Effects of medications on post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study comparing the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND

Balanced propofol sedation is extensively used in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), but sedation-related adverse events (SRAEs) are common. In various clinical settings, the combination of dexmedetomidine with opioids and benzodiazepines has provided effective sedation with increased safety. The aim of this investigation was to compare the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation during ERCP.

METHODS

Forty-one patients were randomly divided into two groups: the dexmedetomidine (DEX) group and the propofol (PRO) group. Patients in the DEX group received an additional bolus of 0.6 μg kg-1 dexmedetomidine followed by a dexmedetomidine infusion at 1.2 μg kg-1 h-1, whereas the PRO group received 1-2 mg kg-1 of propofol bolus followed by a propofol infusion at 2-3 mg kg-1 h-1. During ERCP, the primary outcome was the incidence of hypoxemia (SpO2 < 90% for > 10 s). Other intraoperative adverse events were also recorded as secondary outcomes, including respiratory depression (respiratory rate of < 10 bpm min-1), hypotension (MAP < 65 mmHg), and bradycardia (HR < 45 beats min-1).

RESULTS

The incidence of hypoxemia was significantly reduced in the DEX group compared to the PRO group (0% versus 28.6%, respectively; P = 0.032). Patients in the PRO group exhibited respiratory depression more frequently than patients in the DEX group (35% versus 81%, respectively; P = 0.003). There were no significant differences in terms of hypotension and bradycardia episodes between groups. During the procedures, the satisfaction scores of endoscopists and patients, as well as the pain and procedure memory scores of patients were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSION

In comparison with propofol, dexmedetomidine provided adequate sedation safety with no adverse effects on sedation efficacy during ERCP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2200061468, 25/06/2022.

Acute pancreatitis associated with intravenous administration of propofol: evaluation of causality in a systematic review of the literature

Acute pancreatitis (AP) associated with intravenous administration of propofol has been described with unknown causal relation. We therefore assessed this causality in a systematic review. Multiple databases were searched on 16 August 2017; studies were appraised and selected by two reviewers based on a priori criteria. Propofol causality was evaluated with the Naranjo scale and Badalov classification. We identified 18 studies from 11 countries with a total of 21 patients, and the majority had adequate methodological quality. The median age was 35 years (range, 4-77) and 10 (48%) were males. Overall, propofol was administrated in 8 patients as sedative along with induction/maintenance of anesthesia in 13 patients; median dose was 200 mg, with intermediate latency (1-30 days) in 14 (67%). Serum triglycerides were >1000 mg/dL in four patients. Severe AP was observed in four patients (19%). AP recurrence occurred in one out of two patients who underwent rechallenge. Mortality related to AP was 3/21(14%). Propofol was the probable cause of AP according to the Naranjo scale in 19 patients (89%). Propofol-induced AP has a probable causal relation and evidence supports Badalov class Ib. Hypertriglyceridemia is not the only mechanism by which propofol illicit AP. Propofol-induced AP was severe in 19% of patients with a mortality rate related to AP of 14%. Future research is needed to delineate whether this risk is higher if combined with other procedures that portend inherent risk of pancreatitis such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Cannabis Use Is Associated With Increased Risk of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis: Analysis of the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database, 2004-2014

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of cannabis on post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP).

METHODS

The US Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried to identify patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis from 2004 to 2014. Cannabis use was identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition codes, and patients in remission were excluded. Poisson regression models were used to derive adjusted incidence risk ratios (IRRs) for outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 37,712 patients with PEP, 0.4% had documented cannabis use disorder. From 2004 to 2014, the rate of PEP and cannabis use increased (8.9%-11.0% [P < 0.01] and 0.20%-0.70% [P < 0.01], respectively). Univariate analysis demonstrated cannabis was associated with increased risk of PEP (IRR, 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.50-1.90; P < 0.01). On multivariate analysis, cannabis use was an independent predictor of PEP (IRR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4; P = 0.004). Cannabis was not associated with in-hospital death (IRR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.02-1.04; P = 0.06) but was associated with shorter hospital stay (IRR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98; P < 0.001) and lower costs (IRR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.91-0.92; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis use was associated with an increase in PEP without significant increase in mortality.

Impact of smoking on the risk of pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Cigarette smoking may increase the risk of developing pancreatic cancer, although its impact on pancreatitis has only been discerned in recent years. However, the results of previous studies differ. We performed a meta-analysis to provide a quantitative pooled risk estimate of the association of cigarette smoking with pancreatitis.

METHOD

A literature search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases was conducted, and studies were selected that investigated the association of cigarette smoking with pancreatitis. Summary relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included. The summary RRs (95% CI) associated with ever, current and former smokers for acute and chronic pancreatitis (AP/CP) were as follows: 1.51 (1.10, 2.07)/3.00 (1.46, 6.17), 1.42 (1.08, 1.87)/2.72 (1.74, 4.24), and 1.22 (0.99, 1.52)/1.27 (1.00, 1.62), respectively. Moreover, studies that analyzed both AP and CP were also summarized: 1.73 (1.18, 2.54) for ever smokers, 1.67 (1.03, 2.68) for current smokers and 1.56 (1.16, 2.11) for former smokers, respectively. There was no evidence of publication bias across the studies.

CONCLUSION

The evidence suggests a positive association of cigarette smoking with the development of pancreatitis. It is possible that smoking cessation may be a useful strategy for the management of pancreatitis.

Meta-analysis: Tobacco smoking may enhance the risk of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Questions remain unclear about the association of smoking status and the development of acute pancreatitis (AP). We performed a meta-analysis of observational studies explore this association.

METHODS

A computerized literature search was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE through November 30, 2014. We also searched the reference lists of pertinent articles. We used a random-effects model to calculate the summary relative risks (SRRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 3690 incident cases of AP included 12 observational studies (6 case-control and 6 prospective cohort/nested case-control studies) were identified. Compared with never smokers, the summary RR estimates were 1.54 (95% CI, 1.31-1.80) for ever smokers, 1.71 (95% CI, 1.37-2.14) for current smokers, and 1.21 (95% CI, 1.02-1.43) for former smokers. Smoking is found to be a potential risk factor for alcohol use, idiopathic factors and drugs related AP, but not for gallstone related AP, in the ever and current smokers. A dose-response effect of tobacco use on the risk was ascertained: current smokers had a 40% (95% CI, 30%-51%) increased risk of AP for every additional 10 cigarettes per day.

CONCLUSION

The present analysis suggests that smokers have an elevated risk of AP development. Further studies, however, are warranted before definitive conclusions can be drawn.

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 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.

Risk models for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP): smoking and chronic liver disease are predictors of protection against PEP

OBJECTIVES

We investigated which variables independently associated with protection against or development of postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) and severity of PEP. Subsequently, we derived predictive risk models for PEP.

METHODS

In a case-control design, 6505 patients had 8264 ERCPs, 211 patients had PEP, and 22 patients had severe PEP. We randomly selected 348 non-PEP controls. We examined 7 established- and 9 investigational variables.

RESULTS

In univariate analysis, 7 variables predicted PEP: younger age, female sex, suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (SOD), pancreatic sphincterotomy, moderate-difficult cannulation (MDC), pancreatic stent placement, and lower Charlson score. Protective variables were current smoking, former drinking, diabetes, and chronic liver disease (CLD, biliary/transplant complications). Multivariate analysis identified seven independent variables for PEP, three protective (current smoking, CLD-biliary, CLD-transplant/hepatectomy complications) and 4 predictive (younger age, suspected SOD, pancreatic sphincterotomy, MDC). Pre- and post-ERCP risk models of 7 variables have a C-statistic of 0.74. Removing age (seventh variable) did not significantly affect the predictive value (C-statistic of 0.73) and reduced model complexity. Severity of PEP did not associate with any variables by multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

By using the newly identified protective variables with 3 predictive variables, we derived 2 risk models with a higher predictive value for PEP compared to prior studies.

Pancreatitis potentially associated drugs as a risk factor for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the role of known risk factors and specifically evaluate the role of pancreatitis potentially associated drugs as potential risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP).

METHODS

This was a prospective, single-center cohort study conducted in a tertiary university hospital. All eligible ERCP procedures within a 16-month period were evaluated, and all interventions, patient characteristics, and medications used were documented. The association of potential risk factor with PEP was investigated with univariable analyses. Those statistically significant were entered in a multivariable regression model.

RESULTS

Three hundred eighteen ERCP procedures were studied. Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 28 patients (8.8%). Twenty-three potential risk factors were studied in univariable analyses, and 3 of them were found to be nominally statistically significant. These 3 factors were independently associated with PEP in the multivariable model and included the use of pancreatitis potentially associated drugs, belonging to Badalov classes I or II, during the last month before ERCP (odds ratio [OR], 4.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.70-5.47; P = 0.003), more than 1 guide-wire insertions in the pancreatic duct (OR, 5.00; 95% CI, 1.97-12.81; P = 0.001) and bile duct stone extraction (OR, 0.12; CI, 0.05-0.32; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreatitis potentially associated drugs used before ERCP seem to increase the risk for PEP.

Risk factors for postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a retrospective analysis of 7,168 cases

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) is one of the most common and serious complications after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This study aims to test the hypothesis that the incidence of PEP declined over time due to improved patient selection and/or endoscopic equipment and endoscopic techniques. Therefore, we compared the incidence and risk factors of PEP between four arbitrary chronologically stratified groups.

METHODS

A total of 7,168 cases of ERCP procedures were retrospectively analyzed. According to the different developmental stages of ERCP equipment and techniques, cases were divided into four groups. The incidence rates and major risk factors for acute PEP were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Among the 7,168 cases, the overall incidence of PEP was 3.70% (265/7,168). When analyzed against each stage of ERCP development, the incidence of PEP was 4.09% (77/1,884) in stage I, 5.79% (86/1,489) in stage II, 3.95% (62/1,568) in stage III and 1.80% (40/2,227) in stage IV. By univariate analysis, pancreatic stent placement (OR: 0.300) and use of propofol-balanced anesthesia (OR: 0.632) seem to be protective factors for acute PEP. By multivariate analysis, the following risk factors for PEP could be identified: repeated cannulation (OR: 3.462), pancreatic duct injection (OR: 3.218), balloon dilation of biliary sphincter (OR: 2.847), papillae precut (OR: 2.493), nonselective high-pressure injection (OR: 1.428), excessive electrocoagulation incision (OR: 1.263), history of pancreatitis (OR: 3.843) and suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (OR: 1.782).

CONCLUSIONS

Improved technical procedures were associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of PEP. Risks for developing PEP may be minimized by constant improvement in ERCP techniques, such as routine use of a guidewire, highly selective cannulation, pancreatic stent placement and cautious incision.

Drug-induced acute pancreatitis related to medications commonly used in gastroenterology

BACKGROUND

With the growing number of pharmacological agents available nowadays, the gastrointestinal drug-induced side effects become more common than ever. However, drug-induced pancreatitis belongs to rather seldom reported adverse drug reactions, probably because of the difficulty in proving the relationship between an inflammation of the pancreas and the pharmacotherapy with a certain drug.

AIM

The aim of this review is to draw attention to an infrequent but real problem of drug-induced acute pancreatitis associated with medications commonly used in the treatment of gastrointestinal disorders.

METHODOLOGY

For the purpose of that the PubMed database was searched using the keywords "drug-induced pancreatitis", "drug-associated pancreatitis", "acute pancreatitis", "pancreatitis" in various combinations and relevant literature was reviewed.

RESULTS

A substantial number of drugs commonly prescribed for gastrointestinal disorders are known to cause acute pancreatitis. Case reports and review articles published so far draw attention to medications already known to cause drug-induced pancreatic damage as well as implicate new drugs. Generally, the etiopathological mechanisms involved in drug-induced pancreatitis remain unclear. It is difficult to establish or rule out definitely such unwanted event, especially in patients taking numerous medications prescribed for multiple comorbidities.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacological agents are among etiologic factors that should be considered in all patients presenting with signs and symptoms consistent with acute pancreatitis. The diagnosis of drug-induced AP is often difficult to established. Therefore a high index of suspicion and thorough drug history are crucial for making the final diagnosis.