Rapid urinary trypsinogen-2 test in the early diagnosis of acute pancreatitis: A meta-analysis

Noninvasive rapid urinary trypsinogen-2 dipstick test for early exclusion of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis within hours after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Clinical diagnosis and considerations

Objective

Few reports have explored the application of urinary trypsinogen-2 measurement in the early diagnosis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis, and none have demonstrated the benefits of noninvasive testing. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical application of the rapid urinary trypsinogen-2 dipstick test (Nipro, Japan) compared with serum amylase and lipase levels for the early diagnosis of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP).

Methods

A total of 100 consecutive patients (54 men and 46 women) who were admitted and underwent ERCP at Tokyo Medical University Hospital from August 2021 to December 2021 were recruited. All patients underwent rapid urinary trypsinogen-2 measurement using the dipstick test before and after ERCP. Measurements were taken 24 h before ERCP for pre-ERCP and 1-4 h after ERCP for post-ERCP. Additionally, serum amylase and lipase levels were measured at 8:00 a.m. of the day after ERCP (at least 8 h after ERCP), and their diagnostic abilities for PEP were compared and evaluated.

Results

PEP occurred in 5/100 patients (5%). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the dipstick test for diagnosing PEP were 100%, 83.2%, 23.8%, and 100%, respectively. These results were comparable to the diagnostic performance of serum amylase and lipase levels at 8:00 a.m. on the day after ERCP (at least 8 h after ERCP). However, false positives must be considered.

Conclusion

The dipstick test may be useful in clinical practice as a noninvasive screening test for the early prediction of PEP.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Pancreatitis

The pancreas is a glandular organ that is responsible for the proper functioning of the digestive and endocrine systems, and therefore, it affects the condition of the entire body. Consequently, it is important to effectively diagnose and treat diseases of this organ. According to clinicians, pancreatitis—a common disease affecting the pancreas—is one of the most complicated and demanding diseases of the abdomen. The classification of pancreatitis is based on clinical, morphologic, and histologic criteria. Medical doctors distinguish, inter alia, acute pancreatitis (AP), the most common causes of which are gallstone migration and alcohol abuse. Effective diagnostic methods and the correct assessment of the severity of acute pancreatitis determine the selection of an appropriate treatment strategy and the prediction of the clinical course of the disease, thus preventing life-threatening complications and organ dysfunction or failure. This review collects and organizes recommendations and guidelines for the management of patients suffering from acute pancreatitis.

Towards evidence-based and personalised care of acute pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis is a heterogeneous illness. Most patients experience a mild course of disease, but one third will develop local complications and/or organ failure associated with increased morbidity and risk of mortality. Diagnosis of acute pancreatitis is based on typical epigastric pain, elevation of serum lipase or amylase levels, and/or characteristic findings on imaging. Personalised management is needed in patients with acute pancreatitis. Currently, analgesia, Ringer's lactate solution-based goal-directed fluid resuscitation and early oral refeeding providing enteral nutrition if not tolerated are the cornerstones for early management. Prophylactic antibiotics or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the absence of cholangitis are considered to be futile. Future clinical trials should address optimal fluid resuscitation, the early administration of anti-inflammatory drugs and the exact role of nutritional support in severe acute pancreatitis. Here, we present a patient case and review the diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of acute pancreatitis.

2019 WSES guidelines for the management of severe acute pancreatitis

Although most patients with acute pancreatitis have the mild form of the disease, about 20-30% develops a severe form, often associated with single or multiple organ dysfunction requiring intensive care. Identifying the severe form early is one of the major challenges in managing severe acute pancreatitis. Infection of the pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis occurs in about 20-40% of patients with severe acute pancreatitis, and is associated with worsening organ dysfunctions. While most patients with sterile necrosis can be managed nonoperatively, patients with infected necrosis usually require an intervention that can be percutaneous, endoscopic, or open surgical. These guidelines present evidence-based international consensus statements on the management of severe acute pancreatitis from collaboration of a panel of experts meeting during the World Congress of Emergency Surgery in June 27-30, 2018 in Bertinoro, Italy. The main topics of these guidelines fall under the following topics: Diagnosis, Antibiotic treatment, Management in the Intensive Care Unit, Surgical and operative management, and Open abdomen.

Characteristics and outcome of severe preeclampsia/eclampsia concurrent with or complicated by acute pancreatitis: a report of five cases and literature review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to determine the rate of acute pancreatitis in preeclampsia/eclampsia patients and describe the clinical manifestations, treatment characteristics and outcome of five cases of severe preeclampsia concurrent with or complicated by acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

The clinical data of pregnant women with preexisting or gestational hypertension who sought medical care between January 2002 and December 2015 at the Pregnant Women Critical Care Unit of Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China were retrieved. The rate of acute pancreatitis in preeclampsia/eclampsia patients was calculated and patients with preeclampsia/eclampsia and acute pancreatitis were included for further analysis.

RESULTS

Totally 1703 pregnant women who received medical care at our institution during the review period were diagnosed with hypertension. Four hundred and seven (23.9%) of them had severe preeclampsia. Five (1.2%, 5/407) women with severe preeclampsia developed acute pancreatitis. Their median age was 32 (range 25-35) years and the median duration of gestation was 32 (range 28-40) weeks. Mild acute pancreatitis occurred in three cases, and moderately severe and severe acute pancreatitis in one case each. Four patients underwent cesarean resection and one patient underwent vaginal delivery. Conservative therapy was undertaken. No patient received surgical intervention and cure was achieved in all patients.

CONCLUSION

Acute pancreatitis may complicate severe preeclampsia/eclampsia or may be concurrent with severe preeclampsia/eclampsia, complicating and compromising the management of preeclampsia/eclampsia. Physicians should be alert for the presence of acute pancreatitis as prompt diagnosis and treatment, rapid termination of pregnancy and subsequent conservative management of pancreatitis could lead to a general favorable outcome.

Serum amylase and lipase and urinary trypsinogen and amylase for diagnosis of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The treatment of people with acute abdominal pain differs if they have acute pancreatitis. It is important to know the diagnostic accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis, so that an informed decision can be made as to whether the person with abdominal pain has acute pancreatitis. There is currently no Cochrane review of the diagnostic test accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase, either alone or in combination, in the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis in people with acute onset of a persistent, severe epigastric pain or diffuse abdominal pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR HTA and DARE), and other databases until March 2017. We searched the references of the included studies to identify additional studies. We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively. We also performed a 'related search' and 'citing reference' search in MEDLINE and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all studies that evaluated the diagnostic test accuracy of serum amylase, serum lipase, urinary trypsinogen-2, and urinary amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. We excluded case-control studies because these studies are prone to bias. We accepted any of the following reference standards: biopsy, consensus conference definition, radiological features of acute pancreatitis, diagnosis of acute pancreatitis during laparotomy or autopsy, and organ failure. At least two review authors independently searched and screened the references located by the search to identify relevant studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies. The thresholds used for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis varied in the trials, resulting in sparse data for each index test. Because of sparse data, we used -2 log likelihood values to determine which model to use for meta-analysis. We calculated and reported the sensitivity, specificity, post-test probability of a positive and negative index test along with 95% confidence interval (CI) for each cutoff, but have reported only the results of the recommended cutoff of three times normal for serum amylase and serum lipase, and the manufacturer-recommended cutoff of 50 mg/mL for urinary trypsinogen-2 in the abstract.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies including 5056 participants met the inclusion criteria for this review and assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the index tests in people presenting to the emergency department with acute abdominal pain. The risk of bias was unclear or high for all of the included studies. The study that contributed approximately two-thirds of the participants included in this review was excluded from the results of the analysis presented below due to major concerns about the participants included in the study. We have presented only the results where at least two studies were included in the analysis.Serum amylase, serum lipase, and urinary trypsinogen-2 at the standard threshold levels of more than three times normal for serum amylase and serum lipase, and a threshold of 50 ng/mL for urinary trypsinogen-2 appear to have similar sensitivities (0.72 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.82); 0.79 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.92); and 0.72 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.84), respectively) and specificities (0.93 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.99); 0.89 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.99); and 0.90 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.93), respectively). At the median prevalence of 22.6% of acute pancreatitis in the studies, out of 100 people with positive test, serum amylase (more than three times normal), serum lipase (more than three times normal), and urinary trypsinogen (more than 50 ng/mL), 74 (95% CI 33 to 94); 68 (95% CI 21 to 94); and 67 (95% CI 57 to 76) people have acute pancreatitis, respectively; out of 100 people with negative test, serum amylase (more than three times normal), serum lipase (more than three times normal), and urinary trypsinogen (more than 50 ng/mL), 8 (95% CI 5 to 12); 7 (95% CI 3 to 15); and 8 (95% CI 5 to 13) people have acute pancreatitis, respectively. We were not able to compare these tests formally because of sparse data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As about a quarter of people with acute pancreatitis fail to be diagnosed as having acute pancreatitis with the evaluated tests, one should have a low threshold to admit the patient and treat them for acute pancreatitis if the symptoms are suggestive of acute pancreatitis, even if these tests are normal. About 1 in 10 patients without acute pancreatitis may be wrongly diagnosed as having acute pancreatitis with these tests, therefore it is important to consider other conditions that require urgent surgical intervention, such as perforated viscus, even if these tests are abnormal.The diagnostic performance of these tests decreases even further with the progression of time, and one should have an even lower threshold to perform additional investigations if the symptoms are suggestive of acute pancreatitis.

Japanese guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis: Japanese Guidelines 2015

BACKGROUND

Japanese (JPN) guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis were published in 2006. The severity assessment criteria for acute pancreatitis were later revised by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) in 2008, leading to their publication as the JPN Guidelines 2010. Following the 2012 revision of the Atlanta Classifications of Acute Pancreatitis, in which the classifications of regional complications of pancreatitis were revised, the development of a minimally invasive method for local complications of pancreatitis spread, and emerging evidence was gathered and revised into the JPN Guidelines.

METHODS

A comprehensive evaluation was carried out on the evidence for epidemiology, diagnosis, severity, treatment, post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis and clinical indicators, based on the concepts of the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). With the graded recommendations, where the evidence was unclear, Meta-Analysis team for JPN Guidelines 2015 conducted an additional new meta-analysis, the results of which were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine questions were prepared in 17 subject areas, for which 43 recommendations were made. The 17 subject areas were: Diagnosis, Diagnostic imaging, Etiology, Severity assessment, Transfer indication, Fluid therapy, Nasogastric tube, Pain control, Antibiotics prophylaxis, Protease inhibitor, Nutritional support, Intensive care, management of Biliary Pancreatitis, management of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome, Interventions for the local complications, Post-ERCP pancreatitis and Clinical Indicator (Pancreatitis Bundles 2015). Meta-analysis was conducted in the following four subject areas based on randomized controlled trials: (1) prophylactic antibiotics use; (2) prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis; (3) prophylactic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis; and (4) peritoneal lavage. Using the results of the meta-analysis, recommendations were graded to create useful information. In addition, a mobile application was developed, which made it possible to diagnose, assess severity and check pancreatitis bundles.

CONCLUSIONS

The JPN Guidelines 2015 were prepared using the most up-to-date methods, and including the latest recommended medical treatments, and we are confident that this will make them easy for many clinicians to use, and will provide a useful tool in the decision-making process for the treatment of patients, and optimal medical support. The free mobile application and calculator for the JPN Guidelines 2015 is available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/jpn-guideline2015.html.

[Acute pancreatitis. Evidence-based practice guidelines, prepared by the Hungarian Pancreatic Study Group]

Acute pancreatitis is one of the most common diseases of the gastrointestinal tract associated with significant morbidity and mortality that requires up-to-date and evidence based treatment guidelines. The Hungarian Pancreatic Study Group proposed to prepare evidence based guideline for the medical and surgical management of acute pancreatitis based on the available international guidelines and evidence. The preparatory and consultation task force appointed by the Hungarian Pancreatic Study Group translated and, if it was necessary, complemented and/or modified the international guidelines. All together 42 relevant clinical questions were defined in 11 topics (Diagnosis and etiology, Prognosis, Imaging, Fluid therapy, Intensive care management, Prevention of infectious complications, Nutrition, Biliary interventions, Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography pancreatitis, Indication, timing and strategy for intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis, Timing of cholecystectomy [or endoscopic sphincterotomy]). Evidence was classified according to the UpToDate® grading system. The draft of the guideline was presented and discussed at the consensus meeting on September 12, 2014. 25 clinical questions with almost total (more than 95%) and 17 clinical questions with strong (more than 70%) agreement were accepted. The present guideline is the first evidence based acute pancreatitis guideline in Hungary. The guideline may provide important help for tuition, everyday practice and for establishment of proper finance of acute pancreatitis. Therefore, the authors believe that these guidelines will widely become as basic reference in Hungary.

The ACE2-angiotensin-(1-7)-Mas axis protects against pancreatic cell damage in cell culture

OBJECTIVE

Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), its product angiotensin-(1-7), and its receptor Mas have been shown to moderate the adverse effects of the ACE-angiotensin II-AT1 axis in many diseases. The aim of this study was to determine whether the ACE2-Ang-(1-7)-Mas axis could have similar effects in a cell culture model of pancreatic damage.

METHODS

AR42J cells were stimulated with 10 nmol/L cerulein to simulate acute pancreatitis. ACE2, Ang-(1-7), Mas receptor, and PI3K/AKT pathway were measured by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction and Western blot analysis.

RESULTS

ACE2 and Mas receptor protein levels in AR42J cells were significantly increased (P < 0.05) between 30 minutes and 6 hours postdisease induction compared with the control group. Mas receptor gene expression was significantly increased (P < 0.05) at 2 hours postdisease induction, and Ang-(1-7) was increased at 6 hours. Treatment with Ang-(1-7) in AR42J cells increased IL-10, decreased IL-6 and IL-8, and reduced the damage to pancreatic cells. Levels of IL-6 and IL-8 in AR42J cell culture were increased significantly after treatment with A779. Moreover, Ang-(1-7) increased the concentration of PI3K/AKT pathway and eNOSin AR42J cells.

CONCLUSIONS

ACE2-angiotensin-(1-7)-Mas axis significantly inhibits pancreatitis in response to decreased inflammatory factors by the activation of endothelial nitric oxide synthase and NO signaling pathways.

IAP/APA evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

There have been substantial improvements in the management of acute pancreatitis since the publication of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) treatment guidelines in 2002. A collaboration of the IAP and the American Pancreatic Association (APA) was undertaken to revise these guidelines using an evidence-based approach.

METHODS

Twelve multidisciplinary review groups performed systematic literature reviews to answer 38 predefined clinical questions. Recommendations were graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The review groups presented their recommendations during the 2012 joint IAP/APA meeting. At this one-day, interactive conference, relevant remarks were voiced and overall agreement on each recommendation was quantified using plenary voting.

RESULTS

The 38 recommendations covered 12 topics related to the clinical management of acute pancreatitis: A) diagnosis of acute pancreatitis and etiology, B) prognostication/predicting severity, C) imaging, D) fluid therapy, E) intensive care management, F) preventing infectious complications, G) nutritional support, H) biliary tract management, I) indications for intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis, J) timing of intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis, K) intervention strategies in necrotizing pancreatitis, and L) timing of cholecystectomy. Using the GRADE system, 21 of the 38 (55%) recommendations, were rated as 'strong' and plenary voting revealed 'strong agreement' for 34 (89%) recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2012 IAP/APA guidelines provide recommendations concerning key aspects of medical and surgical management of acute pancreatitis based on the currently available evidence. These recommendations should serve as a reference standard for current management and guide future clinical research on acute pancreatitis.