Take 2 Indomethacin (Suppositories) and Call Me in the Morning? The Role of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs in Protection Against Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis

Rectal indometacin dose escalation for prevention of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in high-risk patients: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although rectal indometacin 100 mg is effective in reducing the frequency and severity of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk patients, the optimal dose is unknown, and pancreatitis incidence remains high. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two dose regimens of rectal indometacin on the frequency and severity of pancreatitis after ERCP in high-risk patients.

METHODS

In this randomised, double-blind, comparative effectiveness trial, we enrolled patients from six tertiary medical centres in the USA. Eligible patients were those at high risk for the development of pancreatitis after ERCP. We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) immediately after ERCP to receive either two 50 mg indometacin suppositories and a placebo suppository (standard-dose group) or three 50 mg indometacin suppositories (high-dose group). 4 h after the procedure, patients assigned to the high-dose group received an additional 50 mg indometacin suppository, whereas patients in the standard-dose group received an additional placebo suppository. The randomisation schedule, stratified according to study centre and with no other restrictions, was computer generated by an investigator who was uninvolved in the clinical care of any participants, distributed to the sites, and kept by personnel not directly involved with the study. These same personnel were responsible for packaging the drug and placebo in opaque envelopes. Patients, study personnel, and treating physicians were masked to study group assignment. The primary outcome of the study was the development of pancreatitis after ERCP. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01912716, and enrolment is complete.

FINDINGS

Between July 9, 2013, and March 22, 2018, 1037 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either standard-dose (n=515) or high-dose indometacin (n=522). Pancreatitis after ERCP occurred in 141 (14%) of 1037 patients-76 (15%) of 515 patients in the standard-dose indometacin group and 65 (12%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group (risk ratio [RR] 1·19, 95% CI 0·87-1·61; p=0·32). We observed 19 adverse events that were potentially attributable to study drug. Clinically significant bleeding occurred in 14 (1%) of 1037 patients-six (1%) of 515 patients in the standard-dose indometacin group and eight (2%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group (p=0·79). Three (1%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group developed acute kidney injury versus none in the standard-dose group (p=0·25). A non-ST elevation myocardial infarction occurred in the standard-dose indometacin group 2 days after ERCP. A transient ischaemic attack occurred in the high-dose indometacin group 5 days after ERCP. All 19 adverse events, in addition to the 141 patients who developed pancreatitis after ERCP, were considered serious as all required admission to hospital. We observed no allergic reactions or deaths at 30 day follow-up.

INTERPRETATION

Dose escalation to rectal indometacin 200 mg did not confer any advantage compared with the standard 100 mg regimen, with pancreatitis incidence remaining high in high-risk patients. Current practice should continue unchanged. Further research should consider the pharmacokinetics of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs to determine the optimal timing of their administration to prevent pancreatitis after ERCP.

FUNDING

American College of Gastroenterology.

Risk factors of post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients despite prevention with prophylactic pancreatic stents

Objectives: To analyze risk factors of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in high risk patients in whom prophylactic pancreatic stents (PPSs) were intended to use to prevent endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP)-related complications.Patients and methods: Three hundred and seventeen high-risk patients for developing PEP were considered for preventive pancreatic stent placement in our endoscopy unit over 5 years. 5 Fr, 3-5 cm long PPSs were used. All data were collected in a predefined database. Development of PEP despite PPS placement was analyzed.Results: PEP occurred in 29 of 288 successfully stented patients (10.07%; 24 mild, four moderate, one severe). PPS was protective against all risks factors except for sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD). PPS related complication rate was 2.78% (n = 8). Unsuccessful stenting occurred in 29 patients (9.15%), PEP developed in 41.38% (n = 12; seven mild, four moderate, one severe). Those patients who had more patient related risk factors were more likely to develop PEP despite preventive measures with PPS. On the contrary, PPS placement was less successful in patients who had more procedure related risk factors.Conclusions: PPS is protective against all risks factors of PEP except for SOD in high-risk patients. More vulnerable patients who have more patient-related risk factors are more likely to develop PEP despite PPS is used, while more complex procedures predispose to unsuccessful PPS placement in patients with more procedure-related risk factors. PPS insertion in high-risk patients is effective and safe preventive method and the procedure related complication rate is reasonably low.

Pancreatic stenting to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis: a randomized multicenter trial

Background and study aims  Acute pancreatitis (AP) is one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders leading to hospitalization and the most frequent complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Besides pharmaco-prophylaxis, pancreatic stenting has been demonstrated to protect from post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). However, it remains unclear which patients benefit from pancreatic stenting. We therefore hypothesized that in an unselected population, inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct during first-time ERCP increases risk of PEP and that this risk can be significantly reduced by pancreatic stenting. Patients and methods  This study was a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial conducted at four European centers. A total of 167 patients undergoing first-time ERCP were enrolled in this trial. In the case of inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct, patients were randomly assigned to receive either a 5 French plastic pancreatic stent of various length or no routine prophylactic intervention for PEP. Results  A total of 167 patients were included in the final analysis. Prophylactic stent insertion significantly reduced the rate of PEP during first-time ERCP (odds ratio 0.43; 95% confidence interval 0.19 - 0.98; P  = 0.04). The number needed to treat to prevent one case of PEP by prophylactic stent insertion after inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct was 8.1 for the intention-to-treat population. Conclusion  In an unselected patient population, inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct during first-time ERCP is associated with a high risk for PEP. This risk can be significantly reduced by prophylactic pancreatic stenting, which is a safe and feasible procedure.

Rectal Indomethacin Is Protective against Pancreatitis after Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Aim

Rectal indomethacin was reported to be effective for postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) prophylaxis. However, the preventive effect of indomethacin for average-risk patients remains unclear. Recently, some conflicting evidence was addressed by recent articles. We aimed to determine the protective role of indomethacin in PEP based on the latest available literature.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library to identify related articles published before October 2016. Studies that evaluated the administration of indomethacin in the prevention of PEP were included in the analysis. We adopted a random-effects model to calculate the overall relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Ten trials from an initial search were finally included in the meta-analysis. The administration of rectal indomethacin significantly reduced the incidence of PEP in consecutive ERCP population (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50–0.77). There was no significant heterogeneity across included studies (I² = 14.2%, P = 0.31). Further subgroup analyses also revealed that rectal indomethacin could protect the individuals at high and average risks and reduced severity of PEP. Pre-ERCP administration of indomethacin seemed to be better than the post-ERCP given. There was no evidence of significant publication bias.

Conclusions

Rectal administration of indomethacin is an effective approach to prevent the incidence of PEP in both high- and average-risk populations undergoing ERCP. However, more high-quality RCTs are needed to further investigate the optimal timing for the administration of indomethacin.

Identification of risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in a high volume center

Background/Objectives

Pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Several patients´ or procedure related risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) have been suggested. The aim of this study was to validate the risk factors for PEP in a high-volume center.

Methods

All patients undergoing first time ERCP at a tertiary referral center between December 2010 and October 2013 were retrospectively included. PEP was defined according to the Atlanta Classification.

Results

404 patients were included in the final analysis. The risk to develop PEP was increased in patients after inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct (odds ratio 7.468 (2.792–19.975); p<0.001), which occurred in 37.4% of the patients. Inadvertent cannulation occurred significantly more frequently in patients with difficult cannulation of the papilla duodeni major (odds ratio 7.3; p<0.001).

Conclusion

Inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct is a procedure related risk factor for PEP. Measurements on preventing inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct should be established and studies on prophylactic measurements should focus particularly on patients with inadvertent cannulation of the pancreatic duct.

Targeted inhibition of pancreatic acinar cell calcineurin is a novel strategy to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is a pressing need to develop effective preventative therapies for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). We demonstrated that early PEP events are induced through the calcium-activated phosphatase calcineurin and that global calcineurin deletion abolishes PEP in mice. A crucial question is whether acinar cell calcineurin controls the initiation of PEP in vivo.

METHODS

We used a mouse model of PEP and examined the effects of in vivo acinar cell-specific calcineurin deletion by either generating a conditional knockout line or infusing a novel AAV-Ela-iCre into the pancreatic duct of a calcineurin floxed line.

RESULTS

We found that PEP is dependent on acinar cell calcineurin in vivo, and this led us to determine that calcineurin inhibitors, infused within the radiocontrast, can largely prevent PEP.

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide impetus for launching clinical trials to test the efficacy of intraductal calcineurin inhibitors to prevent PEP.