Randomized trial comparing needle-knife and pull-sphincterotome techniques for pancreatic sphincterotomy in high-risk patients

Identification and management of pancreas divisum

Introduction: Pancreas divisum is the most common congenital malformation of the pancreas with the majority asymptomatic. The etiological role, pathogenesis, clinical significance and management of pancreas divisum in pancreatic disease has not been clearly defined and our understanding is yet to be fully elucidated.Areas covered: This review describes the role of pancreas divisum in the development of pancreatic disease and the ambiguity related to it. In our attempt to offer clarity, a comprehensive search on PubMed, Ovid, Embase and Cochrane Library from inception to May 2019 was undertaken using key words "pancreas divisum", "idiopathic recurrent acute pancreatitis" and "chronic pancreatitis".Expert opinion: Current research fails to define a clear association between pancreas divisum and pancreatic disease. Though debatable, several studies do suggest a pathological role of pancreas divisum in pancreatic disease and a benefit of minor papilla therapy in the setting of acute recurrent pancreatitis. Surgical and endoscopic therapeutic modalities have not been directly compared. With the current data available, it would be imprudent to advise a definitive line of management for pancreatic disease associated with pancreas divisum and should involve a comprehensive discussion with the individual patient to define expectations before embarking on any medical and/or interventional therapy.

Role of ERCP in Patients With Idiopathic Recurrent Acute Pancreatitis

OPINION STATEMENT

Recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP) is defined based on the occurrence of two or more episodes of acute pancreatitis. RAP is differentiated from chronic pancreatitis based on the presence of a normal morphological appearance of the pancreas between episodes. RAP can be due to a variety of etiologies including common bile duct stones or sludge, sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD), pancreas divisum (PD), anomalous pancreaticobiliary junction, genetic mutations, and alcohol related. In approximately 30 % of patients, the etiology of RAP is unclear and the term "idiopathic" is used. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) can be utilized in both the diagnosis and the initial management of RAP, but it has known limitations and risks. Since gallbladder sludge and SOD account for most cases with RAP, cholecystectomy and, eventually, endoscopic biliary and/or pancreatic sphincterotomy are performed as a part of management. In patients with PD-associated RAP, data from uncontrolled and primarily retrospective studies point toward a benefit from minor papillary endoscopic intervention. However, given the lack of quality data from prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs), endoscopic management in such patients remains an individualized decision, and RCTs are needed to ascertain its true long-term benefit. Future studies to investigate the role of endoscopic therapy in preventing progression to chronic pancreatitis are needed.

Endoscopic prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is not an uncommon adverse event but may be an avoidable complication. Although pancreatitis of severe grade is reported in 0.1%-0.5% of ERCP patients, a serious clinical course may be lethal. For prevention of severe PEP, patient risk stratification, appropriate selection of patients using noninvasive diagnostic imaging methods such as magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography or endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), and avoidance of unnecessary invasive procedures, are important measures to be taken before any procedure. Pharmacological prevention is also commonly attempted but is usually ineffective. No ideal agent has not yet been found and the available data conflict. Currently, rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are used to prevent PEP in high-risk patients, but additional studies using larger numbers of subjects are necessary to confirm any prophylactic effect. In this review, we focus on endoscopic procedures seeking to prevent or decrease the severity of PEP. Among various cannulation methods, wire-guided cannulation, precut fistulotomy, and transpancreatic septostomy are reviewed. Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement, which is the best-known prophylactic method, is reviewed with reference to the ideal stent type, adequate duration of stent placement, and stent-related complications. Finally, we comment on other treatment alternatives, and make the point that further advances in EUS-guided techniques may afford useful PEP prophylaxis.

Endotherapy in chronic pancreatitis

Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a progressive disease with irreversible changes in the pancreas. Patients commonly present with pain and with exocrine or endocrine insufficiency. All therapeutic efforts in CP are directed towards relief of pain as well as the management of associated complications. Endoscopic therapy offers many advantages in patients with CP who present with ductal calculi, strictures, ductal leaks, pseudocyst or associated biliary strictures. Endotherapy offers a high rate of success with low morbidity in properly selected patients. The procedure can be repeated and failed endotherapy is not a hindrance to subsequent surgery. Endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy is helpful in patients with CP with minimal ductal changes while minor papilla sphincterotomy provides relief in patients with pancreas divisum and chronic pancreatitis. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy is the standard of care in patients with large pancreatic ductal calculi. Long term follow up has shown pain relief in over 60% of patients. A transpapillary stent placed across the disruption provides relief in over 90% of patients with ductal leaks. Pancreatic ductal strictures are managed by single large bore stents. Multiple stents are placed for refractory strictures. CP associated benign biliary strictures (BBS) are best treated with multiple plastic stents, as the response to a single plastic stent is poor. Covered self expanding metal stents are increasingly being used in the management of BBS though further long term studies are needed. Pseudocysts are best drained endoscopically with a success rate of 80%-95% at most centers. Endosonography (EUS) has added to the therapeutic armamentarium in the management of patients with CP. Drainage of pseudcysts, cannulation of inaccessible pancreatic ducts and celiac ganglion block in patients with intractable pain are all performed using EUS. Endotherapy should be offered as the first line of therapy in properly selected patients with CP who have failed to respond to medical therapy and require intervention.

Endoscopic therapy for acute recurrent pancreatitis

Endoscopy plays an important role in both the diagnosis and the initial management of recurrent acute pancreatitis, as well as the investigation of refractory disease, but it has known limitations and risks. Sound selective use of these therapies, complemented with other lines of investigation such as genetic testing, can dramatically improve frequency of attacks and associated quality of life. Whether endoscopic therapy can reduce progression to chronic pancreatitis, or reduce the risk of malignancy, is debatable, and remains to be proven.

Does leaving a main pancreatic duct stent in place reduce the incidence of precut biliary sphincterotomy-associated pancreatitis? A randomized, prospective study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatitis is the most common major complication of ERCP and precut endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES). Prophylactic pancreatic duct (PD) stent placement has been shown to reduce the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in high-risk settings.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether leaving a main PD stent in place after precut ES would reduce the incidence and severity of PEP.

DESIGN

Single-center, randomized, prospective study.

SETTING

Tertiary care ERCP referral center.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients who underwent ERCP with a clear indication for biliary access and standard biliary ES whereby free cannulation of the bile duct was not possible and precut ES was undertaken.

INTERVENTIONS

When free bile duct cannulation for ES was not possible and selective PD cannulation was achieved, a PD stent was placed. Using the PD stent as a guide, we used a needle-knife sphincterotome to perform precut ES. The patients were then randomized to either leaving the PD stent in place for 7 to 10 days (stent group) or immediate removal after the procedure (stent removed group). The remaining patients who did not undergo selective PD cannulation and stent placement were not randomized (no stent group) and had a free-hand needle-knife ES performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Patients were prospectively followed for the development of complications. Standardized criteria were used to diagnose and grade the severity of PEP.

RESULTS

A total of 151 patients were enrolled. The groups were similar with regard to patient demographics and patient and procedure risk factors for PEP. The overall incidence of PEP was 13.2% (20/151). It occurred in 4.3% (2/46), 21.3% (10/47), and 13.8% (8/58) of patients in the stent, stent removed, and no stent groups, respectively. The stent group had a significantly lower frequency and severity of PEP compared with the stent removed group (4.3% vs 21.3%; P = .027 for frequency and 0% vs 12.8%; P = .026 for moderate and severe pancreatitis).

LIMITATIONS

Single center. Randomization scheme not optimal.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that placing and maintaining a PD stent for needle-knife precut ES reduces the frequency and severity of postprocedure pancreatitis.

Proximally migrated pancreatic stent successfully removed using needle-knife and forceps: complication after precut papillotomy assisted by pancreatic stenting

Pancreatic stent-assisted ampullary precut papillotomy is a rescue method for cases with difficult bile duct cannulation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We describe a case in which post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) developed due to the proximal migration of pancreatic stent, after precut papillotomy. Removal of the migrated pancreatic stent was achieved after needle-knife incision of the pancreatic duct's orifice followed by retrieval of the stent using rat-tooth forceps, which resulted in rapid resolution of the PEP. Caution is needed when pancreatic stent is placed after papillary incision. Needle-knife incision of the pancreatic duct orifice followed by forceps removal is an effective technique for rescuing pancreatic stent migration.

Difficult biliary cannulation: use of physician-controlled wire-guided cannulation over a pancreatic duct stent to reduce the rate of precut sphincterotomy (with video)

BACKGROUND

Successful cannulation of the common bile duct (CBD) remains the benchmark for ERCP. Use of a pancreatic duct (PD) stent to facilitate biliary cannulation has been described, although the majority of patients require precut sphincterotomy to achieve CBD cannulation.

OBJECTIVE

To report the performance characteristics of using a PD stent in conjunction with physician-controlled wire-guided cannulation (WGC) to facilitate bile duct cannulation.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Two tertiary care, academic medical centers.

PATIENTS

All undergoing ERCP with native papillae.

INTERVENTION

In cases of difficult biliary access in which the PD is cannulated, a pancreatic stent is placed. After this, physician-controlled WGC is attempted by using the PD stent to direct the sphincterotome into the biliary orifice. If cannulation is unsuccessful after several minutes, a precut sphincterotomy is performed over the PD stent or the procedure is terminated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Frequency of successful bile duct cannulation and precut sphincterotomy.

RESULTS

A total of 2345 ERCPs were identified, 1544 with native papillae. Among these, CBD and PD cannulation failed in 16 (1.0%) patients, whereas 76 (4.9%) patients received a PD stent to facilitate biliary cannulation. Successful cannulation was achieved in 71 (93.4%) of 76 patients, 60 (78.9%) of whom did not require precut sphincterotomy. Complications included mild post-ERCP pancreatitis in 4 (5.3%) and aspiration in 1 (1.3%). Precut sphincterotomy was complicated by hemorrhage, controlled during the procedure in 2 (13.3%) of 15.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician-controlled WGC over a PD stent facilitates biliary cannulation while maintaining a low rate of precut sphincterotomy.

Post-ERCP pancreatitis

Pancreatitis remains the most common severe complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Detailed information about the findings of previous studies concerning post-ERCP pancreatitis has not been utilized sufficiently. The purpose of the present article was to present guidelines for the diagnostic criteria of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and its incidence, risk factors, and prophylactic procedures that are supported by evidence. To achieve this purpose, a critical examination was made of the articles on post-ERCP pancreatitis, based on the data obtained by research studies published up to 2009. At present, there are no standardized diagnostic criteria for post-ERCP pancreatitis. It is appropriate that post-ERCP pancreatitis is defined as acute pancreatitis that has developed following ERCP, and its diagnosis and severity assessment should be made according to the diagnostic criteria and severity assessment of the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. The incidence of acute pancreatitis associated with diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP is 0.4-1.5 and 1.6-5.4%, respectively. Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation is associated with a high risk of acute pancreatitis compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy. It was made clear that important risk factors include dysfunction of the Oddi sphincter, being of the female sex, past history of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and performance of pancreaticography. Temporary prophylactic placement of pancreatic stents in the high-risk group is useful for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis [odds ratio (OR) 3.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-6.4, number needed to treat (NNT) 10]. Use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is associated with a reduction in the development of post-ERCP pancreatitis (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.32-0.65). Single rectal administration of NSAIDs is useful for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis [relative risk (RR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.22-0.60, NNT 15] and decreases the development of pancreatitis in both the low-risk group (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.12-0.71) and the high-risk group (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23-0.72) of post-ERCP pancreatitis. As for somatostatin, a bolus injection may be most useful compared with short- or long-term infusion (OR 0.271, 95% CI 0.138-0.536, risk difference 8.2%, 95% CI 4.4-12.0%). The usefulness of gabexate mesilate was not apparent in any of the following conditions: acute pancreatitis (control 5.7 vs. 4.8% for gabexate mesilate), hyperamylasemia (40.6 vs. 36.9%), and abdominal pain (1.7 vs. 8.9%). Formulation of diagnostic criteria for post-ERCP pancreatitis is needed. Temporary prophylactic placement of pancreatic stents in the high-risk group offers the most promise as a means of preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis. As for pharmacological attempts, there are high expectations concerning NSAIDs because they are excellent in terms of cost-effectiveness, ease of use, and safety. There was no evidence of effective prophylaxis with the use of protease inhibitors, especially gabexate mesilate.

Post-ERCP pancreatitis rates do not differ between needle-knife and pull-type pancreatic sphincterotomy techniques: a multiendoscopist 13-year experience

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic sphincterotomy is one of several factors associated with an increased risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). The needle-knife pancreatic sphincterotomy technique (NKS) is purported to result in less-frequent post-ERCP pancreatitis compared with a standard pull-type sphincterotomy (PTS).

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to analyze the experience with both endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy (EPS) techniques with respect to post-ERCP pancreatitis at a single tertiary-level referral center.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Tertiary-care medical center (Charleston, South Carolina).

PATIENTS

Patients without chronic pancreatitis and with normal retrograde pancreatogram who underwent EPS between 1994 and 2007 were identified. Patients were excluded for the following reasons: pancreatic stent not placed, both sphincterotomy techniques used, any balloon dilation of the ampullary orifice, precut or access papillotomy, pancreas divisum.

RESULTS

A total of 481 patients were identified and underwent 510 ERCPs. Indications for ERCP were recurrent pancreatic-type pain (n = 353) or pancreatitis (n = 157). NKS was used for 395 of 510 (77.5%) cases versus 115 of 510 (22.5%) in which PTS was used. The incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis was no different between NKS (25/395, 6.4%) and PTS (9/115, 7.8%). Most cases were mild pancreatitis; a single episode of severe PEP occurred in each group.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis does not differ between EPS techniques when performed at a high-volume pancreaticobiliary referral center when using routine prophylactic pancreatic duct stent placement.

The role of endoscopy in the therapy of chronic pancreatitis

Almost all the therapeutic efforts in the treatment of chronic pancreatitis are directed towards pain control. Endoscopic techniques available for this purpose are endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (combined or not with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy) and endoscopic ultrasound. Pancreatic stones and strictures, pancreatic pseudocysts, and common bile duct strictures complicating chronic pancreatitis can be treated by endoscopy. The development of endoscopic ultrasound extended the possibilities in the treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts and main pancreatic duct drainage. Endoscopy is considered the first-line treatment in chronic pancreatitis and can be useful also as a 'bridge to surgery'. In fact the endoscopic approach to chronic pancreatitis can predict the response to surgical therapy as a definitive treatment. Medical, endoscopic and surgical methods for the management of chronic pancreatitis should all be considered in decision-making, and the best treatment should be chosen case by case and according to the local expertise.

Pancreatic stents for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Placement of pancreatic stents is a relatively new and increasingly adopted approach to reduce the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. Evidence for the efficacy of pancreatic stents in reducing post-ERCP pancreatitis continues to accumulate. Routine use of pancreatic stents in high-risk cases at advanced centers has changed the complexion of ERCP, reducing the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis to a more acceptable level, and eliminating some of the fear factor surrounding previously prohibitively risky settings, such as treatment of sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD). On the other hand, the adoption of prophylactic pancreatic stenting into some practices has been sporadic. Problems with pancreatic stent placement include technical difficulty with placement, need for follow-up evaluation to ensure passage or removal, and potential for inducing pancreatic ductal injury. There remain many challenges and unanswered questions which will be addressed in this review, including which patients are at risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis, how might pancreatic stents reduce risk, what is the evidence supporting efficacy of pancreatic stenting in reducing risk; and based on those data, which ERCPs are at sufficiently high risk to warrant a stent; at what point in an ERCP should a pancreatic stent be placed; how long pancreatic stents need to remain in place to be effective, the risk of inducing pancreatic duct injury by placement of a stent; the frequency and consequences of failure at attempted stent placement, and effectiveness of pancreatic stent placement in the hands of those with limited experience. Current recommendations for use of pancreatic stents and areas requiring further investigation are discussed.

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.