A historical perspective on the discovery of the accessory duct of the pancreas, the ampulla 'of Vater' and pancreas divisum

Surgical management of acute pancreatitis: Historical perspectives, challenges, and current management approaches

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a serious condition presenting catastrophic consequences. In severe AP, the mortality rate is high, and some patients initially diagnosed with mild-to-moderate AP can progress to a life-threatening severe state. Treatment of AP has evolved over the years. Drainage was the first surgical procedure performed for AP; however, later, surgical approaches were replaced by more conservative approaches due to the availability of advanced medical care and improved understanding of the course of AP. Currently, surgery is used to manage several complications of AP, such as pseudocysts, pancreatic fistulas, and biliary tract obstruction. Patients who are unresponsive to conservative treatment or have complications are typically considered for surgical intervention. This review focuses on the surgical approaches (endoscopic, percutaneous, and open) that have been established in recent studies to treat this acute condition and summarizes the common management guidelines for AP, discussing the relevant indications, significance, and complications. It is evident that despite their reduced involvement, surgeons lead the multidisciplinary care of patients with AP; however, given the gaps in existing knowledge, more research is required to standardize surgical protocols for AP.

NOMENs land: The place of eponyms in the anatomy classroom

The law of Non-Original Malappropriate Eponymous Nomenclature (NOMEN) states that no phenomenon is named after its discoverer. However, eponymous terms are rife in the anatomical and medical literature. In this viewpoint commentary, the authors discuss the history of anatomical eponyms, explain the additional cognitive load imposed by eponyms that can negatively impact student learning and explore the view that eponyms are "pale, male and stale" in the socially conscious 21st century. The authors probe two of the most common arguments used to keep eponyms in anatomy education: (1) clinicians use them because they are easy, and (2) eponyms remind us of anatomy's history. Educators, clinicians and students need to work together to progress this movement and bring a modern lens to this discussion. Based on the arguments presented in this commentary, the authors propose that eponyms should be removed from anatomy curricula, textbooks and have no place in the anatomy classroom.

Balloon Dilatation of the Minor Duodenal Papilla Up to 4 mm is Safe in a Porcine Model

OBJECTIVES

Balloon dilatation of the minor duodenal papilla is a treatment option for symptomatic pancreas divisum. The histologic effects of balloon dilatation have not yet been evaluated. The aim of this study is to investigate the tolerated extent of dilatation of the minor papilla.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A dilatation of the minor papilla was performed in freshly explanted pancreas of pigs using biliary balloon dilatators. Three organs were not dilated (control group), in each 8 organs a dilatation of 4, 6, and 8 mm, respectively, was performed. Tissue damage was assessed by microscopic evaluation. Ductal wall disruption and perforation as well as a semiquantitative inflammation score was described and compared.

RESULTS

Ductal wall disruption was increased by dilatation of 6 (5/8; P=0.019) and 8 mm (6/8; P=0.006) compared with 4 mm (1/8). Median inflammation score was 0 (0 to 0), 1 (0 to 2), and 1 (0 to 2) for dilatation of 4, 6, and 8 mm, respectively (4 vs. 6 mm, P=0.007; 4 vs. 8 mm, P=0.026). No perforation occurred in the 4 (0/8) and 6 mm (0/8) group, 1 perforation occurred in the 8 mm group (1/8).

CONCLUSIONS

A dilatation of up to 4 mm seems to be safe. However, dilatation of the minor papilla from 4 mm onwards is increasingly associated with tissue damage. These findings should be considered in endoscopic procedures dilating the minor duodenal papilla.

A systematic review and quantitative analysis of different therapies for pancreas divisum

BACKGROUND

Pancreas divisum is the most common anatomical variation of pancreatic ductal system affecting 5-10% of population. Therapy includes different endoscopic and surgical procedures. The aim of this article was to summarize actual evidence of different treatment.

METHODS

A Medline search was performed to identify all studies, investigating endoscopic or surgical therapy of Pancreas divisum. An individual data simulation model was applied to compare endoscopic and surgical studies.

RESULT

56 observational studies (31 endoscopic and 25 surgical studies) were included in analyses. Surgery was significantly superior to endoscopic treatment in terms of success rate (72% vs. 62.3), complication rate (23.8% vs. 31.3%) and re-intervention rate (14.4% vs. 28.3%).

CONCLUSION

Surgery may be superior to endoscopy in terms of treatment success and complications. There is no study comparing these two therapies. Consequently, a randomized trial is needed to clarify if endoscopy or surgery is superior in the therapy of pancreas divisum.

Pancreas divisum: correlation between anatomical abnormalities and bile precipitation in the gallbladder in seven patients

Pancreas divisum is a genetic defect associated with recurrent acute pancreatitis due to insufficient drainage of the accessory pancreatic duct. Seven young patients diagnosed with pancreatic divisum and thickening of the gallbladder bile as shown on magnetic resonance cholangio-pancreatography without pancreatic ductal changes underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. During the mean follow-up of 32 months no episode of pancreatitis was reported. There is an association between PD and higher concentration of bile in the gallbladder. Cholecystectomy can be considered curative in patients with PD in the absence of indications for major surgery.

The Accuracies of Diagnosing Pancreas Divisum by Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography and Endoscopic Ultrasound: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), MRCP after secretin stimulation (S-MRCP) and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) are all selected to diagnose pancreas divisum. However, the accuracies of three diagnosis remain unclear. The aim is to address the diagnostic accuracies of MRCP, S-MRCP and EUS on pancreas divisum. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to January, 2015. Of the 536 citations retrieved, 16 studies were included. For MRCP diagnosis on pancreas divisum, the area under the hierarchical summary receiver-operating characteristic (HSROC) curve was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87 to 0.92), and for S-MRCP and EUS, 0.99 (95% CI 0.97 to 0.99) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.96 to 0.98). Sensitivity and specificity for MRCP were 0.59 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.71) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.00); for S-MRCP, 0.83 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.92) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.00); for EUS, 0.85 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.94) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.99). Comprehensive comparison of three diagnostic techniques to pancreas divisum, S-MRCP was more reliable than MRCP and EUS on the effect of the diagnostic test.

Chronic Pancreatitis: Landmark Papers, Management Decisions, and Future

On May 16, 2015 at the invitation of the American Gastroenterological Association Institute Council E.P.D. presented a state-of-the-art lecture at Digestive Disease Week 2015. The aims were to discuss a selection of landmark papers in chronic pancreatitis (CP) that influence modern management and to conclude by suggesting some future directions. This is based on that presentation. We will specifically review the following: duct anatomy and pancreas divisum, description of chronic relapsing pancreatitis and its differentiation from recurrent acute pancreatitis and established CP (ECP), natural histories and gene discoveries of alcoholic, idiopathic and hereditary pancreatitis, development of pancreatic cancer in CP, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency and calculation of dose and delivery of enzymes, endoscopic ultrasonography, and autoimmune pancreatitis. With some exceptions, we exclude basic science and surgery.

A study on the human pancreaticobiliary duct system and ampulla region with their clinical considerations

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to present the variations of the pancreatic duct system and hepatopancreatic ampulla so that an awareness of these variations may help in surgical planning and prevention of ductal injury.

METHODS

Forty human pancreatic specimens were used to study the duct pattern of the pancreas and the formation and mode of termination of the pancreatic ducts. Also, the patency of the main pancreatic ducts, length of the hepatopancreatic ampulla, and length of the main pancreatic duct were measured.

RESULTS

The main pancreatic duct was patent in 37 out of 40 specimens, 2 specimens showed the embryonic type of the duct system, and one had the duct obliterated at its duodenal end. The mode of termination of the main pancreatic and common pancreatic ducts was divided into four types. Seventy-five percent specimens belonged to type I, followed by type II in 22.5 % and type III in 2.5 % of specimens. The length of the main pancreatic duct ranged from 11 to 21.2 cm, the average being 17.3 cm, and the length of the hepatopancreatic ampulla varied from 1 to 10 mm (1 to 2 mm-5 %, 3 to 8 mm-55 %, and more than 8 mm in 15 % of specimens), and it was absent in 25 %.

CONCLUSION

Awareness of these anomalies may help in surgical planning and prevention of undue ductal injury.

[A brief history of the anatomy and physiology of a mysterious and hidden gland called the pancreas]

Because of its retrogastric location and appearance, which is similar to mesenteric fat, for centuries the pancreas has been a mysterious, hidden organ that has received little attention. However, its importance was intuited and described by Herophilus, Ruphos of Ephesus and Galen. This gland began to appearin distinct medical treatises from the 16th century. There are two important scientists in the history of the pancreas. The fist, Johann Georg Wirsung, described the main pancreatic duct in 1642, a date considered by many to be the start of Pancreatology. The second, Claude Bernard, described pancreatic exocrine function between 1849 and 1856 and is considered the father of pancreatic physiology. Besides these two outstanding figures, there is a constellation of personalities who contributed to improving knowledge of this enigmatic gland with the results of their studies. The aim of this article is to call attention to some of the most notable findings that have enhanced knowledge of this gland over the years.

Endoscopic minor papilla balloon dilation for the treatment of symptomatic pancreas divisum

OBJECTIVE

A subpopulation of patients with pancreas divisum experience symptomatic events such as recurrent acute pancreatitis and chronic pancreatitis. Minor papilla sphincterotomy has been reported as being an effective treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic balloon dilation for the minor papilla.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2012, 16 patients were retrospectively included in this study. After endoscopic balloon dilation for the minor papilla was received, a pancreatic stent or a nasal pancreatic drainage catheter was placed for 1 week. If a stricture or obstruction was evident, it was treated with balloon dilation followed by long-term stent placement (1 year). When an outflow of pancreatic juice was disturbed by a pancreatic stone, endoscopic stone extraction was performed.

RESULTS

Balloon dilation and stent placement were achieved and were successful in all the cases (16/16; 100%). Clinical improvement was achieved in 7 (84.7%) of the 9 patients with recurrent acute pancreatitis and in 6 (85.7%) of the 7 patients with chronic pancreatitis. Early complications were observed in 1 (6.3%) patient. Pancreatitis or bleeding related to balloon dilation was not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic balloon dilation for the minor papilla is feasible for the management of symptomatic pancreas divisum.

Endotherapy in symptomatic pancreas divisum: a systematic review

Pancreas divisum (PD) is the most common congenital variant of the pancreas and has been implicated as a cause of pancreatitis; however, endoscopic treatment is controversial. Our objective was to examine patient response to endotherapy for treatment of symptomatic PD in adult patients in a systematic review of the literature. A systematic review of all case series and case-control studies with ten or more patients undergoing endotherapy for treatment of symptomatic PD indicated by acute recurrent pancreatitis (ARP), chronic pancreatitis (CP), or chronic abdominal pain (CAP) was performed. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception through February 2013 using [pancreas divisum] AND [endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)] OR [endotherapy] OR [endoscopy] as search terms. Importantly, the majority of studies were retrospective in nature, significantly limiting analysis capacity. Main outcomes measures included endotherapy response rate in patients with PD and ARP, CP, or CAP. Twenty-two studies were included in the review, with a total of 838 patients. Response to endoscopy was seen in 528 patients, but response rate varied by clinical presentation. Patients with ARP had a response rate ranging from 43% to 100% (median 76%). Reported response rates were lower in the other two groups, ranging from 21% to 80% (median 42%) for patients with CP and 11%-55% (median 33%) for patients with CAP. Complications reported included perforation, post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis, bleeding, and clogged stents. Endotherapy appears to offer an effective treatment option for patients with symptomatic PD, with the best results in patients presenting with ARP.

Acute non-traumatic pancreatitis in a patient with pancreas divisum: a case report

Pancreas divisum is a frequent congenital anatomical anomaly characterized by the failure of fusion of the ducts of Santorini and Wirsung during fetal development. Although the condition usually remains asymptomatic, it has been reported to be a predisposing factor of chronic and recurrent idiopathic pancreatitis. We report a case of acute non-traumatic pancreatitis in a 54-year-old Caucasian male with pancreas divisum. Diagnosis was established based on the findings from magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. The patient was managed conservatively and was discharged home having an uneventful clinical course after five days of hospitalization. Although the role of the pancreas in the induction of acute pancreatitis is still a matter of debate, physicians have to be aware about this prevalent pancreatic anatomic abnormality. Timely detection may help in the prevention of potential recurrent pancreatic reaction.

Diagnosis and therapy of pancreas divisum by ERCP: a single center experience

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the diagnosis and endoscopic management of pancreas divisum with results from long-term experience at our institution.

METHODS

A prospectively collected database of all patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the diagnosis of pancreas divisum at our institution from January 2001 to April 2010 was retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients were identified with pancreas divisum with 62 ERCP procedures. The major indication for ERCP included pancreatitis in 33 patients (73.3%), of whom 18 had idiopathic recurrent acute pancreatitis, 8 had recurrent pancreatic-type pain and 7 had chronic pancreatitis. The median size of the incision of sphincterotomy was 5 mm (range 3-8 mm). In all 37 patients (82.2%) underwent placement of stent into the dorsal pancreatic duct, with a median stent size of 5 Fr by 7 cm (range 3-10 Fr by 3-12 cm). The overall response rate was 75.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency of finding pancreas divisum during ERCP varies among institutions and is low compared with the autopsy series, given that many patients may remain asymptomatic or might not undergo ERCP even if the symptoms develop. Our study is the first to describe specific procedure-related details during therapeutic endoscopy for pancreas divisum.

Pancreas divisum: a differentiated surgical approach in symptomatic patients

BACKGROUND

Some patients with pancreas divisum (PD) develop symptoms of recurrent pancreatitis. This is probably caused by insufficient drainage of the pancreatic duct. We report the results of our follow-up of patients who underwent surgery for symptomatic pancreas divisum according to an individualized surgical approach.

METHODS

Between October 2001 and April 2009, 28 patients with symptomatic pancreas divisum were operated at the University Hospital of Heidelberg. According to the localization and type of morphological changes of the pancreas, patients received a reinsertion of the papilla (SP; n=11), duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR; n=10), pylorus-preserving Whipple (ppWhipple; n=4), or other pancreatic resections (n=3). Hospitalization, morbidity, mortality, pain course, and patient satisfaction were analyzed.

RESULTS

Before surgery, patients received a median of three endoscopic interventions and were hospitalized for 77 days. The median postoperative follow-up was 4.1 years. Surgical morbidity was 11% and mortality 0%. We performed an SP when the pancreas was soft (n=10). When the pancreas was inflammatory altered, a DPPHR was performed in ten, ppW in four, segmental resection in two, and SP and pancreatic left resection in one case. A redo operation for persisting symptoms was needed in six patients (3 soft and 3 altered pancreas). Compared with the preoperative situation, pain was significantly reduced in the follow-up (median Visual Analogue Scale 0 vs. 10). Ninety-six percent of patients were without symptoms during the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The individualized surgical approach for patients with symptomatic PD achieves significant reduction of pain in all patients. Reinsertions of the papilla should be performed as a first surgical intervention in patients with a soft pancreas when symptoms persist despite adequate endoscopic treatment. DPPHR should be performed when fibrotic alterations of the pancreas are present.

Acute pancreatitis with an emphasis on infection

Acute pancreatitis is an inflammatory disease that is mild and self-limiting in about 80% of cases. However, severe necrotizing disease still has a mortality of up to 30%. Differentiated multimodal treatment concepts are needed for these patients, including a multidisciplinary team (intensivists, gastroenterologists, interventional radiologists, and surgeons). The primary therapy is supportive. Patients with infected pancreatic necrosis who are septic undergo interventional or surgical treatment, ideally not before the fourth week after onset of symptoms. This article reviews the pathophysiologic mechanisms of acute pancreatitis and describes clinical pathways for diagnosis and management based on the current literature and guidelines.

Acute pancreatitis: a historical perspective

Among the various pancreatic disorders, the pace of scientific discovery in acute pancreatitis has been particularly slow. The objective of this paper was to briefly review the history of scientific discovery of the clinical features, pathophysiology, and treatment of acute pancreatitis. A clinical description of acute pancreatitis was first presented in 1652 by the Dutch anatomist Nicholas Tulp, and despite the nearly 350 years that have passed, there continue to be many unanswered questions. In the late 19th and early 20th century, Reginald Fitz, Nicholas Senn, Eugene Opie, and others made seminal contributions that continue to influence our present understanding of acute pancreatitis. Despite remarkable progress in the past 6 decades, our ability to accurately diagnose and estimate the severity of acute pancreatitis remains limited. History provides multiple examples of empiric remedies and surgical interventions based on the prevailing theories and opinions of the scientific luminaries du jour, and indeed, after 3 centuries of inquiry, the most effective interventions for acute pancreatitis are purely supportive in nature and not specific to the pancreas. However, the perseverance of successive generations of the finest scientific minds provides hope that we will unravel the many mysteries of this enigmatic gland.

Miss rate of pancreas divisum by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

Pancreas divisum is the most common congenital abnormality of the pancreatic anatomy. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography has emerged as a noninvasive method of examining the pancreatic ductal anatomy. We aim to assess the sensitivity of MRCP for pancreas divisum.

METHODS

Patients with pancreas divisum at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and who had prior MRCP between January 2001 and February 2006 were identified. Sensitivities were calculated for relevant subgroups with binomial 95% confidence intervals. Fisher exact P values were calculated.

RESULTS

Four hundred five patients had divisum at ERCP; of these, 111 (27%) had undergone MRCP before ERCP. Seventy-two (65%) patients had MRCP at outside centers. Twenty-three of the 72 MRCPs at referring centers correctly reported divisum. In contrast, the sensitivity was higher for the 24 MRCPs without secretin at our institution: 16 (67%). The sensitivity in the secretin-stimulated group was 67% (10/15). However, this was not different from that of MRCP without secretin. Of note, 9 (18%) of the 49 negative outside MRCPs had divisum suspected by the gastroenterologist reviewing the MRCP images before ERCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreas divisum seems to be often missed on MRCP, even when secretin is used. The absence of secretin, use of suboptimal magnetic resonance techniques, and inexperienced pancreatic MRCP examiners are all possible contributing factors.

Evaluation of unusual causes of pancreatitis: role of cross-sectional imaging

There are widely diverse causes of pancreatitis. Gallstone and alcohol have been recognized as the most common causes of pancreatitis accounting for 90% of cases. However, acute and chronic pancreatitis may also result from a variety of uncommon causes. The determination of the etiology is important for patient management and prevention of recurrence. Sludge is the most common cause of idiopathic or recurrent acute pancreatitis. Endoscopic ultrasonography is considered as the most accurate diagnostic test for this abnormality. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have only a limited role in the diagnosis of sludge. However, papillitis observed on the contrast-enhanced CT and MR may provide clues to the detection of pancreatitis secondary to sludge, a small stone or a recently passed stone. Radiological studies, clinical presentation and laboratory data can be helpful in determining the etiology of unusual causes of pancreatitis such as anatomic anomalies, autoimmune pancreatitis, groove pancreatitis, and traumatic pancreatitis.

Acute pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis is an inflammatory disease of the pancreas. Acute abdominal pain is the most common symptom, and increased concentrations of serum amylase and lipase confirm the diagnosis. Pancreatic injury is mild in 80% of patients, who recover without complications. The remaining patients have a severe disease with local and systemic complications. Gallstone migration into the common bile duct and alcohol abuse are the most frequent causes of pancreatitis in adults. About 15-25% of pancreatitis episodes are of unknown origin. Treatment of mild disease is supportive, but severe episodes need management by a multidisciplinary team including gastroenterologists, interventional radiologists, intensivists, and surgeons. Improved understanding of pathophysiology and better assessments of disease severity should ameliorate the management and outcome of this complex disease.

MRCP of congenital pancreaticobiliary malformation

BACKGROUND

Congenital pancreaticobiliary malformations are sometimes associated with acute or chronic pancreatitis and biliary carcinoma. Currently, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is one of the first choices for investigating and diagnosing pancreaticobiliary diseases noninvasively. We compared the accuracy of conventional MRCP and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in making the diagnosis of congenital pancreaticobiliary malformations.

METHODS

In patients with pancreas divisum (n = 17), pancreaticobiliary maljunction (n = 12), choledochocele (n = 2), and annular pancreas (n = 1) who underwent ERCP and MRCP, the diagnostic accuracy and findings on MRCP were compared with those on ERCP.

RESULTS

Of the 32 patients with congenital pancreaticobiliary malformations diagnosed on ERCP, 23 (72%) presented the same diagnosis on MRCP. Complete pancreas divisum was diagnosed in 73% on MRCP based on the finding of a dominant dorsal pancreatic duct crossing the lower bile duct and emptying into the duodenum without communicating with the ventral pancreatic duct. Pancreaticobiliary maljunction was diagnosed in 75% on MRCP based on the finding of an anomalous union between the common bile duct and the pancreatic duct and the existence of a long common channel.

CONCLUSIONS

Conventional MRCP is a useful, noninvasive tool for diagnosing congenital pancreaticobiliary malformations; and the diagnostic accuracy can be increased with three-dimensional MRCP or dynamic MRCP with secretin stimulation.

Endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy for pancreas divisum by using a needle-knife or standard pull-type technique: safety and reintervention rates

BACKGROUND

Technical options for pancreatic sphincterotomy of the minor papilla for pancreas divisum include a needle-knife cut over a plastic stent and a standard pull-type cut with a sphincterotome.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to compare the frequency, safety, and intermediate-term efficacy of these 2 techniques at our institution.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of the GI-Trac database from July 1994 to July 2004 for patients with pancreas divisum undergoing an initial minor papilla sphincterotomy.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were separated into 2 groups on the basis of the endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy technique used, either a needle-knife sphincterotomy (NKS) or standard pull-type sphincterotomy (PTS). The groups were compared on the basis of need for any reintervention, restenosis rates, and complication rates with use of Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

There were 133 patients (72%) in the NKS group and 51 (28%) in the PTS group. Clinical presentations were similar in the 2 groups. At a median follow-up of 5 years, additional endoscopic therapy including repeat endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy, endoscopic balloon dilation, stone extraction, or stenting was necessary in 29% of patients after NKS and in 26% after PTS. Papillary restenosis rates were 24% over a median follow-up of 6 years after NKS and 20% over a median follow-up of 5 years after PTS. Overall complication rates were similar in those undergoing NKS and PTS (8.3% vs 7.8%). Age less than 40 years independently predicted reintervention (hazard ratio 2.21) and restenosis (hazard ratio 2.41) (both P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

NKS is used more than PTS for minor papilla sphincterotomy at our institution, but the 2 techniques appear equally safe and effective. Younger age may be associated with higher reintervention rates.

Anatomical features of the minor duodenal papilla in pancreas divisum

BACKGROUND

Clinical expression of pancreas divisum is often explained as a consequence of relative or true stenosis of the minor papilla with dorsal duct obstruction. This anatomo-functional study of the minor papilla in pancreas divisum has included its topographical, functional and structural features.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was carried out on 37 human autopsy specimens of duodenopancreas, which underwent pancreatography, manometrically controlled perfusion and light microscopy.

RESULTS

One pancreas divisum was detected in the study group. In this case, the distances between the minor and the major papilla was 24.0 mm, and between the minor papilla and the superior duodenal flexure 27.4 mm. The minor papilla was patent when perfused under pressure of 10 mmHg, and its light microscopy revealed regular global histological organization with only light fibrosis and no cellular atypia.

CONCLUSIONS

The structure and position of the minor papilla in pancreas divisum did not significantly differ from the ones in fused pancreases.

Eponyms in Radiology of the Digestive Tract: Historical Perspectives and Imaging Appearances

Eponyms are a means of honoring individuals who have made lasting contributions to medicine. Eponyms are frequently encountered in the field of radiology, especially radiology of the digestive tract. However, the use of eponyms may fail to convey a precise meaning or definition and could result in miscommunication. Furthermore, in some instances, more than one individual may have contributed to the discovery or description of a particular structure or disease, whereas in others, an eponym may have been incorrectly applied and then propagated for years thereafter in the medical literature. Still, eponyms are a means of honoring those who have made important discoveries and observations, and familiarity with these terms is important for proper reporting and accurate communication. Moreover, the acquisition of some historical knowledge about the individuals whose names are associated with various structures or diseases helps restore some humanity to the science of medicine.

Surgical treatment of pancreas divisum causing chronic pancreatitis: the outcome benefits of duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection

Pancreas divisum (PD) represents a duct anomaly in the pancreatic head ducts, leading frequently leading to recurrent acute pancreatitis (rAP) or chronic pancreatitis (CP). Based on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, pancreas divisum can be found in 1% to 6% of patients with pancreatitis. The correlation of this abnormality with pancreatic disease is an issue of continuing controversy. Because of the underlying duct anomalies and major pathomorphological changes in the pancreatic head, duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR) offers an option for causal treatment. Thirty-six patients with pancreatitis caused by PD were treated surgically. Thirty patients suffered from CP, 6 from rAP. The mean duration of the disease was 47.5 and 49.8 months, respectively. The age at the time of surgery was 39.2 years in the CP group, and 27.6 years in the rAP group. Median hospitalization since diagnosis was 18.8 weeks for CP patients and 24.6 weeks for rAP patients. Previous procedures performed in these patients included endoscopic papillotomy (30%), duct stenting (14%), and surgical treatment (17%). The median preoperative pain score was 8 on a visual analog scale. According to the classification of pancreas divisum, 10 patients demonstrated a complete PD, 25 had a functionally incomplete PD, and 1 had a dorsal duct type. The pain status as well as the endocrine (oral glucose tolerance test) and exocrine (pancreolauryl test) function were evaluated preoperatively and early and late postoperatively with a median follow-up time of 39.3 months. There was no operative-related mortality. The follow-up was 100%; 4 patients died (1 from suicide, 1 from cardiac arrest, and 2 from cancer of the esophagus). Fifty percent of the patients were completely pain-free, 31% had a significant reduction of pain with a median pain score of 2 (P < 0.001). Six patients (5 CP, 1 rAP) had further attacks of acute pancreatitis with a need for hospitalization. DPPHR reduced pain and preserved the endocrine function in the majority of patients with pancreas divisum. Therefore, DPPHR is an alternative to other resective or drainage procedures after failure of interventional treatment.

Benign Anatomical Mistakes: “Ampulla of Vater” and “Papilla of Vater”

The anatomy of the ampullary termination of the bile and pancreatic ducts is complex; appropriate terminology for this area is confusing and inaccurate. We examine the terms “ampulla of Vater” and “papilla of Vater” for anatomical and historical correctness. The term “ampulla” refers to a dilated part of a duct or other channel. Thus, this word is topographically correct to describe the dilatation at the confluence of the bile and main pancreatic ducts; historically, however, there is considerable reason to believe that its first description was by Santorini rather than Vater. The eponymous term “papilla of Vater” is also incorrect historically. The use of eponyms is firmly entrenched in the medical literature, but some are so problematic that they should be discarded. The eponymous terms for both the ampulla and the papilla should be replaced with the terms “hepatopancreatic ampulla” (or “biliaropancreatic ampulla”) and “major [or “greater”] duodenal papilla,” respectively.

Expression of integrins in tumour tissue of a patient with cancer of the Vater's ampulla complicated by pancreas divisum

We present herein a rare case where cancer of the Vater's ampulla was complicated with pancreas divisum. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography demonstrated the pancreas divisum and stenosis of the common channel due to the tumorous lesion of the Vater's ampulla. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography demonstrated that the Wirsung duct and Santorini duct were unconnected. The biopsy specimen at the upper gastrointestinal endoscopy revealed moderately differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma. The patient was diagnosed with cancer of the Vater's ampulla complicated with pancreas divisum, and underwent a pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. Immunohistochemical examination showed that the p53 protein and the alpha5beta1-integrin were expressed in tumour cells, and the proliferating cell nuclear antigen test was positive. Furthermore, the alpha5beta1-integrin was expressed in chronic pancreatitis tissue. We demonstrate that there is a risk that pancreas divisum will co-exist with malignant disease in the pancreaticobiliary area, causing a potential risk of complicating malignant diseases in the pancreas.

MR cholangiopancreatography: evaluation of common pancreatic diseases

In the evaluation of common pancreatic diseases, MRCP is a noninvasive alternative to ERCP. Ductal anatomy can be ascertained without risk of complications. MRCP is valuable in defining common anatomic variants, determining the state of the pancreatic duct in pancreatitis, and characterizing neoplasms, especially combined with other MR imaging sequences. With the advent of MRCP, techniques requiring endoscopy and percutaneous access are largely reserved for histologic diagnosis and treatment, or for cases in which MRCP fails to establish a diagnosis.

Wirsung and Santorini: the men behind the ducts

During the 16th and 17th centuries, several important discoveries were accomplished by anatomists whose contribution has enlightened the most important anatomic structures of the pancreas. Following the earliest discoveries, researchers of several medical specialities further investigated the ductal pancreatic system. The accessory pancreatic duct with its minor papilla, the main pancreatic duct and the papilla major along with the confluence of the main pancreatic duct with the bile duct and pancreas divisum, have been the objects of interest of several personalities of the medical history. Eponyms in pancreatic anatomy were given to remember some of them, although anatomical misattributions are frequent and controversial. The aim of the authors was to dedicate a small tribute to the researchers who have written, during the last 500 years, important chapters of the medical history and who dedicated their lives to study the pancreatic ducts and their duodenal endings. Furthermore, a brief outlook was dedicated to the impact of anatomic variations and of embryologic anomalies of the pancreatic ducts in our clinical practice and in our actual understanding of duct-related diseases. The authors are confident that the genial curiosity of few extraordinary personalities of the past and the opportunities provided by modern technology continue to play a major role that may finally add wisdom to decision-making in dealing with duct-related biliopancreatic diseases and safety to diagnostic and therapeutic procedures employed.

Surgery and pancreas divisum: a dwindling role?

Pancreas divisum has generated varying enthusiasm regarding operative intervention. Applying similar principles to divisum surgery as for the surgical treatment of chronic pancreatitis will yield a better outcome than using subjective symptoms.

Pancreas divisum and "santorinicele": diagnosis with dynamic MR cholangiopancreatography with secretin stimulation

PURPOSE

To evaluate the usefulness of magnetic resonance (MR) cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) before and after secretin administration in diagnosing santorinicele in patients with pancreas divisum.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred seven patients suspected of having pancreatic disease underwent MRCP before and after secretin administration (S-MRCP). S-MRCP images were evaluated for pancreas divisum and santorinicele and for size of the main pancreatic duct and santorinicele. The onset of duodenal filling was calculated on dynamic S-MRCP images.

RESULTS

Pancreas divisum was detected in five (5%) of 107 patients at MRCP and in 10 (9%) of 107 patients at S-MRCP. Santorinicele was detected in three (21%) of 14 patients at MRCP and in an additional four (seven [50%] of 14) patients at S-MRCP in patients with pancreas divisum. Santorinicele was confirmed in six of seven patients at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP); in one of seven patients, ERCP was unsuccessful. The duct of Santorini was significantly (P: <.05) larger in the pancreatic head in patients with pancreas divisum and santorinicele (3.6 mm) compared with those with only pancreas divisum (2.2 mm). A noteworthy reduction in size of the pancreatic duct (26%) and of the santorinicele (63%) was observed after sphincterotomy. The onset of duodenal filling was delayed significantly in patients with santorinicele (2.1 vs 1.3 minutes; P: <.05).

CONCLUSION

S-MRCP helps in identifying pancreas divisum and santorinicele, which may be the cause of impeded pancreatic outflow.

Pancreas divisum

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is diagnostic. Similarly, secretin stimulated ultrasonography may positively predict the outcome of minor papilla therapy. Computed tomography is only helpful for the detection of complications. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is a new noninvasive diagnostic tool in development. It is accurate and might replace ERCP for diagnosis. Clinically, symptomatic patients with PD may be divided into five groups: group 1, those with minimal symptoms; group 2, those with recurrent acute pancreatitis or upper abdominal pain with no other cause; group 3, those with chronic pancreatitis; group 4, those with chronic pancreatic pain; and group 5, those with other complications. Group 1 should be treated with medical therapy alone. The response to surgical or endoscopic therapy of the minor papilla is good in group 2 (75-90%), moderate in group 3 (40-60%), and poor in group 4 (20-40%). A few patients require other forms of pancreatic surgery, such as Puestow's operation, Beger's operation, or distal pancreatectomy. With careful selection of patient and therapy, good response to the therapy can be achieved. Pancreas divisum (PD) is the most common congenital anomaly of the pancreas, with an incidence of up to 10%. Symptoms or complications developing in individuals with PD are uncommon (5% of individuals with PD). It seems unlikely that PD alone could cause obstructive pancreatitis and the presence of another factor, such as minor papilla insufficiency, is probably required for this relatively common anomaly to develop complications.

Minor papilla cannulation and dorsal ductography in pancreas divisum

Until recently, pancreas divisum represented a major technical barrier to a complete evaluation of pancreatic ductal anatomy. Technical refinements have now made it possible to achieve minor papilla cannulation and dorsal ductography in more than 90% of attempts. In 120 consecutive dorsal ductograms, structural pathology was demonstrated in 36 subjects (30%): chronic pancreatitis in 23, pancreatic stones in 10, pseudocyst(s) in 4, ductal "cut-off" in 7, pancreatic cancer in 3, and partial agenesis in 1 (some patients had more than one finding). For patients in whom alcohol abuse was excluded, ductal pathology was present in 25%. Abnormal ventral ductograms were present in only 8% of cases, demonstrating that dorsal ductography has an appreciable additional diagnostic yield. When the clinical situation indicates the need for pancreatography, minor papilla cannulation should be performed if major papilla cannulation fails or reveals only the ventral pancreatogram of pancreas divisum.

Evaluation and treatment of the dominant dorsal duct syndrome (pancreas divisum redefined)

The controversial association of pancreatitis and pancreas divisum was studied in 100 patients (77 women, 23 men, median age 35) with episodic acute pancreatitis (49%) or "pancreatic pain" (51%). Seventy-one had classic pancreas divisum (type 1); 23 had only a dorsal duct with an absent Wirsung's duct (type 2); and 6 had a filamentous connection between the two duct systems (type 3). Accessory papilla sphincteroplasty was performed in 88 patients, with a mean follow-up of 53 months. The orifice was stenotic at the mucosal level in 66 patients. Seventy percent of patients have shown improvement: 85% if the accessory papilla was stenotic, compared with 27% if it was not (p less than 0.0001); and 82% with discrete attacks, compared with 56% with chronic pain (p = 0.002). Judged against intraoperative calibration of accessory papilla orifice diameter, ultrasonography with secretin stimulation was 78% sensitive for accessory papilla stenosis, with 3% false-positive results. Ultrasonography with secretin stimulation was the best predictor of surgical success: positive = 92% success (attacks or pain) versus negative = 40% success (64% with attacks; 21% with pain). There have been seven restenoses with six reoperations. We conclude that (1) pancreas divisum is but one variety of pancreatic anatomy characterized by a dominant dorsal duct and dependence on secretion through the accessory papilla; (2) accessory papilla stenosis appears to be a necessary cofactor to produce a morbid state, whether episodic pancreatitis or pancreatic pain; (3) presentation with pancreatitis and a positive result on the ultrasound-secretin test are the best predictors of successful accessory papilla sphincteroplasty.

Enlargement of the pancreatic head in patients with pancreas divisum

Pancreas divisum (PD) is a congenital anomaly present in 6-10% of the population. Computed tomography (CT) examinations in eight of 15 patients (53%) with endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERCP)-proven PD were interpreted as showing enlargement of the pancreatic head. Two of these had carcinoma, three had pancreatitis limited to the ventral pancreas, and three were normal. Criteria to distinguish nonpathologic enlargement of the pancreatic head due to PD alone from pathologic causes may include homogeneous parenchyma and an absence of other abnormal signs on CT. Because PD may simulate a pancreatic head mass, the radiologist should be familiar with this variant, and ERCP should precede biopsy unless other evidence of malignancy is present.

Pancreatitis associated with pancreas divisum: results of surgical intervention

The embryologic defect that results when the ventral and dorsal anlages of the pancreas do not fuse has been referred to as pancreas divisum. The patients who present with recurrent pancreatitis or pancreatitis-like pain in association with pancreas divisum should be investigated to determine the presence of minor papilla stenosis. In the present study of 11 patients, 9 became asymptomatic with surgical decompression of the dorsal pancreatic duct. Two surgical failures were related to wrong diagnosis and restenosis of the sphincteroplasty. A delay in the clearance of dye from the dorsal pancreatic duct after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was utilized to determine minor papilla stenosis. In the future, secretin ultrasound tests should prove of value in assessing minor papilla stenosis. Once the diagnosis is made, sphincteroplasty of the minor papilla is the most logical procedure because of the good results obtained. In the present study, pancreaticojejunostomy provided good duct decompression as well.