in prevention of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is one of the most important methods for the clinical diagnosis and treatment of biliary and pancreatic diseases. Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used in clinical prevention of PEP, but the application standards are not unified. This article reviews the progress in the research of the preventive effect of different types of NSAIDs on PEP, their administration routes, timing, and dosage, and combination with other drugs, as well as the preventive effect of NSAIDs in different risk stratification populations, and points out that indomethacin and diclofenac are the most commonly used types of NSAIDs, which should be given at 100 mg via rectal administration before ERCP in all non-selected patients with no contraindications.

POST ENDOSCOPIC RETROGRADE CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY PANCREATITIS PROPHYLAXIS: EVALUATION OF TWO DIFFERENT NSAID REGIMENS

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is a widely used therapeutic modality for the pancreaticobiliary tree. However, it is responsible for the highest rates of complications among the endoscopic procedures, especially post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis. The preventive methods include mechanical and pharmacological approaches, such as the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of two different strategies using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis, and to clarify the uncertainty about the route of administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the prevention of this complication.

METHODS

This was a prospective trial. Two therapeutic groups were compared with a control group that was composed of patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, performed in the same service and by the same team in the period preceding the study (historical series), without the administration of any type of prophylaxis. The first group received 100 mg rectal diclofenac. The second group received 100 mg intravenous ketoprofen. Both groups were compared, separately and jointly, with the control group.

RESULTS

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis occurred in 4.39% (12/273) of the participants. In the group without prophylaxis, the incidence was 6.89% (10/145). Among those who received intravenous ketoprofen, the incidence was 2.56% (2/78). No cases of acute post-procedural pancreatitis were observed in the group that received rectal diclofenac (0/52). Although there was no statistical difference between the therapeutic groups when they were separately analyzed, a statistical difference in the prevention of post-procedural pancreatitis was observed when they were analyzed together (P=0.037).

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence for the efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis.

Biliary cannulation with contrast and guide-wire versus exclusive guide-wire: A prospective, randomized, double-blind trial

BACKGROUND

The use of exclusive guide-wire cannulation (e-GW) instead of contrast injection reduces post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) and pre-cutting and increases cannulation rate. Herein, we intend to compare e-GW with the hybrid technique (GW-C and/or contrast injection).

METHODS

Prospective single-center randomized comparative study, which included all patients referred to ERCP to our unit. Patients with non-naïve papilla; previous ERCP; direct infundibulotomy, ampullectomy, Billroth II gastrectomy or pancreatic sphincterotomy and patients lost to follow up were excluded.

RESULTS

727 consecutive patients were assessed. Of these, 588 naïve papilla patients were included and randomized to receive e-GW (n = 299) or GW-C (n = 289) for selective biliary cannulation. The mean age was 60.3 years and 60.5% were women. PEP occurred in 15(5%) cases in e-GW group and 9(3.1%) in the GW-C group (p = 0.29). Time to reach deep cannulation was faster in the latter group (75% < 5 min vs. 50.2% < 5 min, p<0.001). > 10 min until cannulation was observed in 21% vs. 10% of the ERCPs (groups e-GW and GW-C, respectively, p < 0.001). Total ERCP time was also shorter in the GW-C group (12 vs. 10 min; p < 0.001). Pre-cut (23.8 vs.11.8%, p < 0.001) and pancreatic sphincterotomy as a pre-cut technique (15.8 vs. 5.6%, p < 0.001) were used more frequently in the e-GW group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to exclusive G-W- assisted biliary cannulation, the hybrid technique did not significantly reduce the PEP rate, however it promoted faster cannulation and, consequently, reduced the total procedure time and the use of pre-cut techniques.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug effectivity in preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the primary therapeutic procedure for the treatment of diseases affecting the biliary tree and pancreatic duct. Although the therapeutic success rate of ERCP is high, the procedure can cause complications, such as acute pancreatitis [post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP)], bleeding and perforation.

AIM

To assess the efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in preventing PEP during follow-up.

METHODS

Databases such as MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Library were searched. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of NSAIDs and placebo for the prevention of PEP were included. Outcomes evaluated included the incidence of PEP, severity of pancreatitis, route of administration, types, dose, and timing of administration of NSAIDs.

RESULTS

Twenty-six RCTs were considered eligible with a total of 8143 patients analyzed. Overall, 4020 patients used NSAIDs before ERCP and 4123 did not use NSAIDs (control group). Ultimately, 298 cases of post-ERCP acute pancreatitis were diagnosed in the NSAID group and 484 cases in the placebo group. The risk of PEP was lower in the NSAID group risk difference (RD): -0.04; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.07 to - 0.03; number needed to treat (NNT), 25; P < 0.05. NSAID use effectively prevented mild pancreatitis compared to placebo use (2.5% vs 4.1%; 95%CI: -0.05 to -0.01; NNT, 33; P < 0.05), but information on moderate PEP and severe PEP could not be fully elucidated. Only rectal administration reduced the incidence of PEP with RD: -0.06; 95%CI: -0.08 to -0.04; NNT, 17; P < 0.05). Furthermore, only the use of diclofenac or indomethacin was effective in preventing PEP, at a dose of 100 mg, which must be administered before performing ERCP.

CONCLUSION

Rectal administration of diclofenac and indomethacin significantly reduced the risk of developing mild PEP. Additional RCTs are needed to compare the efficacy between NSAID routes of administration in preventing PEP.

Endoscopic Biliary Large Balloon Dilation Lithotripsy for Giant and Impacted Stones Removal: A Western Series

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic removal of packed, large, or impacted stones, in which a basket cannot be deployed or is unable to grasp the stone(s), is challenging and inevitably leads to repeated procedures such as stent insertion and extra- or intracorporal lithotripsy. In this study, we describe the results of an alternative stone disintegration technique in a considerable series of patients using an esophageal/pyloric balloon for stone fragmentation or making working space in the bile duct to allow the deployment of the basket, a technique we call endoscopic biliary large balloon lithotripsy.

METHODS

We retrieved data from 1,429 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies (ERCPs) from 2 prospective trials performed between 2014 and 2019. Patients with difficult bile duct stones, in which a balloon dilator up to 15 mm was used to crush or increase the working space parallel to the stones in the common or hepatic duct, were included in the study.

RESULTS

From the 1,429 ERCPs, 299 had difficult stones (>1 cm, impacted or multiple stones). Large balloon lithotripsy was employed in 46 cases after endoscopic papillotomy and endoscopic biliary large balloon dilation with failed attempted balloon or basket stone(s) extraction. Failure to clear the bile duct at first ERCP occurred in 4 cases (91.3% of success). Complications were observed in 5 patients (10.8%; 1 perforation, 1 pancreatitis, and 3 bleedings), who were treated conservatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Large balloon lithotripsy, in order to crush the stones or make working room for baskets or balloons in the bile duct, is an effective, safe, and low cost technique for impacted, packed, or giant bile duct stones.

Pharmacological Prevention of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis: Where Do We Stand Now?

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) is the most frequently occurring complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). PEP is associated with significant morbidity and mortality; that is why the prevention of PEP is essential. Pharmacoprevention holds a central position in PEP prophylaxis. The current literature explores the efficacy of various pharmacological agents in preventing PEP, their routes of administration, and the correct administration timing. Data was collected on PubMed using regular keywords, the latter yielded 2077 papers. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 218 papers were selected and screened and 28 studies were finally chosen after the removal of duplicate and irrelevant studies. The selected 28 articles comprised 25 randomized clinical trials and three systematic reviews.

The study concludes that rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) administered before ERCP are effective in preventing PEP in high-risk patients. The efficacy of rectal NSAIDs in low to medium risk group is not well established. A combination of rectal NSAIDs and intravenous hydration provides improved prophylaxis against PEP in high-risk patients than NSAIDs alone. Nafamostat, sublingual nitrates, and intravenous hydration are potential alternatives in patients with contraindications to NSAIDs.

Parecoxib Improves the Outcomes of Acute Mild and Moderate Pancreatitis: A 3-Year Matched Cohort Study Based on a Prospective Database

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of parecoxib in patients with different severities of acute pancreatitis (AP).

METHODS

A total of 772 eligible patients with AP were divided into 4 groups: mild and moderately AP (MAP) treated with parecoxib (group A, n = 236), MAP without parecoxib treatment (group B, n = 453), severe AP (SAP) treated with parecoxib (group C, n = 28), and SAP without parecoxib treatment (group D, n = 55). Patients in group A were exactly matched with patients in group B by propensity score matching, similar to the matching between group C and group D.

RESULTS

The morbidity of abdominal infection in group A was significantly lower as compared with that in group B (P < 0.050). The progression of MAP to SAP significantly decreased in group A than group B (P < 0.050). No significant differences were observed between group C and group D. The risk factors independently related to the progression of MAP included alcoholic/high-fat dietary (P = 0.028) and parecoxib administration (P = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Early administration of parecoxib could reduce the morbidity of complications among patients with MAP. Parecoxib may prevent the progression of MAP to SAP and improve its outcomes.

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: A systematic review for prevention and treatment

BACKGROUND

Post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is comparatively complex application. Researchers has been investigated prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), since it has been considered to be the most common complication of ERCP. Although ERCP can lead various complications, it can also be avoided.

AIM

To study the published evidence and systematically review the literature on the prevention and treatment for PEP.

METHODS

A systematic literature review on the prevention of PEP was conducted using the electronic databases of ISI Web of Science, PubMed and Cochrane Library for relevant articles. The electronic search for the review was performed by using the search terms “Post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis” AND “prevention” through different criteria. The search was restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed between January 2009 and February 2019. Duplicate studies were detected by using EndNote and deleted by the author. PRISMA checklist and flow diagram were adopted for evaluation and reporting. The reference lists of the selected papers were also scanned to find other relevant studies.

RESULTS

726 studies meeting the search criteria and 4 relevant articles found in the edited books about ERCP were identified. Duplicates and irrelevant studies were excluded by screening titles and abstracts and assessing full texts. 54 studies were evaluated for full text review. Prevention methods were categorized into three groups as (1) assessment of patient related factors; (2) pharmacoprevention; and (3) procedural techniques for prevention. Most of studies in the literature showed that young age, female gender, absence of chronic pancreatitis, suspected Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, recurrent pancreatitis and history of previous PEP played a crucial role in posing high risks for PEP. 37 studies designed to assess the impact of 24 different pharmacologic agents to reduce the development of PEP delivered through various administration methods were reviewed. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are widely used to reduce risks for PEP. Rectal administration of indomethacin immediately prior to or after ERCP in all patients is recommended by European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines to prevent the development of PEP. The majority of the studies reviewed revealed that rectally administered indomethacin had efficacy to prevent PEP. Results of the other studies on the other pharmacological interventions had both controversial and promising results. Thirteen studies conducted to evaluate the efficacy of 4 distinct procedural techniques to prevent the development of PEP were reviewed. Pancreatic Stent Placement has been frequently used in this sense and has potent and promising benefits in the prevention of PEP. Studies on the other procedural techniques have had inconsistent results.

CONCLUSION

Prevention of PEP involves multifactorial aspects, including assessment of patients with high risk factors for alternative therapeutic and diagnostic techniques, administration of pharmacological agents and procedural techniques with highly precise results in the literature.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs versus placebo for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the primary therapeutic procedure for treatment of diseases that affect the biliary tree and pancreatic duct. While the therapeutic success rate of ERCP is high, the procedure can cause complications, such as acute pancreatitis (PEP), bleeding, and perforation. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in preventing PEP following (ERCP). Materials and methods  We searched databases, such as MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Library. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of NSAIDs and placebo for the prevention of PEP were included. Outcomes assessed included incidence of PEP, severity of pancreatitis, route of administration, and type of NSAIDs. Results  Twenty-one RCTs were considered eligible with a total of 6854 patients analyzed. Overall, 3427 patients used NSAIDs before ERCP and 3427 did not use the drugs (control group). In the end, 250 cases of acute pancreatitis post-ERCP were diagnosed in the NSAIDs group and 407 cases in the placebo group. Risk for PEP was lower in the NSAID group (risk difference (RD): -0.05; 95 % confidence interval (CI): -0.07 to - 0.03; number need to treat (NNT), 20; P  < 0.05). Use of NSAIDs effectively prevented mild pancreatitis compared with use of placebo (2.5 % vs. 4.1 %; 95 % CI, -0.05 to - 0.01; NNT, 33; P  < 0.05), but the information on moderate and severe PEP could not be completely elucidated. Only rectal administration reduced incidence of PEP (6.8 % vs. 13 %; 95 % CI, -0.10 to - 0.04; NNT, 20; P  < 0.05). Furthermore, only diclofenac or indomethacin use was effective in preventing PEP. Conclusions  Rectal administration of diclofenac and indomethacin significantly reduced risk of developing mild PEP. Further RCTs are needed to compare efficacy between NSAID administration pathways in prevention of PEP after ERCP.

What is impact of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Recently, although studies have investigated the role of NSAIDs in the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP), selection of the ideal drug, the time and route of its administration for the appropriate population remain controversial.

Methods

A systematic search was done in sources including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov from from August 1, 1990 to August 1, 2017. Randomized controlled trials comparing the prophylactic use of NSAIDs versus a placebo were included. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software to assess the outcomes.

Results

A total of 21 randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Our study showed that NSAIDs significantly reduced the incidence of PEP (RR, 0.61, 95%CI,0.52–0.72; p < 0.00001). The analysis showed that indomethacin administration post-ERCP (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31–0.70; p = 0.0002) appeared to be more effective in preventing PEP than indomethacin administration pre-ERCP (RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45–0.79; P = 0.0003), but there was no significant difference between the high-risk and average-risk population(p = 0.13). In the diclofenac group, it was noted that administration of diclofenac pre-ERCP (RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.16–0.63; p = 0.001) was more effective than that in post-ERCP (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.27–1.599; p = 0.35). The relative risk of PEP was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.27–1.50; p = 0.30) in high-risk patients and 0.41 (95% CI, 0.17–0.98; p = 0.02) in average-risk patients. With regard to the route of administration, PEP decreased significantly only in patients receiving the drug rectally (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.44–0.63; p < 0.00001), but not for those who received intramuscularly (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.47–1.17; p = 0.20), intravenously (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.51–1.83; p = 0.93), and orally (RR = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.55–0.1.43; p = 0.62).

Conclusions

Rectal administration of NSAIDs (both indomethacin and diclofenac) was effective in preventing PEP in unselected patients. A single dose of indomethacin after ERCP might be effective in preventing PEP in both high-risk and average-risk patients. However, diclofenac administered rectally before ERCP might be protective against PEP in high-risk patients compared to a placebo. However, more high quality head-to-head RCTs are required.