A meta-analysis on the role of rectal diclofenac and indomethacin in the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Universal prophylactic rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with a policy of selective pancreatic duct stenting significantly reduce post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Although rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been shown to be effective for the prevention of post-ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) pancreatitis (PEP) in high-risk patients, the benefit in average-risk patients is unclear. We aimed at assessing the benefit of prophylactic rectal NSAIDs in unselected consecutive patients to prevent PEP.

METHODS

All patients undergoing index ERCP procedures from January 2018 until March 2020 were included. All patients received prophylactic rectal diclofenac. A prophylactic pancreatic duct (PD) stent was placed if there was repeated PD cannulation, at the discretion of the endoscopist. The frequency of PEP was compared with historical controls.

RESULTS

Of 769 patients who underwent ERCP, 34 (4.4%) developed PEP (mild in 29 [85.3%], moderate in four [11.8%] and severe in one [2.9%]). Female gender, precut sphincterotomy, inadvertent PD cannulation and procedural time of > 30 minutes predicted PEP in univariate analysis. Inadvertent PD cannulation (OR 4.6, 95% CI: 1.8-11.7; p < 0.001) and procedural time of > 30 minutes (OR 8.5, 95% CI: 3.7-10.1; p < 0.001) were independent risk factors on multivariate analysis. When compared with historical controls, the odds of PEP with prophylactic use of rectal NSAIDs and selective PD stenting was 0.54 (CI: 0.31-0.93, p = 0.027). The number needed to treat (NNT) was 22 to prevent one PEP with prophylactic rectal NSAIDs.

CONCLUSION

Routine use of prophylactic rectal NSAIDs effectively prevents the occurrence of PEP in unselected consecutive patients in a real-world scenario.

Rectal administration of low-dose diclofenac does not reduce post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a popular technique; however, post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) remains a major adverse event. The administration of rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is reportedly effective in preventing PEP. However, the recommended dose varies and the efficacy of low-dose rectal NSAIDs remains unclear. Therefore, we decided to investigate the effectiveness of low-dose rectal diclofenac on PEP prevention, using propensity score matching.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included 401 patients who underwent ERCP between July 2015 and March 2020. After December 2016, we administered rectal diclofenac within 30 min before the ERCP procedure as widely as possible. Patients were divided into those who did (diclofenac group) and did not (control group) receive rectal diclofenac. Patients weighing ≥ 50 kg were administered a 50 mg dose, while those weighing < 50 kg were administered a 25 mg dose. The incidence and severity of PEP in the two groups were assessed by propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

Among 401 patients undergoing ERCP, 367 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Overall, 187 patients received rectal diclofenac (diclofenac group) and 180 did not (control group). After propensity score matching, 105 pairs were selected for evaluation. Overall, seven (6.7%) patients in the diclofenac group and 10 (9.5%) in the control group developed PEP (P = 0.45). Moderate or severe PEP occurred in four (3.8%) patients in the diclofenac group and six (5.7%) in the control group (P = 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of low-dose rectal diclofenac could not reduce the incidence and severity of PEP.

The preventive effect of tacrolimus on patients with post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Background/Aims

In patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), calcineurin activates zymogen, which results in pancreatitis. In this study, we aimed to determine the efficacy of tacrolimus, a calcineurin inhibitor, in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP).

Methods

This was a prospective pilot study in which patients who underwent ERCP received tacrolimus (4 mg in two divided doses); this was the Tac group. A contemporaneous cohort of patients was included as a control group. All patients were followed-up for PEP. PEP was characterized by worsening abdominal pain with an acute onset, elevated pancreatic enzymes, and a duration of hospital stay of more than 48 hours. Serum tacrolimus levels were measured immediately before the procedure in the Tac group.

Results

There were no differences in the baseline characteristics between the Tac group (n=48) and the control group (n=51). Only four out of 48 patients (8.3%) had PEP in the Tac group compared to eight out of 51 patients (15.7%) who had PEP in the control group. The mean trough tacrolimus level in patients who developed PEP was significantly lower (p<0.05).

Conclusions

Oral tacrolimus at a cumulative dose of 4 mg safely prevents PEP. Further randomized controlled studies are warranted to establish the role of tacrolimus in this context.

ERCP-Related Adverse Events in Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Aims

While endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic tool in primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), there is conflicting data on associated adverse events. The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis are to (1) compare ERCP-related adverse events in patients with and without PSC and (2) determine risk factors for ERCP-related adverse events in PSC.

Methods

Embase, PubMed, and CENTRAL were searched between January 1, 2000, and May 12, 2021. Eligible studies included adults with PSC undergoing ERCP and reported at least one ERCP-related adverse event (cholangitis, pancreatitis, bleeding, and perforation) or an associated risk factor. The risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2. Raw event rates were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and then pooled using random-effects models.

Results

Twenty studies met eligibility criteria, of which four were included in a meta-analysis comparing post-ERCP adverse events in patients with PSC (n = 715) to those without PSC (n = 9979). We found a significant threefold increase in the 30-day odds of cholangitis in PSC compared to those without (OR 3.263, 95% CI 1.076-9.896; p=0.037). However, there were no significant differences in post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), bleeding, or perforation. Due to limitations in primary data, only risk factors contributing to PEP could be analyzed. Accidental passage of the guidewire into the pancreatic duct (OR 7.444, 95% CI 3.328-16.651; p < 0.001; I 2 = 65.0%) and biliary sphincterotomy (OR 4.802, 95% CI 1.916-12.033; p=0.001; I 2 = 73.1%) were associated with higher odds of PEP in a second meta-analysis including five studies.

Conclusions

In the context of limited comparative data and heterogeneity, PSC patients undergoing ERCP have higher odds of cholangitis despite the majority receiving antibiotics. Additionally, accidental wire passage and biliary sphincterotomy increased the odds of PEP. Future studies on ERCP-related risks and preventive strategies are needed.

Optimal timing of rectal diclofenac in preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Background and study aims  Rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) prophylaxis reduces incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. Direct comparisons to the optimal timing of administration, before or after ERCP, are lacking. Therefore, we aimed to assess whether timing of rectal NSAID prophylaxis affects the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Patients and methods  We conducted an analysis of prospectively collected data from a randomized clinical trial. We included patients with a moderate to high risk of developing post-ERCP pancreatitis, all of whom received rectal diclofenac monotherapy 100-mg prophylaxis. Administration was within 30 minutes before or after the ERCP at the discretion of the endoscopist. The primary endpoint was post-ERCP pancreatitis. Secondary endpoints included severity of pancreatitis, length of hospitalization, and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admittance. Results  We included 346 patients who received the rectal NSAID before ERCP and 63 patients who received it after ERCP. No differences in baseline characteristics were observed. Post-ERCP pancreatitis incidence was lower in the group that received pre-procedure rectal NSAIDs (8 %), compared to post-procedure (18 %) (relative risk: 2.32; 95% confidence interval: 1.21 to 4.46, P  = 0.02). Hospital stays were significantly longer with post-procedure prophylaxis (1 day; interquartile range [IQR] 1-2 days vs. 1 day; IQR 1-4 days; P  = 0.02). Patients from the post-procedure group were more likely to be admitted to the ICU (1 patient [0.3 %] vs. 4 patients [6 %]; P  = 0.002). Conclusions  Pre-procedure administration of rectal diclofenac is associated with a significant reduction in post-ERCP pancreatitis incidence compared to post-procedure use.

Efficacy of Combining Aggressive Hydration With Rectal Indomethacin in Preventing Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (ERCP). No randomized controlled trial (RCT) has compared the efficacy of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy recommended interventions for PEP prevention. We assessed the effectiveness of these interventions using network meta-analysis. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify RCTs investigating guideline-recommended interventions and their combinations [rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs): indomethacin or diclofenac, pancreatic stent (PS), aggressive hydration (AH), sublingual nitrate) for PEP prevention. We performed direct and Bayesian network meta-analysis, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve to rank interventions. Subgroup network meta-analysis for high-risk populations was also performed. We identified a total of 38 RCTs with 10 different interventions. Each intervention was protective against PEP on direct and network meta-analysis compared with controls. Except AH+diclofenac and NSAIDs+ sublingual nitrate, AH+indomethacin was associated with a significant reduction in risk of PEP compared with PS [odds ratio (OR), 0.09; credible interval (CrI), 0.003-0.71], indomethcin+PS (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.85), diclofenac (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.65), AH (OR, 0.09; CrI, 0.003-0.65), sublingual nitrate (OR, 0.07; CrI, 0.002-0.63), and indomethacin (OR, 0.06; CrI, 0.002-0.43). AH with either rectal NSAIDs or sublingual nitrate had similar efficacy. AH+indomethacin was the best intervention for preventing PEP with 95.3% probability of being ranked first. For high-risk patients, although the efficacy of PS and indomethacin were comparable, PS had an 80.8% probability of being ranked first. AH+indomethacin seems the best intervention for preventing PEP. For high-risk patients, PS seems the most effective strategy. The potential of combination of interventions need to be explored further.

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis assessed using criteria for acute pancreatitis

Background and Aim

International consensus on the definition and classification of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) has been reached. However, the diagnosis and severity of PEP are often assessed according to the diagnostic criteria and classification for acute pancreatitis (AP). This study determined the incidence, severity, and risk factors of PEP diagnosed according to the diagnostic criteria and classification for AP in a large cohort.

Methods

This prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study conducted at five high-volume centers included 1932 patients who underwent ERCP-related procedures. The incidence, severity, and risk factors for PEP were evaluated.

Results

PEP occurred in 142 patients (7.3%); it was mild in 117 patients (6.0%) and severe in 25 patients (1.3%). According to the Cotton criteria, PEP occurred in 87 patients (4.5%); it was mild in 54 patients (2.8%), moderate in 20 patients (1.0%), and severe in 13 patients (0.7%). In the multivariate analysis, female sex (odds ratio [OR] 2.239; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.546-3.243), naïve papilla (OR 3.047; 95% CI 1.803-5.150), surgically-altered gastrointestinal anatomy (OR 2.538; 95% CI 1.342-4.802), procedure time after reaching the papilla (OR 1.009; 95% CI 1.001-1.017), pancreatic duct injection (OR 2.396; 95% CI 1.565-3.669), and intraductal ultrasonography (OR 1.641; 95% CI 1.024-2.629) were independent risk factors.

Conclusion

According to the diagnostic criteria and classification for AP, the incidence of PEP was higher than that according to the Cotton criteria and the severity of PEP tended to be severe.

Nafamostat Mesylate is Not Effective in Preventing Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is associated with complications such as post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). Protease inhibitors, including nafamostat mesylate (NM), have been evaluated for prophylaxis against PEP.

AIM

We describe the first multicenter randomized controlled trial assessing the prophylactic efficacy of NM against PEP.

METHODS

In this multicenter prospective study, we aimed to enroll 800 patients aged ≥ 20 years with a planned ERCP between December 2012 and March 2019. The primary outcome was the incidence and severity of PEP in patients who did not receive NM (non-NM) versus those who did (NM; 20 mg). Secondary outcomes included the incidence of PEP by NM initiation (pre- and post-ERCP), risk factors for PEP, and NM-related adverse events.

RESULTS

Only 441 of the planned 800 patients were enrolled (non-NM: n = 149; NM: n = 292 [pre-ERCP NM: n = 144; post-ERCP NM: n = 148]). Patient characteristics were balanced at baseline with no significant differences between groups. PEP occurred in 40/441 (9%) patients (non-NM: n = 15 [10%]; NM: n = 25 [9%]), including 17 (12%) and eight (8%) in the pre-ERCP and post-ERCP NM groups, respectively. In the NM group, the incidence of PEP was lower in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group. Pancreatic injection and double-guidewire technique were independent risk factors for PEP. NM-related adverse events of hyperkalemia occurred in two (0.7%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence for the prophylactic effect of NM against PEP, regardless of the timing of administration; however, further studies are needed.

Combined use of indomethacin and hydration is the best conservative approach for post-ERCP pancreatitis prevention: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is a life-threatening complication. Given the lack of a causative treatment for pancreatitis, it is of vital importance to minimize this risk of PEP. Multi-target preventive therapy may be the best choice for PEP prevention as disease development is multifactorial.

AIM

We aimed to assess the efficacy of a combination of indomethacin and hydration - type and amount - for PEP prevention via a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Through a systematic search in three databases, we searched all randomized controlled trials involving hydration and indomethacin and ranked the PEP preventive efficacy with a Bayesian network meta-analysis using the PRISMA for Network Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-NMA) guideline. The RoB2 tool was used for risk of bias assessment, surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for ranking and PROSPERO for the study protocol [reg. no. CRD42018112698]. We used risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data with 95% credible intervals (95% CrI).

RESULTS

The quantitative analysis included 7559 patients from 24 randomized controlled trials. Based on the SUCRA values, a combination of lactated Ringer's and indomethacin is more effective than single therapy with a 94% certainty. The percent relative risk ratios estimate preventive efficacy 70-99% higher for combinations than single therapies. Aggressive hydration with indomethacin (SUCRA 100%) is also significantly more effective than all other interventions (percent relative effect 94.3-98.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

A one-hit-on-each-target therapeutic approach is recommended in PEP prevention with an easily accessible combination of indomethacin and aggressive hydration for all average and high-risk patients without contraindication.

Safety and sedation-associated adverse event reporting among patients undergoing endoscopic cholangiopancreatography: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

There is wide variation in choice of sedation and airway management for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate safety outcomes of deep sedation with monitored anesthesia care (MAC) versus general endotracheal anesthesia (GETA).

METHODS

Individualized search strategies were performed in accordance with PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. This meta-analysis was performed by calculating pooled proportions using random effects models. Measured outcomes included procedure success, all-cause and anesthesia-associated adverse events, and post-procedure recovery time. Heterogeneity was assessed with I² statistics and publication bias by funnel plot and Egger regression testing.

RESULTS

Five studies (MAC: n = 1284 vs GETA: n = 615) were included. Patients in the GETA group were younger, had higher body mass index (BMI), and higher mean ASA scores (all P < 0.001) with no difference in Mallampati scores (P = 0.923). Procedure success, all-cause adverse events, and anesthesia-associated events were similar between groups [OR 1.16 (95% CI 0.51-2.64); OR 1.16 (95% CI 0.29-4.70); OR 1.33 (95% CI 0.27-6.49), respectively]. MAC resulted in fewer hypotensive episodes [OR 0.32 (95% CI 0.12-0.87], increased hypoxemic events [OR 5.61 (95% CI 1.54-20.37)], and no difference in cardiac arrhythmias [OR 0.48 (95% CI 0.13-1.78)]. Procedure time was decreased for MAC [standard difference - 0.39 (95% CI - 0.78-0.00)] with no difference in recovery time [standard difference - 0.48 (95% CI - 1.04-0.07)].

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests MAC may be a safe alternative to GETA for ERCP; however, MAC may not be appropriate in all patients given an increased risk of hypoxemia.

Aggressive Hydration With Ringer's Lactate in the Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Meta-Analysis

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is a dangerous complication and occurs in a considerable number of patients. However, since well-randomized controlled trials investigating aggressive hydration with Ringer's lactate are lacking, this meta-analysis assessed the role of aggressive hydration with Ringer's lactate alone or in combination with other therapies in the prevention of PEP.

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for relevant articles. The search engine was set to randomize controlled trials and prospective cohorts assessing Ringer's lactate in PEP prevention either alone or in combination with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and stent. The keywords "aggressive hydration," "Ringer's lactate," "post-ERCP pancreatitis," "NSAIDs," "stent placement," and "somatostatin analogs" were used. The search was limited to a study on humans published in English with no limitation to the study period.

Two hundred and six articles were retrieved. Only eight articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The studies showed a reduction of post-ERCP pancreatitis using aggressive hydration with Ringer's lactate alone (odds ratio 0.23, 95% CI 0.13 - 0.40, P-value < 0.001, I² for heterogeneity = 0%, P-value = 0.61, Chi-square value 1.83, and degrees of freedom (df) 3. In addition, the combination of Ringer's lactate with stents or NSAIDs was superior to Ringer's lactate alone (odds ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 - 0.98, P-value < 0.04, I² for heterogeneity = 0%, P-value = 0.48, Chi-square value 2.47, and df 3). Aggressive hydration with Ringer's lactate alone was effective in the prevention of PEP with a superior effect when combined with stents and NSAIDs.

Ringer's Lactate Hydration and Incidence of Post ERCP Pancreatitis: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study

Introduction:

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is one of the most frequently used treatment modality for various pancreatobiliary problems. Frequent complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography include pancreatitis, cholangitis, hemorrhage and perforation. This study was done to see the prevalence of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in patient aggressively hydrated with Ringer's Lactate solution.

Methods:

A descriptive cross sectional study was carried out on patient undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography at Bharatpur Hospital from June 2018 to August 2020. Ethical clearance was taken from Institutional Review Committee Bharatpur Hospital (reference number 16/076/77). The convenient sampling method was applied. Data were collected and analyzed in statistical package for the social sciences version 16. Point estimate at 95% confidence interval was calculated along with frequency and proportion for binary data.

Results:

Pain abdomen was assessed using Visual Analogue Scale and it was found that 8.1% of patients (15 patients) complained of pain abdomen with visual analogue scale > 3. Serum amylase was sent only in those patients who complained of pain abdomen and only in three patients (1.6%) serum amylase was increased more than 3 times the upper limit of normal value suggestive of pancreatitis. All three patients who had pancreatitis had precut sphincterotomy.

Conclusions:

In this study we found that incidence of pancreatitis slumped after aggressive hydration with Ringer's lactate solution and adjunct use of other prophylactic measures for prevention of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis might yield further better results.

Hydration with Lactated Ringer's solution combined with rectal diclofenac in the prevention of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

OBJECTIVE

Different measures are recommended to reduce pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We conducted a study in patients with ERCP treated with rectal diclofenac or lactated Ringer's solution, or both interventions, to assess whether there is a decrease in the number of cases of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A mixed cohort study involving 1,896 patients from 2009 to 2018. Up to June 2012 without treatment (Group I). Subsequently, 100mg of rectal diclofenac (Group II). Since 2016, lactated Ringer's solution 200ml/hour during the procedure and 4hours after it, in addition to 500ml over 30minutes when the pancreas was cannulated (Group III). Since 2017, lactated Ringer's solution plus Diclofenac (Group IV). There were 725 patients in group I, and 530, 227 and 414 patients in groups II, III and IV, respectively. Factors predisposing to post-ERCP pancreatitis and post-ERCP pancreatitis cases that were defined by consensus criteria have been collected.

RESULTS

There were 65 cases of post-ERCP pancreatitis (3.4%); 2.9%, 3.4%, 3.1% and 4.3% in groups I, II, III and IV, respectively (P=.640). In group I, there was 4.2% of post-ERCP pancreatitis in naïve papillae and 4%, 4.9% and 6.3% in groups II, III and IV, respectively (P=.585). The severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis and adverse effects were similar in all groups. 38.4% were high-risk patients. There were also no differences in post-ERCP pancreatitis in this group (P=.501).

CONCLUSION

In this work, no benefit was obtained with diclofenac plus hydration in reducing the number and severity of cases of post-ERCP pancreatitis nor with the other prophylactic measures.

Low-dose rectal diclofenac does not prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis in low- or high-risk patients

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The most common adverse event following an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedure is post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). Rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) administration has shown promise to reduce the risk of PEP in high-risk patients. However, in contrast to high-risk patients, the role of NSAID administration in patients with low risk remains controversial.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, single-center, single-blinded, two-arm parallel group, randomized controlled trial to clarify the efficacy of low dose (50 mg) rectal NSAID administration for preventing PEP in at-risk patients. Patients scheduled to undergo ERCP were randomized into two groups, those with and without rectal administration of diclofenac. Patients in the diclofenac group received 50 mg of rectal diclofenac 30 min before undergoing ERCP. The primary endpoint was rate of PEP.

RESULTS

A total of 303 were randomized into the study groups. Four patients declined participation following randomization, and another two were withdrawn. As a result, a total of 147 patients were assigned to the diclofenac group and 150 to the control group. The baseline and procedural characteristics were similar in both groups. The primary endpoint of PEP occurrence was seen in 13 of 297 patients (4.4%), including eight (5.4%) in the diclofenac group and five (3.3%) in the control group (P = 0.286). Additionally, those results were not significantly different when patients were classified as low or high risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic low-dose rectal diclofenac did not reduce the incidence of PEP following ERCP in patients classified as low or high risk.

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation less than three minutes for biliary stone removal increases the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis

Objectives

The adequate duration for EPBD was unclear. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the effect of balloon dilatation duration of EPBD on the occurrence of PEP.

Methods

One hundred and ninety-eight patients with common bile duct (CBD) stone treated by EPBD were retrospectively recruited. The dilatation duration was determined according to adequate opening of the biliary orifice without bleeding. The clinical outcomes and complications of EPBD were recorded.

Results

We stratified the patients according to dilatation duration (Group A, <3 minutes; Group B, 3–5 minutes; Group C, ≥5 minutes). The group C patients had a higher proportion of large CBD stones (stones ≥10 mm) (33.3% vs. 26.8% vs. 53.5%, p = 0.01). Patients in group A had a significantly higher PEP rate than patients in group B (13.3 vs. 3.1, p = 0.032). There were no significant differences in perforation and bleeding rate among the three groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that a dilatation duration of <3 minutes, CBD diameter < 10 mm and age ≤ 75 years were independent risk factors of PEP in post-EPBD patients.

Conclusions

In patients receiving EPBD, dilatation duration <3 minutes, lower CBD diameter, and younger age were independent risk factors of PEP.

Diclofenac does not reduce the risk of acute pancreatitis in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiography

BACKGROUND

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy recommends rectal indomethacin or diclofenac before endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis. However, data on the prophylactic effect in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) are lacking.

METHODS

This was a retrospective case-control study. In 2009-2018, a total of 2000 ERCPs were performed in 931 patients with PSC. Case procedures (N = 1000 after November 2013) were performed after administration of rectal diclofenac. Control procedures (N = 1000 before November 2013) were performed with the same indication but without diclofenac. Acute post-ERCP pancreatitis and other ERCP-related adverse events (AEs) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Post-ERCP pancreatitis developed in 49 (4.9%) procedures in the diclofenac group and 62 (6.2%) procedures in the control group (p = 0.241). No difference existed between the groups in terms of the severity of pancreatitis or any other acute AEs. The risk of pancreatitis was elevated in patients with native papilla: 11.4% in the diclofenac group and 8.7% in the control group (p = 0.294). In adjusted logistic regression, diclofenac did not reduce the risk of pancreatitis (odds ratio (OR) = 1.074, 95% confidence interval 0.708-1.629, p = 0.737). However, in generalised estimation equations with the advanced model, diclofenac seemed to diminish the risk of pancreatitis (OR = 0.503) but not significantly (p = 0.110).

CONCLUSION

In this large patient cohort in a low-risk unit, diclofenac does not seem to reduce the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis in patients with PSC. The trend in the pancreatitis rate after ERCP is decreasing. The evaluation of the benefits of diclofenac among PSC patients warrants a randomised controlled study targeted to high-risk patients and procedures.

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography-Related Complications and Their Management Strategies: A "Scoping" Literature Review

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a well-known procedure with both diagnostic and therapeutic utilities in managing pancreaticobiliary conditions. With the advancements of endoscopic techniques, ERCP has become a relatively safe and effective procedure. However, as ERCP is increasingly being utilized for different advanced techniques, newer complications have been noticed. Post-ERCP complications are known, and mostly include pancreatitis, infection, hemorrhage, and perforation. The risks of these complications vary depending on several factors, such as patient selection, endoscopist's skills, and the difficulties involved during the procedure. This review discusses post-ERCP complications and management strategies with new and evolving concepts.

IV Ibuprofen for Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis in Children: A Randomized Placebo-controlled Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is reported to occur in up to 11% of pediatric patients. To date, no study has prospectively evaluated an intervention to prevent PEP in children. It is unclear if such a study is even feasible.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility of studying IV ibuprofen for PEP prevention in the pediatric population.

METHODS

This was a prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled feasibility study. Patients younger than 19 years of age undergoing ERCP were randomized to receive 10 mg/kg IV ibuprofen (max of 800 mg) or placebo (saline) at the time of ERCP. The primary outcome was PEP. Secondary outcomes included post-ERCP-related bleeding, rates of other procedural and medication-related adverse events.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients were randomized and received either IV ibuprofen or placebo. Preprocedure- and procedure-related factors were not significantly different between the groups except that patients in the placebo group tended to weigh less (48.7 vs 63.7 kg, P = 0.03). There were 7 episodes of PEP (12%). PEP was less frequently identified in the Ibuprofen group than in the control group (7% vs 17%), but this was not statistically significant (P = 0.42). Mean postprocedural abdominal pain scores were significantly lower in the IV Ibuprofen group than in the control group (1.1 vs 3.1, P = 0.01) and the number of patients who had increased abdominal pain after the procedure was significantly lower in ibuprofen group than in the control group (3% vs 38%, P = 0.002). There were no significant differences in procedure-related or drug-related adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Postprocedural pain scores and the number of patients who had increased abdominal pain after the procedure were significantly lower in the IV ibuprofen group. The current study provides encouraging, but only very weak evidence that IV ibuprofen decreases PEP in children. Power analysis suggests that a small handful of high-volume pediatric centers would be able to perform an adequate clinical trial in a reasonable time frame. Focusing on all cause postprocedural pain (PEP and non-PEP) may allow for a more efficiency study design and be just as clinically relevant.

Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs for Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Postoperative Pancreatitis Prevention: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND OR PURPOSE

There is controversy regarding the efficacy of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for prophylaxis against endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) postoperative pancreatitis. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of NSAIDs for prophylaxis against post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP).

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Selected RCTs were pooled under a fixed effects model to generate the relative risks (RRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs involving a total of 5031 patients (2555 in the intervention group and 2476 in the control group) were selected. Overall, NSAIDs were associated with a significant reduction in risk of PEP (RR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.64, I² = 40.4%) and moderate to severe PEP (RR = 0.45, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.67, I² = 0%) compared with the control group. Subgroup analyses were performed according to route of administration (rectal or other), type of NSAIDs (diclofenac, indomethacin, or other), timing of administration (pre-ERCP, post-ERCP, or other), and patient population (high risk or general). Subgroup analyses showed difference in clinical efficacy of NSAID prophylaxis regardless of route, timing, or specific type of NSAID.

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs were associated with a significant reduction in risk of PEP and moderate to severe PEP compared to the control group.

Risk Factors for Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis in the Indomethacin Era - A Prospective Study

Background and Aims

Although endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an essential procedure used to treat conditions affecting the biliopancreatic system, it can lead to several complications. Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is the most frequent one, with an incidence ranging from 3 to 14%. Our aim was to assess the potential risk factors associated with PEP occurrence in patients undergoing ERCP with indomethacin prophylaxis.

Methods

Prospective, single-center, real-world observational study (January to December 2015) with inclusion of patients submitted to ERCP, where relevant patient-related and procedure-related data had been collected. Patients had to have been admitted for a minimum of 24 h in order to establish the presence of early complications. All patients were submitted to PEP prophylaxis with 1 or 2 methods: rectal indomethacin and pancreatic duct (PD) stenting.

Results

A total of 188 patients who had undergone ERCP were included (52.7% women; mean age 69.2 ± 16.0 years) and PEP was diagnosed in 13 (6.9%). PEP prophylaxis consisted of indomethacin in all cases (100%) and PD stenting in 7.4%. The pancreatitis was mild in 11 patients (84.6%) and severe in the other 2. One of them died (0.5%). None of the patient-related risk factors were associated with changes in PEP probability. Of all patients, 33.0% had 2 or more procedure-related risk factors. A higher number of synchronous procedure-related risk factors showed a statistically significant correlation with PEP occurrence, p = 0.040.

Conclusions

The 6.9% PEP rate is considered acceptable since 33.0% patients had a medium-high risk for PEP due to challenging biliary cannulation. The total number of procedure-related risk factors seems to play a critical role in the development of PEP despite indomethacin prophylaxis.

Split-dose or hybrid nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and N-acetylcysteine therapy for prevention of post-retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Despite significant technical and training improvements, the incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) has not significantly dropped. Although many studies have evaluated the efficacy of various agents, e.g. nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, octreotide, antioxidants, administered via various dosages, routes (oral, intrarectal or parenteral), and schedules (before or after the procedure), the results have been conflicting.

AIM

To evaluate efficacy of three pharmacologic prophylactic methods for prevention of PEP.

METHODS

In this prospective, single-center randomized trial, patients who underwent first-time ERCP for choledocholithiasis were randomly assigned to three groups. The first group received 600 mg N-acetylcysteine 15 min prior to ERCP, and per-rectum administration of 50 mg indomethacin both prior to and after completion of the ERCP. The second group was administered only the 50 mg indomethacin per-rectum both prior to and after the ERCP. The third group was administered per-rectum 100 mg indomethacin only after the ERCP, representing the control group given the guideline-recommended regimen. The primary end-point was PEP prevention.

RESULTS

Among the total 211 patients evaluated during the study, 186 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and completed the protocol. The percentages of patients who developed PEP in each of the three groups were not significantly different (χ² = 2.793, P = 0.247). Among the acute PEP cases, for all groups, 14 patients developed mild pancreatitis (77.77%) and 4 moderate. No severe cases of PEP occurred, and in all PEP cases the resolution was favorable. No adverse events related to the medications (digestive hemorrhage, rectal irritation, or allergies) occurred.

CONCLUSION

The efficacies of split-dose indomethacin and combined administration (N-acetylcysteine with indomethacin) for preventing PEP were similar to that of the standard regimen.

Acute Pancreatitis After Laparoscopic Transcystic Common Bile Duct Exploration: An Analysis of Predisposing Factors in 447 Patients

INTRODUCTION

In laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE), the risk of acute pancreatitis (AP) is well recognized. The present study assesses the incidence, risk factors, and clinical impact of AP in patients with choledocholithiasis treated with LTCBDE.

METHODS

A retrospective database was completed including patients who underwent LTCBDE between 2007 and 2017. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

After exclusion criteria, 447 patients were identified. There were 70 patients (15.7%) who showed post-procedure hyperamylasemia, including 20 patients (4.5%) who developed post-LTCBDE AP. Of these, 19 were edematous and one was a necrotizing pancreatitis. Patients with post-LTCBDE AP were statistically more likely to have leukocytosis (p < 0.004) and jaundice (p = 0.019) before surgery and longer operative times (OT, p < 0.001); they were less likely to have incidental intraoperative diagnosis (p = 0.031) or to have biliary colic as the reason for surgery (p = 0.031). In the final multivariate model, leukocytosis (p = 0.013) and OT (p < 0.001) remained significant predictors for AP. Mean postoperative hospital stay (HS) was significantly longer in AP group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The risk of AP is moderate and should be considered in patients with preoperative leukocytosis and jaundice and exposed to longer OT. AP has a strong impact on postoperative HS.

How to Avoid Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis

Pancreatitis remains the most common and potentially devastating complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. Recent advances in prophylaxis have improved but not eliminated this problem, underscoring the importance of ongoing research toward this goal. This review aims to provide an evidence-based approach to post-ERCP pancreatitis prevention through patient selection, risk stratification, procedural technique, and multimodality prophylaxis, and discusses ongoing and future research initiatives in this important area.

Cyclooxygenase-2 up-regulates hepatic somatostatin receptor 2 expression

Somatostatin and its analogues, which function by binding to somatostatin receptors (SSTRs) 1-5, play a protective role in liver cirrhosis. Hepatic SSTR-2 expression is up-regulated in subjects with liver cirrhosis. However, little is known about the mechanisms underlying this process. In the present study, we observed the up-regulation of hepatic SSTR-2 expression in thioacetamide (TAA)-induced cirrhotic rats and further showed that cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) might play a role in this process via the protein kinase C (PKC)-cAMP response element binding protein (CREB) signaling pathway. In vivo, the up-regulated SSTR-2 in liver cirrhosis was inhibited by the addition of a selective COX-2 inhibitor, such as celecoxib. In vitro, the up-regulation of COX-2 by either transfection with COX-2 plasmids or treatment with TAA increased levels of SSTR-2 and phosphorylated CREB (p-CREB) in the human hepatocyte cell line L02. Furthermore, the increase in SSTR-2 expression was inhibited by the addition of celecoxib and a PKC inhibitor. Moreover, for comparable DNA methylation levels in the region upstream of the hepatic SSTR-2 gene in normal and cirrhotic livers, DNA methylation may not contribute to the up-regulation of SSTR-2 expression in cirrhotic livers. In conclusion, the up-regulation of hepatic SSTR-2 might be induced by COX-2 via the PKC-CREB signaling pathway but is probably not induced by DNA methylation.

Fluid hydration to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis in average- to high-risk patients receiving prophylactic rectal NSAIDs (FLUYT trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication of ERCP and may run a severe course. Evidence suggests that vigorous periprocedural hydration can prevent PEP, but studies to date have significant methodological drawbacks. Importantly, evidence for its added value in patients already receiving prophylactic rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is lacking and the cost-effectiveness of the approach has not been investigated. We hypothesize that combination therapy of rectal NSAIDs and periprocedural hydration would significantly lower the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis compared to rectal NSAIDs alone in moderate- to high-risk patients undergoing ERCP.

Methods

The FLUYT trial is a multicenter, parallel group, open label, superiority randomized controlled trial. A total of 826 moderate- to high-risk patients undergoing ERCP that receive prophylactic rectal NSAIDs will be randomized to a control group (no fluids or normal saline with a maximum of 1.5 mL/kg/h and 3 L/24 h) or intervention group (lactated Ringer’s solution with 20 mL/kg over 60 min at start of ERCP, followed by 3 mL/kg/h for 8 h thereafter). The primary endpoint is the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Secondary endpoints include PEP severity, hydration-related complications, and cost-effectiveness.

Discussion

The FLUYT trial design, including hydration schedule, fluid type, and sample size, maximize its power of identifying a potential difference in post-ERCP pancreatitis incidence in patients receiving prophylactic rectal NSAIDs.

Trial registration

EudraCT: 2015-000829-37. Registered on 18 February 2015.

ISRCTN: 13659155. Registered on 18 May 2015.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2583-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Rectal Indomethacin Prevents Moderate to Severe Post-ERCP Pancreatitis and Death and Should Be Used Before the Procedure: A Meta-Analysis of Aggregate Subgroup Data

Background

Despite overall evidence in the literature favoring rectal indomethacin in preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP), its role in preventing potentially fatal complications is not well explored.

Method

A comprehensive electronic literature search was done to select randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rectal indomethacin and placebo in preventing PEP. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Statistical heterogeneity was characterized. Random effect model meta-analysis was used. Several subgroup, sensitivity and aggregate subgroup data analyses were completed based on specific risk factors or patient characteristics to identify patient populations who may benefit most from rectal indomethacin.

Results

A total of eight out of 336 trials published between 2007 and 2016 (n=3324) were included. Analysis showed administering rectal indomethacin before rather than during or after ERCP significantly reduced PEP rates (odds ratio (OR): 0.56 [0.40-079]). Rectal indomethacin also significantly decreased the rate of moderate to severe PEP and death amongst all patients (OR: 0.53 [0.31-0.89] and 0.10 [0.02-0.65], respectively). Rectal indomethacin significantly prevented PEP in patients with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) (OR: 0.49 [0.30-0.78]) and those undergoing biliary sphincterotomy (OR: 0.63 [0.42-0.95]), but not in those undergoing precut or pancreatic sphincterotomy or prophylactic pancreatic stent placement. Sensitivity analysis showed that the effect remained significant after two studies with high risk of bias were excluded.

Conclusion

Rectal indomethacin significantly decreases the occurrence of moderate to severe PEP and death in all patients, only if given before the procedure.

Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society guidelines for endoscopic sphincterotomy

The Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society (JGES) has recently compiled guidelines for endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) using evidence-based methods. Content regarding actual clinical practice, including detailed endoscopic procedures, instruments, device types and usage, has already been published by the JGES postgraduate education committee in May 2015 and, thus, in these guidelines we avoided duplicating such content as much as possible. The guidelines do not address pancreatic sphincterotomy, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD), and endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD). The guidelines for EPLBD are planned to be developed separately. The evidence level in this field is often low and, in many instances, strong recommendation has to be determined on the basis of expert consensus. At this point in time, the guidelines are divided into six items including indications, techniques, specific cases, adverse events, outcomes, and postoperative follow up.

Pre-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) administration of rectal indomethacin in unselected patients to reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies have reported that peri-procedural administration of rectal indomethacin reduces the risk of pancreatitis in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Based on these studies, gastrointestinal (GI) societies recommend prophylactic rectal indomethacin for all patients undergoing ERCP. However, recent studies have reported contradictory results. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the pooled relative risk (RR) of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in unselected patients who received rectal indomethacin before the ERCP (pre-ERCP) compared to patients who received pre-ERCP rectal placebo.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings (from inception through September 1, 2017) to identify randomized control trials (RCTs) investigating the role of pre-ERCP rectal indomethacin in reducing the risk of PEP in unselected patients undergoing ERCP. The databases included Ovid, Medline, In-Process, and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science. We calculated a pooled estimate of the RR of PEP in patients who received pre-ERCP rectal indomethacin compared to patients who received pre-ERCP rectal placebo. The meta-analysis was performed using the random effects model.

RESULTS

Six RCTs with a total of 2229 patients were included in the final meta-analysis. There were 1143 patients in the rectal indomethacin group and 1086 patients in the rectal placebo group. There were 71 events of PEP in the rectal indomethacin group and 114 events of PEP in the rectal placebo group. Pre-ERCP administration of rectal indomethacin significantly reduced the risk of PEP compared to pre-ERCP rectal placebo (RR 0.60, 95% CI, 0.45-0.80; p<0.0001). There was no heterogeneity between the studies (I² = 0).

CONCLUSION

The results of this meta-analysis support the routine pre-ERCP administration of rectal indomethacin in unselected patients to prevent PEP.

The effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on severity of acute pancreatitis and pancreatic necrosis

Introduction Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common emergency presentation and can be disabling. There is significant morbidity and mortality associated with AP, and it places a considerable burden on the healthcare system. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been shown to have a protective effect in some elective contexts. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the effect of NSAIDs on the course of AP and the severity of the disease. Methods A retrospective analysis was carried out of 324 patients admitted as an emergency with a diagnosis of AP to two UK hospitals. Patients were divided into two groups: those already taking NSAIDs for other co-morbidities and those not taking NSAIDs. Variables compared included: admission to a high dependency or intensive care unit; pancreatic necrosis; pseudocyst development; need for surgery; serum inflammatory markers; modified early warning scores on days 1, 3 and 5; length of stay; and mortality. Results Patients not taking NSAIDs were more likely to have a C-reactive protein level of ≥150mg/l (p=0.007). Patients in the NSAID group experienced less pancreatic necrosis (p=0.019) and lower rates of pseudocyst formation (p=0.010). Other variables showed no difference between the two groups, specifically length of stay and mortality. Conclusions Routine NSAID use may exert a protective effect on the development of AP, its severity, and complications. Therapeutic use of NSAIDs in acute presentations with pancreatitis should be further evaluated.

Use of NSAIDs via the Rectal Route for the Prevention of Pancreatitis after ERCP in All-Risk Patients: An Updated Meta-Analysis

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of the rectal administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). We searched database for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing periprocedural rectal administration of NSAIDs with placebo for the prevention of PEP. The rectal administration of NSAIDs significantly decreased the incidence of PEP in the whole patient population (odds ratio (OR): 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.30–0.64, P < 0.0001), high-risk patients (OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.19–0.58, P = 0.0001), and all-risk patients (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.31–0.84, P = 0.008). The incidence of PEP was reduced by indomethacin (OR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.36–0.82, P = 0.004) and diclofenac (OR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.15–0.46, P < 0.00001). The administration of NSAIDs before (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.25–0.73, P = 0.002) or after (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.27–0.56, P < 0.00001) ERCP reduced PEP. The NSAIDs were associated with a reduction in mild PEP (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.36–0.83, P = 0.004) and moderate-to-severe PEP (OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.28–0.79, P = 0.004). The rectal administration of NSAIDs reduced the incidence of PEP in high-risk and all-risk patients.

Does rectal diclofenac reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis? A district general hospital experience

INTRODUCTION

There is controversy in the literature recently regarding the efficacy of rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of PEP in three distinct groups of patients at the Royal United Hospital, Bath: no use of rectal diclofenac, selective use and blanket use without contraindication.

METHOD

Readmission data, blood results, radiology reports and discharge summaries were used to identify patients with PEP from August 2010 to December 2015. The administration of rectal diclofenac postprocedure was recorded from the endoscopy reporting system.

RESULTS

1318 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies (ERCP) were performed by four endoscopists during the study period with 66 (5.0%) cases of pancreatitis. 445 ERCPs were performed prior to the introduction of NSAID use during which time, with an incidence of 35 (7.9%) episodes of PEP. During the selective period of NSAID use (high-risk patients) 539 ERCPs were performed and 72 (13.4%) patients received NSAIDs. 17 (3.2%) developed PEP. 334 ERCPs were performed when NSAIDs were given to all patients without contraindication. 289 (86.5%) of patients received rectal diclofenac and 13 (3.9%) developed pancreatitis. There is a statistically significant decrease in PEP comparing the groups of patients receiving NSAIDs selectively (p=0.0009) or routinely (p=0.0172) when compared with none. There is no difference between the selective and routine group (p=0.571).

CONCLUSION

Our data demonstrate that the introduction of a selective or routine use of NSAIDs for PEP in a District General Hospital (DGH) significantly decreases the risk of pancreatitis (risk reduction 43.7%).

Risk factors of pancreatitis after endoscopic sphincterotomy. Review of literature and practical remarks based on approximately 10,000 ERCPs

Post-endoscopic pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Depending on the presence of risk factors, PEP can occur in 4,1% to about 43% of patients. According to the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines, only three to patient-associated risk factors have been identified: suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) (OR 4.09), female gender (OR 2.23), and previous pancreatitis (OR 2.46). Another three procedure-associated factors include cannulation attempt duration &gt; 10 minutes (OR 1.76), more than one pancreatic guidewire passage (OR 2.77, CI: 1.79 - 4.30), and pancreatic injection (OR 2.2, CI: 1.60 - 3.01). Importantly, analyses of cumulative risk due to coexistence of several factors emphasize the importance of female sex, difficult cannulation, CBD diameter &lt;5 mm, young age, and many other factors. Unfortunately, studies performed to date have included only small numbers of patients with several co-existing risk factors. Therefore, further analysis of other risk factors and the cumulative risk related to their co-occurrence is necessary. Based on current evidence, special care must be given to patients with several risk factors. Also, care should be given to proper qualification of patients, use of guidewires, early pre-cut incision, protective Wirsung's duct stenting, and rectal NSAID administration.

Reducing the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Pancreatitis is the most common and potentially devastating complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), resulting in significant morbidity, occasional mortality, and increased health-care expenditure. Accordingly, the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) remains a major clinical and research priority. Strategies to reduce the incidence of PEP include thoughtful patient selection, appropriate risk-stratification, sound procedural technique, prophylactic pancreatic stent placement, and pharmacoprevention. Despite advances in all these areas, however, the incidence of PEP remains as high as 15% in high-risk cases. Thus, additional research towards the goal of eliminating PEP is necessary. Herein is an evidence-based review of strategies to prevent pancreatitis after ERCP, focusing on recent important developments in the field.

Risk factors of post- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in biliary type sphincter of Oddi dysfunction in Japanese patients

OBJECTIVE

Suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD) is a well-known risk factor for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). The indication of ERCP for suspected SOD patients was very low in Japan compared to other countries. Therefore, the risk of PEP may be different in Japanese SOD patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the risk of PEP in suspected biliary type SOD in Japan.

METHODS

From December 1996 to January 2017, 72 patients were suspected as having biliary type SOD, by questionnaire, liver function tests, hepatobiliary scintigraphy, abdominal ultrasonography, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasonography and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Finally, 60 patients who underwent ERCP were included in this study, and the factors associated with PEP were evaluated.

RESULTS

The overall PEP rate was 23.3% (n = 14). Diagnostic ERCP alone for SOD did not increase the risk of PEP. The correlation of PEP incidence with pancreatic duct guidewire (PGW) technique and endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) was indicated in univariate and multivariate analysis. Pancreatic stent placement was a risk in univariate analysis but not in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

PGW technique and EST for biliary type SOD were important risk factors for PEP. Pancreatic stenting was ineffective for prevention of PEP.

Diclofenac Does Not Reduce the Risk of Post-endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis in Low-Risk Units

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have an inhibitory role in pathogenesis of pancreatitis. Guidelines from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy recommend routine rectal administration of 100 mg of diclofenac or indomethacin immediately before or after ERCP for all patients without contraindications.

AIMS

Our aim was to evaluate the effect of diclofenac in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in a high-volume, low-PEP-risk ERCP unit.

METHODS

The rate and severity of PEP were compared in groups of 1000 historical controls prior to the routine use of diclofenac and in 1000 patients receiving 100 mg diclofenac before ERCP.

RESULTS

PEP occurred in 56 (2.8%) of the 2000 patients, and the rate of the pancreatitis was 2.8% in control group and 2.8% in diclofenac group (p = 1.000). The PEP rate among the native papilla patients was 3.9% in control group and 3.6% in diclofenac group (p = 0.803). In subgroup analysis of patients with a high risk of PEP, diclofenac neither prevented PEP nor made its course milder.

CONCLUSIONS

In an unselected patient population in a center with a low incidence of PEP, diclofenac seems to have no beneficial effect.

Rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs administration is effective for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis is one of the most common complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Whether the prophylactic administration of rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) peri-ERCP is effective in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) remains controversial. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of rectal NSAIDs on PEP.

METHODS

A systematic search of literature databases (Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science) was performed to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The Jadad score for assessing risk of bias was used to evaluate the quality of included studies. The primary endpoint of the study was efficacy for PEP prevention. Sub-analyses were performed to determine the risk reduction for different NSAID types, for general vs. high-risk patients, by timing of administration and for moderate to severe PEP.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs, including a total of 3989 patients, were identified and included in the analysis. The risk of PEP was lower in the NSAIDs group than in the placebo group (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.43-0.64; P < 0.01). The risk of moderate to severe PEP was also lower in the NSAIDs group. (RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.28-0.69; P < 0.01). There was no difference in efficacy between rectal indomethacin and diclofenac, nor between pre-ERCP and post-ERCP administration timing of rectal NSAIDs.

CONCLUSIONS

A single rectal dose of NSAIDs is effective in preventing PEP both in high-risk and in unselected patients, regardless of timing of administration (pre- or post-ERCP) and NSAID type (indomethacin or diclofenac).

Indomethacin and diclofenac in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Diclofenac and indomethacin are the most studied drugs for preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). However, there are no prospective, randomized multicenter trials with a sufficient number of patients for correct evaluation of their efficacy. Our aim was to evaluate all prospective trials published in full text that studied the efficacy of diclofenac or indomethacin and were controlled with placebo or non-treatment for the prevention of PEP in adult patients undergoing ERCP.

METHODS

Systematic search of databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane) for relevant studies published from inception to 30 June 2016.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis of 4741 patients from 17 trials showed that diclofenac or indomethacin significantly decreased the risk ratio (RR) of PEP to 0.60 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.78; P = .0001), number needed to treat (NNT) was 20, and the reduction of RR of moderate to severe PEP was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.43-0.97; P = .0339). The efficacy of indomethacin compared with diclofenac was similar (P = .98). The efficacy of indomethacin or diclofenac did not differ according to timing (P = .99) or between patients with average-risk and high-risk for PEP (P = .6923). The effect of non-rectal administration of indomethacin or diclofenac was not significant (P = .1507), but the rectal route was very effective (P = .0005) with an NNT of 19. The administration of indomethacin or diclofenac was avoided in patients with renal failure. Substantial adverse events were not detected.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of rectally administered diclofenac or indomethacin before or closely after ERCP is inexpensive and safe and is recommended in every patient (without renal failure) undergoing ERCP. (Registration number: CRD42016042726, http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.).

Prophylactic rectal indomethacin may be ineffective for preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in general patients: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Efficacy of prophylactic indomethacin for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) in general patients remains controversial. To address this, we conducted a meta-analysis of clinical trials specifically on rectal indomethacin in prevention of PEP in consecutive patients undergoing ERCP.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trials on rectal indomethacin in the prevention of PEP in consecutive patients undergoing ERCP. Primary outcome was the overall rate of PEP. Secondary outcomes were the overall rates of moderate to severe PEP and mild PEP.

RESULTS

Six studies, with a total of 2473 patients, were included. Overall rate of PEP was 7% (95% CI, 6-9%). No statistical difference was observed in overall rates of PEP (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.46-1.00, P = 0.050) and, additionally, rates of moderate to severe (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.28-1.56, P = 0.345) or mild (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.45-1.10, P = 0.127) PEP between indomethacin and placebo.

CONCLUSION

In a contemporary meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials of consecutive patients undergoing ERCP, rectal indomethacin did not show significant prevention effect of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Rectal NSAIDs in the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in unselected patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Efficacy of rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) prophylaxis in unselected patients remained controversial. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of rectal NSAIDs in the prevention of PEP in unselected patients.

METHODS

An electronic literature search in the Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed was carried out for randomized controlled trials comparing rectal indomethacin or diclofenac with placebo in the prevention of PEP in unselected patients. Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate methodological quality. The data were carried out in forest plots using fixed-effect methods, and random-effect methods were used when heterogeneity was significant.

RESULTS

A total of nine trials were included in our final analysis. Rectal NSAIDs were effective to reduce the incidence of PEP in unselected patients (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46-0.79), especially for moderate-to-severe PEP (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.17-0.79). Both indomethacin (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.88) and diclofenac (RR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.12-0.69) were significantly efficacious. Rectal NSAIDs given pre-ERCP showed significant efficacy (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.39-0.71), whether when given within 30 min pre-ERCP (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.92) or not (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.28-0.67).

CONCLUSION

Rectal NSAIDs are effective in the prevention of PEP in unselected patients.

Efficacy and safety of rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for prophylaxis against post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are not commonly used clinically for preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of NSAIDs for post-ERCP prophylaxis, we systematically reviewed sixteen randomized controlled trials (involving 6458 patients) that compared rectal NSAIDs with placebo or no treatment for post-ERCP pancreatitis prophylaxis updated to August 2016. GRADE framework was used to assess the quality of evidence. There was “high quality” evidence that rectal NSAIDs were associated with significant reduction in the risk of overall post-ERCP pancreatitis (RR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.42–0.71). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that diclofenac (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.19–0.90) was probably superior to indomethacin (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45–0.75), post-ERCP administration (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24–0.89) was probably superior to pre-ERCP (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.42–0.67), and that mixed-risk population received more benefits (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33–0.88) than average-risk population (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.41–0.88), but less than high-risk population (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.19–0.91). Moreover, “high quality” evidence showed that rectal NSAIDs were safe when given as a standard dose (RR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.47–1.36). In conclusion, this meta-analysis revealed that rectal NSAIDs are effective and safe in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis in populations with all levels of risk.

How to select patients and timing for rectal indomethacin to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Acute pancreatitis is a severe complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Previous meta-analyses have shown that indomethacin effectively prevents this complication; however, the data are limited. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the applications for rectal indomethacin.

Methods

A systematic search was performed in June 2016. Human prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trials that compared rectally administered indomethacin with a placebo for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) were included. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to assess the outcomes (PEP) using Review Manager 5.0.

Results

Seven randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria (n = 3013). The overall incidence of PEP was significantly lower after prophylactic administration of rectal indomethacin than after administration of the placebo (RR, 0.58, 95% CI, 0.40–0.83; P = 0.004). A subgroup analysis was performed for rectal indomethacin administration compared to a placebo in high-risk patients (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.32–0.65; P < 0.00001) and average-risk patients (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.46–1.22; P = 0.25) and for administration before ERCP (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39–0.79; P = 0.001) and after the procedure (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.26–1.44; P = 0.26).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis indicated that prophylactic rectal indomethacin is not suitable for all patients undergoing ERCP but it is safe and effective to prevent PEP in high-risk patients. In addition, rectal indomethacin administration before ERCP is superior to its administration after ERCP for the prevention of PEP.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12876-017-0599-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Comparison of rectal indomethacin, diclofenac, and naproxen for the prevention of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

NSAIDs are commonly utilized for the prevention of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP). However, not much is known about the most effective drug in preventing this complication. This study aims to clarify which drug (indomethacin, diclofenac, or naproxen) is most effective for the prevention of post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a double-blind, randomized study, patients received a single rectal dose of one of the three drugs 30 min before undergoing ERCP: diclofenac (100 mg), indomethacin (100 mg), or naproxen (500 mg). The primary outcome measured was the development of pancreatitis. The levels of serum amylase, lipase, lipoxin A4, and resolvin E1 were measured before ERCP, and at 24 h after the procedure.

RESULTS

Three hundred and seventy-two patients completed the study. The overall incidence of PEP was 8.6%, which occurred in five of the 124 (4%) patients who received diclofenac, seven of the 122 (5.8%) patients who received indomethacin, and 20 of the 126 (15.9%) patients who received naproxen. There were no significant differences in amylase and lipase levels among the three groups (P=0.183 and 0.597, respectively). Unlike patients in the naproxen group, patients in the diclofenac and indomethacin groups showed a significant increase in lipoxin A4 and resolvin E1 (P=0.001 and 0.02, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Diclofenac and indomethacin patient groups had a lower incidence of PEP than the naproxen group.

The "Scope" of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis

Pancreatitis is the most common adverse event of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, with the potential for clinically significant morbidity and mortality. Several patient and procedural risk factors have been identified that increase the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP). Considerable research efforts have identified several pharmacologic and procedural interventions that can drastically affect the incidence of PEP. This review article addresses the underlying mechanisms at play for the development of PEP, identifying patient and procedural risk factors and meaningful use of risk-stratification information, and details current interventions aimed at reducing the risk of this complication.

Vigorous Periprocedural Hydration With Lactated Ringer's Solution Reduces the Risk of Pancreatitis After Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Hospitalized Patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Vigorous intravenous fluid resuscitation (IVFR) was reported to reduce post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis in a pilot study. We performed a randomized, double-blind controlled trial to establish whether periprocedural vigorous IVFR reduces the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

METHODS

A total of 510 patients with native papilla at 3 tertiary referral centers in Korea were randomly assigned (1:1) to groups given vigorous IVFR (lactated Ringer's solution in an initial bolus of 10 mL/kg before the procedure, 3 mL/kg/h during the procedure, for 8 hours after the procedure, and a post-procedure bolus of 10 mL/kg) or a standard IVFR (lactated Ringer's solution at 1.5 mL/kg/h during and for 8 hours after the procedure). The primary end point of the study was the development of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and the secondary end point was severity of pancreatitis, hyperamylasemia, and fluid overload.

RESULTS

The main indications for ERCP were choledocholithiasis (58%) and malignant biliary stricture (27%). Post-ERCP pancreatitis developed in 11 patients in the vigorous IVFR group (4.3%) and 25 patients in the standard IVFR group (9.8%) (relative risk, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20-0.86; P = .016). Moderate or severe acute pancreatitis occurred in a significantly smaller proportion of patients in the vigorous IVFR group (0.4%) than in the standard IVFR group (2.0%; P = .040). One patient in the vigorous IVFR group developed peripheral edema.

CONCLUSIONS

In a double-blind, randomized controlled trial, we found vigorous periprocedural intravenous hydration with lactated Ringer's solution to reduce the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis in average-risk and high-risk cases. IVFR is not associated with increased adverse events. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02308891.

Rectal indomethacin is protective against post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients but not average-risk patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Rectal indomethacin is a popular chemopreventive agent to help prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). Previous meta-analyses have shown an overall protective effect for PEP in average-risk and high-risk patients. However, these meta-analyses are limited by a small number of studies. Recently, more trials have been published addressing this issue. The aim is to determine whether rectal indomethacin prevents PEP in average-risk and high-risk groups, after incorporating these new data.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of multiple literature databases in April 2016 was performed. Human prospective randomized controlled trials with placebo controls that examined the effect of rectally administered indomethacin on the incidence of PEP were included.

RESULTS

A total of 8 trials between 2007 and 2016 (n = 3778) were included. No significant publication bias existed. All studies used similar criteria to detect pancreatitis. Random effects model meta-analysis showed that the rate of PEP was significantly lower using indomethacin compared with placebo (relative risk, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.65; P < .001) in high-risk patients. There was no significant statistical or clinical heterogeneity. Among average-risk patients, the rate of PEP was similar (non-significant) between the indomethacin and placebo groups (relative risk, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.07; P = .115). The result of the main outcome remained robust in multiple sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal indomethacin given before or after ERCP is protective against PEP in high-risk patients versus placebo; however, it is not protective in average-risk patients versus placebo.