Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2012;2012:796751. [PMID: 21845187 PMCID: PMC3154520 DOI: 10.1155/2012/796751]

Development of an acute pancreatitis porcine model based on endoscopic retrograde infusion of contrast medium or sodium taurocholate

BACKGROUND/AIMS

A reproducible, endoscope-based, large animal model, of acute pancreatitis was developed to meet the need for a suitable means of preclinically testing treatments. The aim of this study was to develop an endoscope-based animal model of acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

This experimental study was conducted on six mini-pigs. The pancreatitis model was induced by infusing contrast medium (CM) or sodium taurocholate (TCA) under high pressure (100 mmHg) into the main pancreatic duct by endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. Animals were randomly allocated to three groups: a CM group, a 10% TCA group, and a 20% TCA group. Pancreatic injuries were evaluated histologically, and serum amylase and lipase levels were measured.

RESULTS

Acute pancreatitis was observed in all animals during hematologic and histologic examinations. Serum amylase and lipase levels were significantly higher (> 10 times baseline), and pancreatic edema, vacuolization of acinar cells, and hemorrhagic necrosis were observed. Severity of pancreatitis tended to be greater in the TCA groups than in the CM group as assessed using histologic scores, and degrees of pancreatitis were found to be dose-dependently related to TCA concentration.

CONCLUSION

The two endoscopic procedures described are effective and safe for creating a swine model of acute pancreatitis. The authors hope the described endoscopic methods will assist in the development of a suitable treatment strategy.

Endocut Versus Conventional Blended Electrosurgical Current for Endoscopic Biliary Sphincterotomy: A Meta-Analysis of Complications

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EST) is commonly performed during therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), but is an independent risk factor for post-ERCP pancreatitis, bleeding and duodenal perforation. These are partly ascribed to the electrosurgical current mode used for EST, and currently the optimal current model for EST remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to compare the rate of complications undergoing EST using the Endocut versus the blended current.

METHODS

A systematic search of databases was performed for relevant published and prospective studies including randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to compare Endocut with blended current modes for EST. Data were collected from inception until 1 July 2018, using post-ERCP pancreatitis, bleeding and perforation as primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Three RCTs including a total of 594 patients met the inclusion criteria. Our meta-analysis results showed the rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis, primarily mild to moderate pancreatitis, was no different between Endocut versus blended current modes [risk ratio (RR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25-1.52, P = 0.29]. However, the risk of endoscopically bleeding events, primarily mild bleeding, was lower in studies using Endocut versus blended current (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31-0.95, P = 0.03). Notably, none of the patients experienced perforation in these three trials.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis was not significantly different when using the Endocut versus blended current during EST. Nevertheless, compared with the blended current, Endocut reduced the incidence of endoscopically evident bleeding; however, the available data were insufficient to assess the perforation risk.

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.

ERCP induced and non-ERCP-induced acute pancreatitis: Two distinct clinical entities?

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common gastrointestinal disease of varied etiology; however, the most common causes of AP are gallstones and alcohol abuse. AP has emerged as the most frequent complication after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Post-ERCP pancreatitis is generally a clinically irrelevant condition; however, it can be severe or even fatal in up to 0.8% of cases. Different clinical courses and outcomes have been observed between mild and severe AP of different etiologies (i.e., non-ERCP AP and post-ERCP AP), which opens the discussion as to whether they are the same or distinct clinical entities.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reduce the incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several recent studies suggested that nonsteroidal anti-inflammation drugs (NSAIDs) could prevent the pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, the routes of administration, the dosages of NSAIDs and the potential efficacy in reducing the severity of pancreatitis remain controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of NSAIDs for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) prophylaxis.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, EBSCO, Elsevier and Web of Science databases up to 1 October 2016 for relevant studies.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared to the controls, the risk of pancreatitis was much lower in the NSAIDs group (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.48-0.67, P < 0.0001). However, NSAIDs were not effective in reducing the risk of moderate to severe pancreatitis compared with placebo (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.57-1.00). In the subanalyses, rectal administration was the only effective route (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.42-0.62), and the risk of PEP was reduced in both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.52-0.76) and case-control articles (C-Cs) (OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.28-0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic administration of NSAIDs reduced the incidence of PEP in both RCTs and C-Cs, especially when rectally administered, but was not effective in reducing the risk of moderate to severe pancreatitis.

The Role Safety Steps in Success and Complication Rate of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is widely used for treatment of biliary disorders. There are several studies to increase the success rate and decrease the complication rate of ERCP. In this study we aimed to evaluate the affect of safety steps in success and complication rate of ERCP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this cohort study patients were evaluated under 2 groups divided as before the introduction of safety steps and after. Successful cannulation rate, difficult cannulations, and complications of the procedure were recorded.

RESULT

Failed ampullary cannulation rates were 8.2% in group 1 and 4% in group 2. In terms of postprocedural complications; in group 2 complication rates significantly decreased from 10.7% to 4.3%. Moreover, post-ERCP pancreatitis rate decreased from 9.1% in group 1 to 4% in group 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Introduction of safety steps, significantly increase the cannulation rate and decrease both overall complication rate and pancreatitis risk.

History of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis and Acute Pancreatitis as Risk Factors for Post-ERCP Pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Previous pancreatitis is a definite patient-related risk factor for pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP pancreatitis: PEP). However, the effects of differences in the history of PEP and acute pancreatitis on the occurrence of PEP have not been fully investigated. We examined the relationship between previous PEP or previous acute pancreatitis and procedural factors associated with PEP.

METHODS

Clinical data on 1,334 consecutive patients undergoing ERCP between April 2006 and June 2010 were collected. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess the relationship between PEP and the cannulation time (<15 min vs. ≥15 min) or total procedure time (<30 min vs. ≥30 min) according to previous pancreatitis (previous PEP: pPEP or previous acute pancreatitis: pAP), with adjustments for clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Longer cannulation times (≥15 min) correlated with the occurrence of PEP in the pPEP group (OR=2.97; 95% CI=1.10 to 8.43, P=0.03) and in patients without previous pancreatitis (non-preP group) (OR=2.43; 95% CI=1.41 to 4.14, P= 0.002), but not in the pAP group (OR=2.78; 95% CI=0.50 to 22.42, P= 0.25). In contrast, longer procedure times correlated with the occurrence of PEP in the pAP group (OR=3.93; 95% CI=1.11 to 16.5, P= 0.03), but not in the pPEP group (OR=2.79; 95% CI=0.92 to 9.18, P= 0.068) or non-preP group (OR=0.71; 95% CI=0.39 to 1.24, P= 0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

A higher risk of PEP with previous PEP was associated with longer cannulation times, whereas a higher risk of PEP with previous acute pancreatitis was associated with longer procedure times.

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.

Diclofenac sodium versus ceftazidime for preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We aimed to compare the efficacy of prophylactic, parenterally administered ceftazidime and rectally applied diclofenac sodium for the prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP).

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients who underwent ERCP. In a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, patients received a suppository containing diclofenac sodium rectally (100 mg) and placebo intravenously (group A) or ceftazidime intravenously (1 g) and placebo rectally (group B) immediately before the procedure. The serum and urine amylase levels were recorded and the patients were clinically evaluated after ERCP.

RESULTS

Of the 272 patients enrolled (group A: 129; group B: 143), 32 developed pancreatitis (group A: 11 [8.5 %]; group B: 21 [14.7 %]; P = 0.17; relative risk = 1.72; 95 % confidence interval [CI] = 0.86-3.43). The severity of the pancreatitis or complications did not significantly differ between the groups. A serum amylase level of ≥560 U/L and urine amylase level of ≥1150 U/L indicated a positive likelihood ratio for post-ERCP pancreatitis of ≥10. Moreover, the threshold visual analog scale score of ≤5 for abdominal pain after ERCP had excellent diagnostic potential for predicting the presence or absence of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

The PEP incidence did not differ between the ceftazidime and diclofenac sodium groups. In patients with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug contraindications, antibiotics can be considered a safe alternative to diclofenac sodium for PEP prevention. Moreover, the visual analog scale for abdominal pain has excellent diagnostic value for predicting PEP. CLINICAL TRIALS.

GOV NUMBER

NCT 01784445.

Selective biliary cannulation techniques for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures and prevention of post- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Numerous endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) techniques have been reported to achieve selective biliary cannulation success. For standard biliary cannulation procedures, the wire-guided cannulation technique has been reported to reduce the rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) and increase the biliary cannulation success rate, although conflicting reports exist. The pancreatic or double-guidewire technique and several precut techniques have been reported as useful techniques in difficult biliary cannulation cases. Although ERCP is a useful endoscopic procedure, the risk of adverse events, particularly post-ERCP pancreatitis, is inevitable. Previous studies and analyses have revealed the risk factors for PEP. The efficacy of prophylactic pancreatic duct stent placement and the administration of rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for preventing PEP has also been reported. Herein, we reviewed reports in the literature regarding the current status of selective biliary cannulation techniques and PEP prevention.

Preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: What can be done?

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. The incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis varies substantially and is reported around 1%-10%, although there are some reports with an incidence of around 30%. Usually, PEP is a mild or moderate pancreatitis, but in some instances it can be severe and fatal. Generally, it is defined as the onset of new pancreatic-type abdominal pain severe enough to require hospital admission or prolonged hospital stay with levels of serum amylase two to three times greater than normal, occurring 24 h after ERCP. Several methods have been adopted for preventing pancreatitis, such as pharmacological or endoscopic approaches. Regarding medical prevention, only non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, namely diclofenac sodium and indomethacin, are recommended, but there are some other drugs which have some potential benefits in reducing the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Endoscopic preventive measures include cannulation (wire guided) and pancreatic stenting, while the adoption of the early pre-cut technique is still arguable. This review will attempt to present and discuss different ways of preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Effectiveness of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: A meta-analysis

AIM: To investigate the effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on the incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP).

METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched PubMed (1966 to October 2013), Embase (1984 to October 2013) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 4, 2013) for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying the effectiveness of prophylactic NSAID administration in the prevention of PEP. Using the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook, meta-analyses were conducted to evaluate the overall effect of NSAIDs in preventing the incidences of PEP and moderate to severe pancreatitis.

RESULTS: Eight RCTs were identified from the literature search and included 1883 patients that underwent ERCP, with 971 patients in the NSAID group and 912 patients in the placebo group. Sixty-nine out of 971 (7.11%) patients developed PEP in the NSAID group in comparison to 143 out of 912 (15.68%) patients in the placebo group. The pooled RR of PEP incidence with prophylactic NSAID administration was 0.43 (95%CI: 0.33-0.56), which demonstrates that NSAID administration after ERCP significantly reduced the incidence of PEP when compared to the placebo group (P < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis was performed and revealed that the presence (NSAID group) or absence (placebo group) of NSAIDs had no significant effect on the development of moderate to severe pancreatitis (RR = 0.79, 95%CI: 0.52-1.18). Moreover, the administration of NSAIDs as a rectal suppository (RR = 0.35, 95%CI: 0.26-0.48; P < 0.0001) was more effective than oral administration (RR = 0.97, 95%CI: 0.53-1.80) or through infusion (RR = 0.43, 95%CI: 0.12-1.54).

CONCLUSION: NSAIDs effectively reduce the incidence of PEP but not of moderate to severe pancreatitis.

Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis

Post-procedure pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) and carries a high morbidity and mortality occurring in at least 3%-5% of all procedures. We reviewed the available literature searching for "ERCP" and "pancreatitis" and "post-ERCP pancreatitis". in PubMed and Medline. This review looks at the diagnosis, risk factors, causes and methods of preventing post-procedure pancreatitis. These include the evidence for patient selection, endoscopic techniques and pharmacological prophylaxis of ERCP induced pancreatitis. Selecting the right patient for the procedure by a risk benefits assessment is the best way of avoiding unnecessary ERCPs. Risk is particularly high in young women with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD). Many of the trials reviewed have rather few numbers of subjects and hence difficult to appraise. Meta-analyses have helped screen for promising modalities of prophylaxis. At present, evidence is emerging that pancreatic stenting of patients with SOD and rectally administered nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in a large unselected trial reduce the risk of post-procedure pancreatitis. A recent meta-analysis have demonstrated that rectally administered indomethecin, just before or after ERCP is associated with significantly lower rate of pancreatitis compared with placebo [OR = 0.49 (0.34-0.71); P = 0.0002]. Number needed to treat was 20. It is likely that one of these prophylactic measures will begin to be increasingly practised in high risk groups.

Prevention and treatment of post-ERCP pancreatitis

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is widely used in the diagnosis and treatment of cholangiopancreatic diseases, and pancreatitis remains the most common and severe complication. It is therefore important to minimize the incidence and severity of pancreatitis. This paper discusses the recent progress in the prevention and treatment of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Somatostatin administration prior to ERCP is effective in reducing the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients

Somatostatin has been extensively studied for the prophylaxis of pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, the results remain controversial. The present retrospective cohort study aimed to investigate the efficacy of pre- and post-ERCP somatostatin administration in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). All ERCP procedures performed at one hospital between January 2009 and December 2012 were reviewed. They were divided into three groups based on somatostatin administration: pre-ERCP som group (somatostatin administration: 0.25 mg/h for 24 h, starting 1 h prior to ERCP), post-ERCP som group (somatostatin administration: 0.25 mg/h for 24 h, starting immediately following ERCP), and control group (no somatostatin administration). Out of a total of 304 cases, 81 received pre-ERCP somatostatin; 126 received post-ERCP somatostatin and 97 were not administered somatostatin. Pre-ERCP somatostatin was effective in reducing the incidence of PEP compared with that in the control group (4.9 vs. 16.5%; P=0.017). This benefit was significant in high-risk patients (8.9 vs. 26.0%; P=0.035), but not in low-risk patients (0 vs. 6.4%; P=0.254). Post-ERCP somatostatin was not effective in preventing PEP in high- or low-risk patients. In conclusion, pre-ERCP somatostatin may be effective in reducing the risk of PEP in high-risk patients, but not in low-risk patients. Post-ERCP somatostatin did not reveal a benefit in high- or low-risk patients. However, large randomized controlled trials are required to further confirm these findings.

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography complications in liver transplanted patients, a single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Complications in the biliary tract occur in 5%-30% after liver transplantation and the main part of the complications is successfully managed with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP). The incidence and risk factors for post-ERCP complications in liver transplantation patients are not well described. Our objective was to define the frequency of post-ERCP complications in liver transplantation patients at the Abdominal Center, Rigshospitalet, the only Liver Transplantation Center in Denmark.

METHODS

Retrospective study of all ERCPs performed in liver transplantation patients during a 9-year period.

RESULTS

A total of 292 ERCPs were included. Overall post-ERCP complications occurred in 24 procedures (8.2%): pancreatitis in 8 (2.7%), bleeding in 5 (1.7%), and cholangitis in 13 (4.5%) procedures. Simultaneous pancreatitis and cholangitis, and simultaneous bleeding and cholangitis occurred after two procedures, respectively. Multivariate analysis concerning overall complications identified biliary sphincterotomy (p = 0.006) and time since liver transplantation within 90 days postoperatively (p = 0.044) as risk factors for post-ERCP complications. Specifically concerning post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), it was found that pre-ERCP cholangitis was another independent risk factor for PEP (p = 0.026). Stent in the biliary tract prior to ERCP seemed to be protective (p = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

Complications were of surprisingly mild degree. The rates of post-ERCP complications in our study were in line with previous studies with liver transplantation patients. Cholangitis prior to ERCP may be another risk factor for post-ERCP pancreatitis.

UK wide survey on the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

In 2010, the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy delivered guidelines on the prophylaxis of postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). These included Grade A recommendations advising the use of prophylactic pancreatic stent (PPS) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in high-risk cases. Our study aim was to capture the current practice of UK biliary endoscopists in the prevention of PEP.

DESIGN

In summer 2012, an anonymous online 15-item survey was emailed to 373 UK consultant gastroenterologists, gastrointestinal surgeons and radiologists identified to perform ERCP.

RESULTS

The response rate was 59.5% (222/373). Of the respondents, 52.5% considered ever using PPS for the prevention of PEP. PPS users always attempted insertion for the following procedural risk factors: pancreatic sphincterotomy (48.9%), suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (46.5%), pancreatic duct instrumentation (35.9%), previous PEP (25.2%), precut sphincterotomy (8.5%) and pancreatic duct injection (7.8%). Prophylactic NSAID use was significantly associated with attempts at PPS placement (p<0.001). 64.1% of non-PPS users cited a lack of conviction in their benefit as the main reason for their decision. Self-reported pharmacological use rates for PEP prevention were: NSAIDs (34.6%), antibiotics (20.6%), rapid intravenous fluids (13.2%) and octreotide (1.6%). 6% routinely measured amylase post-ERCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite strong evidence-based guidelines for prevention of PEP, less than 53% of ERCP practitioners use pancreatic stenting or NSAIDs. This suggests a need for the development of British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines to increase awareness in the UK. Even among stent users, PPS are being underused for most high-risk cases. Prophylactic pharmacological measures were rarely used as was routine post-ERCP serum amylase measurement.

Glyceryl trinitrate for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis and improve the rate of cannulation: a meta-analysis of prospective, randomized, controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis is the most common complication of diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Several clinical trials used glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) to prevent the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). However, the results were still controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a meta-analysis of published, full-length, randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of prophylactic GTN on the prevention of PEP, improve the rate of cannulation and the prevention of hyperamylasemia.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Web of Knowledge databases, using keywords "post-ERCP" and "pancreatitis" and limited in randomized controlled trials.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs involving 2649 patients were included. Eleven RCTs compared GTN with placebo for PEP prevention. Meta-analysis showed the overall incidence of PEP was significantly reduced by GTN treatment (RR 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87). Nevertheless, GTN administration did not decrease the incidence of moderate to severe PEP (RR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.42-1.15). Subgroup analyses revealed that GTN administered by sublingual was more effective than transdermal and topical in reducing the incidence of PEP. Besides, the prophylactic effect of GTN was far more obvious in the group of high PEP incidence than in the group of low PEP incidence. Additionally, the incidence of hyperamylasemia was significantly reduced by GTN treatment (RR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54-0.90). No differences of the successful cannulation rate of bile ducts (RR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.99-1.06) attributable to GTN were observed.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic use of GTN reduced the overall incidence of PEP and hyperamylasemia. However, GTN was not helpful for the severity of PEP and the rate of cannulation.

Precut sphincterotomy for selective biliary duct cannulation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Selective biliary cannulation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is required to perform all therapeutic biliary procedures. Despite major advances in imaging, guidewires and sphincterotome catheter designs, the success rate for biliary cannulation by experienced endoscopists during ERCP is approximately 85% when standard cannulation techniques are applied. Precut sphincterotomy, also known as access sphincterotomy, is performed when standard techniques fail to achieve selective biliary cannulation. Precut sphincterotomy significantly increases the rate of biliary cannulation up to 98%. However, precut sphincterotomy has traditionally been considered a risk factor for adverse events following ERCP, especially concerning is post-ERCP pancreatitis which results in significant morbidity and financial burden. Recent evidence suggests that precut sphincterotomy alone may not be a risk factor for pancreatitis; rather repeated attempts ( ≥ 10) at biliary cannulation prior to precut sphincterotomy may be the actual cause of post-ERCP pancreatitis. In this paper, we review the different variations of the precut sphincterotomy technique and their corresponding rates of success and adverse events.