The diagnostic work-up and outcomes of 'presumed' idiopathic acute pancreatitis: A post-hoc analysis of a multicentre observational cohort

Genetic and other risk factors for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is often diagnosed at an advanced stage, resulting in poor prognosis and low 5-year survival rates. While early evidence suggests increased long-term survival in those with screen-detected resectable cancers, surveillance imaging is currently only recommended for individuals with a lifetime risk of PDAC ≥ 5%. Identification of risk factors for PDAC provides opportunities for early detection, risk reducing interventions, and targeted therapies, thus potentially improving patient outcomes. Here, we summarize modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors for PDAC. We review hereditary cancer syndromes associated with risk for PDAC and their implications for patients and their relatives. In addition, other biologically relevant pathways and environmental and lifestyle risk factors are discussed. Future work may focus on elucidating additional genetic, environmental, and lifestyle risk factors that may modify PDAC risk to continue to identify individuals at increased risk for PDAC who may benefit from surveillance and risk reducing interventions.

Bidirectional relationship between acute pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The burdens of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and acute pancreatitis are increasing globally. We reviewed current literature on whether acute pancreatitis is a causal factor for PDAC and examined clinical manifestations of PDAC-associated acute pancreatitis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent findings detail the timing of acute pancreatitis before and after PDAC occurrence, further solidifying the evidence for PDAC-associated acute pancreatitis and for acute pancreatitis as a causal risk factor for PDAC. The risk of PDAC remains elevated above the general population in patients with distant history of acute pancreatitis. PDAC risk also increases with recurrent acute pancreatitis episodes, independent of smoking and alcohol. Mechanisms linking acute pancreatitis to PDAC include inflammation and neutrophil infiltration, which can be attenuated by suppressing inflammation and/or epigenetic modulation, thus slowing the progression of acinar-to-ductal metaplasia. Clinical presentation and management of acute pancreatitis in the context of PDAC are discussed, including challenges acute pancreatitis poses in the diagnosis and treatment of PDAC, and novel interventions for PDAC-associated acute pancreatitis.

SUMMARY

PDAC risk may be reduced with improved acute pancreatitis prevention and treatment, such as antiinflammatories or epigenetic modulators. Increased acute pancreatitis and PDAC burden warrant more research on better diagnosis and management of PDAC-associated acute pancreatitis.

Gallstones as a cause in presumed acute alcoholic pancreatitis: observational multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Data on the incidence and clinical relevance of gallstones in patients with suspected acute alcoholic pancreatitis are lacking and are essential to minimize the risk of recurrent acute pancreatitis. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence of gallstones and the associated rate of recurrent acute pancreatitis in patients with presumed acute alcoholic pancreatitis.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2019, 23 hospitals prospectively enrolled patients with acute pancreatitis. Those diagnosed with their first episode of presumed acute alcoholic pancreatitis were included in this study. The term gallstones was used to describe the presence of cholelithiasis or biliary sludge found during imaging. The primary outcome was pancreatitis recurrence during 3 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 334 patients were eligible for inclusion, of whom 316 were included in the follow-up analysis. Gallstone evaluation, either during the index admission or during follow-up, was performed for 306 of 334 patients (91.6%). Gallstones were detected in 54 patients (17.6%), with a median time to detection of 6 (interquartile range 0-42) weeks. During follow-up, recurrent acute pancreatitis occurred in 121 of 316 patients (38.3%), with a significantly higher incidence rate for patients with gallstones compared with patients without gallstones (59% versus 34.2% respectively; P < 0.001), while more patients with gallstones had stopped drinking alcohol at the time of their first recurrence (41% versus 24% respectively; P = 0.020). Cholecystectomy was performed for 19 patients with gallstones (36%). The recurrence rate was lower for patients in the cholecystectomy group compared with patients who did receive inadequate treatment or no treatment (5/19 versus 19/34 respectively; P = 0.038).

CONCLUSION

Gallstones were found in almost one in every five patients diagnosed with acute alcoholic pancreatitis. Gallstones were associated with a higher rate of recurrent pancreatitis, while undergoing cholecystectomy was associated with a reduction in this rate.

Development of pancreatic diseases during long-term follow-up after acute pancreatitis: a post-hoc analysis of a prospective multicenter cohort

BACKGROUND AND AIM

More insight into the incidence of and factors associated with progression following a first episode of acute pancreatitis (AP) would offer opportunities for improvements in disease management and patient counseling.

METHODS

A long-term post hoc analysis of a prospective cohort of patients with AP (2008-2015) was performed. Primary endpoints were recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP), chronic pancreatitis (CP), and pancreatic cancer. Cumulative incidence calculations and risk analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 1184 patients with a median follow-up of 9 years (IQR: 7-11) were included. RAP and CP occurred in 301 patients (25%) and 72 patients (6%), with the highest incidences observed for alcoholic pancreatitis (40% and 22%). Pancreatic cancer was diagnosed in 14 patients (1%). Predictive factors for RAP were alcoholic and idiopathic pancreatitis (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.51-4.82 and OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.40-3.02), and no pancreatic interventions (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.10-3.01). Non-biliary etiology (alcohol: OR 5.24, 95% CI 1.94-14.16, idiopathic: OR 4.57, 95% CI 2.05-10.16, and other: OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.11-7.94), RAP (OR 4.93, 95% CI 2.84-8.58), prior pancreatic interventions (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.20-8.02), smoking (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.14-4.78), and male sex (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.05-4.05) were independently associated with CP.

CONCLUSION

Disease progression was observed in a quarter of pancreatitis patients. We identified several risk factors that may be helpful to devise personalized strategies with the intention to reduce the impact of disease progression in patients with AP.

American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines: Management of Acute Pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis (AP), defined as acute inflammation of the pancreas, is one of the most common diseases of the gastrointestinal tract leading to hospital admission in the United States. It is important for clinicians to appreciate that AP is heterogenous, progressing differently among patients and is often unpredictable. While most patients experience symptoms lasting a few days, almost one-fifth of patients will go on to experience complications, including pancreatic necrosis and/or organ failure, at times requiring prolonged hospitalization, intensive care, and radiologic, surgical, and/or endoscopic intervention. Early management is essential to identify and treat patients with AP to prevent complications. Patients with biliary pancreatitis typically will require surgery to prevent recurrent disease and may need early endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography if the disease is complicated by cholangitis. Nutrition plays an important role in treating patients with AP. The safety of early refeeding and importance in preventing complications from AP are addressed. This guideline will provide an evidence-based practical approach to the management of patients with AP.

Prospective multicentre study of indications for surgery in patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis following endoscopic ultrasonography (PICUS)

BACKGROUND

Cholecystectomy in patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) is controversial. A randomized trial found cholecystectomy to reduce the recurrence rate of IAP but did not include preoperative endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). As EUS is effective in detecting gallstone disease, cholecystectomy may be indicated only in patients with gallstone disease. This study aimed to determine the diagnostic value of EUS in patients with IAP, and the rate of recurrent pancreatitis in patients in whom EUS could not determine the aetiology (EUS-negative IAP).

METHODS

This prospective multicentre cohort study included patients with a first episode of IAP who underwent outpatient EUS. The primary outcome was detection of aetiology by EUS. Secondary outcomes included adverse events after EUS, recurrence of pancreatitis, and quality of life during 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

After screening 957 consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis from 24 centres, 105 patients with IAP were included and underwent EUS. In 34 patients (32 per cent), EUS detected an aetiology: (micro)lithiasis and biliary sludge (23.8 per cent), chronic pancreatitis (6.7 per cent), and neoplasms (2.9 per cent); 2 of the latter patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy. During 1-year follow-up, the pancreatitis recurrence rate was 17 per cent (12 of 71) among patients with EUS-negative IAP versus 6 per cent (2 of 34) among those with positive EUS. Recurrent pancreatitis was associated with poorer quality of life.

CONCLUSION

EUS detected an aetiology in a one-third of patients with a first episode of IAP, requiring mostly cholecystectomy or pancreatoduodenectomy. The role of cholecystectomy in patients with EUS-negative IAP remains uncertain and warrants further study.

Endoscopic Ultrasound to Identify the Actual Cause of Idiopathic Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review

Idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) presents a diagnostic challenge and refers to cases where the cause of acute pancreatitis remains uncertain despite a comprehensive diagnostic evaluation. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as a valuable tool in the diagnostic workup of IAP. This review explores the pivotal role of EUS in detecting the actual cause of IAP and assessing its accuracy, timing, safety, and future technological improvement. In this review, we investigate the role of EUS in identifying the actual cause of IAP by examining the available literature. We aim to assess possible existing evidence regarding EUS accuracy, timing, and safety and explore potential trends of future technological improvements in EUS for diagnostic purposes. Following PRISMA guidelines, 60 pertinent studies were selected and analysed. EUS emerges as a crucial diagnostic tool, particularly when conventional imaging fails. It can offer intricate visualization of the pancreas, biliary system, and adjacent structures. Microlithiasis, biliary sludge, chronic pancreatitis, and small pancreatic tumors seem to be much more accurately identified with EUS in the setting of IAP. The optimal timing for EUS is post-resolution of the acute phase of the disease. With a low rate of complications, EUS poses minimal safety concerns. EUS-guided interventions, including fine-needle aspiration, collection drainage, and biopsies, aid in the cytological analysis. With high diagnostic accuracy, safety, and therapeutic potential, EUS is able to improve patient outcomes when managing IAP. Further refinement of EUS techniques and cost-effectiveness assessment of EUS-guided approaches need to be explored in multicentre prospective studies. This review underscores EUS as a transformative tool in unraveling IAP's enigma and advancing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

The risk of recurrent pancreatitis after first episode of acute pancreatitis in relation to etiology and severity of disease: A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The study aims to determine and quantify the stratified risk of recurrent pancreatitis (RP) after the first episode of acute pancreatitis in relation to etiology and severity of disease.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis in compliance with PRISMA statement standards was conducted. A search of electronic information sources was conducted to identify all studies investigating the risk of RP after the first episode of acute pancreatitis. Proportion meta-analysis models using random effects were constructed to calculate the weighted summary risks of RP. Meta-regression was performed to evaluate the effect of different variables on the pooled outcomes.

RESULTS

Analysis of 57,815 patients from 42 studies showed that the risk of RP after first episode was 19.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 17.5-22.1%). The risk of RP was 11.9% (10.2-13.5%) after gallstone pancreatitis, 28.7% (23.5-33.9%) after alcohol-induced pancreatitis, 30.3% (15.5-45.0%) after hyperlipidemia-induced pancreatitis, 38.1% (28.9-47.3%) after autoimmune pancreatitis, 15.1% (11.6-18.6%) after idiopathic pancreatitis, 22.0% (16.9-27.1%) after mild pancreatitis, 23.9% (12.9-34.8%) after moderate pancreatitis, 21.6% (14.6-28.7%) after severe pancreatitis, and 6.6% (4.1-9.2%) after cholecystectomy following gallstone pancreatitis. Meta-regression confirmed that the results were not affected by the year of study (P = 0.541), sample size (P = 0.064), length of follow-up (P = 0.348), and age of patients (P = 0.138) in the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of RP after the first episode of acute pancreatitis seems to be affected by the etiology of pancreatitis but not the severity of disease. The risks seem to be higher in patients with autoimmune pancreatitis, hyperlipidemia-induced pancreatitis, and alcohol-induced pancreatitis and lower in patients with gallstone pancreatitis and idiopathic pancreatitis.

Evaluating approaches to diagnosis and management of idiopathic acute pancreatitis

INTRODUCTION

Idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) is a diagnosis of exclusion; systematic work-up is challenging but essential. Recent advances suggest IAP results from micro-choledocholithiasis, and that laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) or endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) may prevent recurrence.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with IAP from 2015-21 were identified from discharge billing records. Acute pancreatitis was defined by the 2012 Atlanta classification. Complete workup was defined per Dutch and Japanese guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 1499 patients were diagnosed with IAP; 455 screened positive for pancreatitis. Most (N = 256, 56.2%) were screened for hypertriglyceridemia, 182 (40.0%) for IgG-4, and 18 (4.0%) MRCP or EUS, leaving 434 (29.0%) patients with potentially idiopathic pancreatitis. Only 61 (14.0%) received LC and 16 (3.7%) ES. Overall, 40% (N = 172) had recurrent pancreatitis versus 46% (N = 28/61) following LC and 19% (N = 3/16) following ES. Forty-three percent had stones on pathology after LC; none developed recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Complete workup for IAP is necessary but was performed in <5% of cases. Patients who potentially had IAP and received LC were definitively treated 60% of the time. The high rate of stones on pathology further supports empiric LC in this population. A systematic approach to IAP is lacking. Interventions aimed at biliary-lithiasis to prevent recurrent IAP have merit.

Machine learning-based decision tool for selecting patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis for endosonography to exclude a biliary aetiology

BACKGROUND

Biliary microlithiasis/sludge is detected in approximately 30% of patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). As recurrent biliary pancreatitis can be prevented, the underlying aetiology of IAP should be established.

AIM

To develop a machine learning (ML) based decision tool for the use of endosonography (EUS) in pancreatitis patients to detect sludge and microlithiasis.

METHODS

We retrospectively used routinely recorded clinical and laboratory parameters of 218 consecutive patients with confirmed AP admitted to our tertiary care hospital between 2015 and 2020. Patients who did not receive EUS as part of the diagnostic work-up and whose pancreatitis episode could be adequately explained by other causes than biliary sludge and microlithiasis were excluded. We trained supervised ML classifiers using H2O.ai automatically selecting the best suitable predictor model to predict microlithiasis/sludge. The predictor model was further validated in two independent retrospective cohorts from two tertiary care centers (117 patients).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight categorized patients' variables recorded at admission were identified to compute the predictor model with an accuracy of 0.84 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.791-0.9185], positive predictive value of 0.84, and negative predictive value of 0.80 in the identification cohort (218 patients). In the validation cohort, the robustness of the prediction model was confirmed with an accuracy of 0.76 (95%CI: 0.673-0.8347), positive predictive value of 0.76, and negative predictive value of 0.78 (117 patients).

CONCLUSION

We present a robust and validated ML-based predictor model consisting of routinely recorded parameters at admission that can predict biliary sludge and microlithiasis as the cause of AP.

Pancreatic Cancer: Changing Epidemiology and New Approaches to Risk Assessment, Early Detection, and Prevention

Pancreatic cancer usually results in poor survival with limited options for treatment, as most affected individuals present with advanced disease. Early detection of preinvasive pancreatic neoplasia and identifying molecular therapeutic targets provide opportunities for extending survival. Although screening for pancreatic cancer is currently not recommended for the general population, emerging evidence indicates that pancreatic surveillance can improve outcomes for individuals in certain high-risk groups. Changes in the epidemiology of pancreatic cancer, experience from pancreatic surveillance, and discovery of novel biomarkers provide a roadmap for new strategies for pancreatic cancer risk assessment, early detection, and prevention.

Simple risk score to predict the likelihood of a positive EUS in idiopathic acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We sought to derive a risk score, DORM65, of known variables to predict the likelihood of a positive EUS in patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of 180 patients with IAP was performed across 3 tertiary care centers between January 2018 and December 2021. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was performed to predict a positive EUS. Accuracy of the models was assessed by the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROCC).

RESULTS

The diagnostic yield of EUS was 58.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 51.7-66.1). The DORM65 scores of 5 predictors present before EUS with the best discrimination were a delayed EUS (defined as ≥82 days from the last episode of AP), obesity, not having had a repeated transabdominal US, male sex, and age ≥65 years at the time of EUS. For those at the lowest risk score group, the positive EUS rate was 13.0% compared with 100% in those at the highest risk group (relative risk, 7.67; P < .001). A score of 3 or more had a positive predictive value of 86.0% with a sensitivity of 34.9% and specificity of 91.9%. The model had a high predictive accuracy (AUROCC, .774; 95% CI, .707-.841). Adding 3 additional predictors (no cholecystectomy, no MRCP, and a single episode of AP) did not increase the accuracy significantly (AUROCC, .805; 95% CI, .742-.867).

CONCLUSIONS

DORM65 is easily calculated and accurately predicts a positive EUS in patients with IAP. Further validation is needed.

Evidence-Based Approach to the Surgical Management of Acute Pancreatitis

Background  Acute pancreatitis is a significant challenge to health services. Remarkable progress has been made in the last decade in optimizing its management.

Methods  This review is a comprehensive assessment of 7 guidelines employed in current clinical practice with an appraisal of the underlying evidence, including 15 meta-analyses/systematic reviews, 16 randomized controlled trials, and 31 cohort studies.

Results  Key tenets of early management of acute pancreatitis include severity stratification based on the degree of organ failure and early goal-directed fluid resuscitation. Rigorous determination of etiology reduces the risk of recurrence. Early enteral nutrition and consideration of epidural analgesia have been pioneered in recent years with promising results. Indications for invasive intervention are becoming increasingly refined. The definitive indications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in acute pancreatitis are associated with cholangitis and common bile duct obstruction. The role of open surgical necrosectomy has diminished with the development of a minimally invasive step-up necrosectomy protocol. Increasing use of endoscopic ultrasound–guided intervention in the management of pancreatic necrosis has helped reduce pancreatic fistula rates and hospital stay.

Conclusion  The optimal approach to surgical management of complicated pancreatitis depends on patient physiology and disease anatomy, in addition to the available resources and expertise. This is best achieved with a multidisciplinary approach. This review provides a distillation of the recommendations of clinical guidelines and critical discussion of the evidence that informs them and presents an algorithmic approach to key areas of patient management.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Endoscopic Approach to Recurrent Acute and Chronic Pancreatitis: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update Expert Review is to provide practical, evidence-based guidance to clinicians regarding the role of endoscopy for recurrent acute and chronic pancreatitis.

METHODS

This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide guidance on a topic of clinical importance to the AGA membership, underwent internal peer review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC), and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This review is framed around the 8 best practice advice points agreed upon by the authors, based on the results of randomized controlled trials, observational studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as well expert consensus in this field. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: After an unrevealing initial evaluation, endoscopic ultrasound is the preferred diagnostic test for unexplained acute and recurrent pancreatitis. Magnetic resonance imaging with contrast and cholangiopancreatography is a reasonable complementary or alternative test to endoscopic ultrasound, based on local expertise and availability. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for reducing the frequency of acute pancreatitis episodes in patients with pancreas divisum is controversial, but minor papilla endotherapy may be considered, particularly for those with objective signs of outflow obstruction, such as a dilated dorsal pancreatic duct and/or santorinicele. There is no role for ERCP to treat pain alone in patients with pancreas divisum. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: The role of ERCP for reducing the frequency of pancreatitis episodes in patients with unexplained recurrent acute pancreatitis and standard pancreatic ductal anatomy is controversial and should only be considered after a comprehensive discussion of the uncertain benefits and potentially severe procedure-related adverse events. When pursued, ERCP with biliary sphincterotomy alone may be preferable to dual sphincterotomy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Surgical intervention should be considered over endoscopic therapy for long-term treatment of patients with painful obstructive chronic pancreatitis. Endoscopic intervention is a reasonable alternative to surgery for suboptimal operative candidates or those who favor a less invasive approach, assuming they are clearly informed that the best practice advice primarily favors surgery. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: When ERCP is pursued, small (≤5mm) main pancreatic duct stones can be treated with pancreatography and conventional stone extraction maneuvers. For larger stones, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and/or pancreatoscopy with intraductal lithotripsy may be required. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: When ERCP is pursued, prolonged stent therapy (6-12 months) is effective for treating symptoms and remodeling main pancreatic duct strictures. The preferred approach is to place and sequentially add multiple plastic stents in parallel (upsizing); emerging evidence suggests that fully covered self-expanding metal stents may have a role for this indication, but additional research is necessary. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: ERCP with stent insertion is the preferred treatment for benign biliary stricture due to chronic pancreatitis. FCSEMS placement is favored over multiple plastic stents whenever feasible, given similar efficacy but significantly reduced need for stent exchange procedures during the treatment course. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Celiac plexus block should not be routinely performed for the management of pain due to chronic pancreatitis. The decision to proceed with celiac plexus block in selected patients with debilitating pain in whom other therapeutic measures have failed can be considered on a case-by-case basis, but only after discussion of the unclear outcomes of this intervention and its procedural risks.

Evaluating the Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Idiopathic Acute Pancreatitis: Comparison With Nonidiopathic Acute Pancreatitis Over a 10-Year Period

OBJECTIVE

Up to 30% of acute pancreatitis (AP) cases do not have an established etiology (idiopathic AP [IAP]). We evaluated the characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized IAP patients compared with those with established AP cause (non-IAP).

METHODS

A retrospective study of AP patients admitted to a single center from 2008 to 2018 was performed. Patients were divided into IAP and non-IAP groups. Outcomes included mortality, 30-day and 1-year readmission, length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit admissions, and complications.

RESULTS

Of 878 AP patients, 338 had IAP and 540 non-IAP (234 gallstone, 178 alcohol). Groups had similar demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and pancreatitis severity. The IAP patients had more 1-year readmissions (0.64 vs 0.55, P = 0.006) but similar 30-day readmissions and mortality. Patients with IAP had shorter LOS (4.98 vs 5.99 days, P = 0.01), and fewer intensive care unit admissions (3.25% vs 6.85%, P = 0.03) and extrapancreatic complications (15.4% vs 25.2%, P = 0.001). There was no difference in pain level between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The IAP patients tend to have more readmissions in 1 year, but less severe presentations, shorter LOS, and fewer complications. Readmission rates may be related to lack of defined etiology and treatment to prevent recurrence.

Exploring the Optimal Timing of Endoscopic Ultrasound Performance Post-Acute Idiopathic Pancreatitis

Background: Patients with acute idiopathic pancreatitis (AIP) should undergo further imaging tests such as endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for further investigation. The time interval between an episode of AIP and EUS performance is still controversial. Aims: We aimed to explore the optimal timing for performing EUS and to reveal parameters that might predict longer intervals needed for performing EUS. Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective study at Galilee Medical Center from January 2015 to January 2020, at which point we included all patients who underwent EUS for further investigation of AIP. Results: Overall, we included 50 patients. The average age of all patients was 54.2 ± 17.6 years (range 22–69 years), and more than half of the study cohort were males (58%). Classifying patients as inflamed vs. normal pancreatic tissue on EUS, we found that among patients with normal pancreatic tissue, EUS was performed 44.7 ± 28.3 days from discharge, while for patients with inflamed pancreatic tissue, it was 48.1 ± 22.3 days (p = 0.37) after discharge. Notably, the CT severity index was significantly associated with inflamed pancreatic tissue on EUS, as it was 2.4 ± 0.74 vs. 1.5 ± 1.3 in the normal pancreatic tissue group (p = 0.03). There were no differences in the Bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) scores, and there were no differences in the average American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status (ASA) scores between the two groups. Notably, 26.3% of patients had inflamed pancreatic tissue when performing EUS at 4 weeks, as compared to 16% who had inflamed pancreatic tissue at EUS performed after 6 weeks. Conclusion: Radiological severity score was the only important factor in determining the time interval of performing EUS after an episode of AIP. Intervals greater than six weeks seem to be needed among patients with higher Balthazar scores.

Cholecystectomy reduces the severity of subsequent idiopathic acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common digestive system disease, and its incidence is increasing year by year. Although some clinical studies have indicated that cholecystectomy can reduce the risk of recurrent pancreatitis after acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP), it is not clear whether cholecystectomy would affect the severity of subsequent AP.

METHODS

In this study, we combined computed tomography scoring index (CTSI), bedside index for severity in AP (BISAP), and clinical manifestations grading of AP with propensity score matching (PSM), after correction for baseline confounding factors, to respectively explore the influence of cholecystectomy on the severity of subsequent pancreatitis in 527 AP patients.

RESULTS

The results showed that ABP (231/527) is more common in female patients and elderly patients (P < 0.001). Age, amylase, creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, and aspartate aminotransferase levels of patients with ABP at admission were higher than those of non-biliary pancreatitis (296/527), and the levels of albumin, hematocrit, and blood glucose were lower (P < 0.050). Further, compared with the unresected group (458/527), patients after cholecystectomy (69/527) had less white blood cells and higher level of albumin (P < 0.050). Patients had lower clinical manifestation grade (P = 0.019) and CTSI grade (P < 0.008) after cholecystectomy. After PSM correction, there was no difference in biochemical parameters between the cholecystectomy group and the non-cholecystectomy group, but differences in clinical manifestation grade (P = 0.039) and CTSI grade (P = 0.013) remained. We also found that cholecystectomy reduced the frequency of biliary pancreatitis (30.4% vs. 45.9%, P < 0.050). Finally, we found that cholecystectomy could reduce the severity of subsequent idiopathic AP.

CONCLUSION

Cholecystectomy could reduce the severity of subsequent idiopathic AP and the frequency of biliary pancreatitis.

Drug-induced acute pancreatitis in a bodybuilder: a case report

Background

Unregulated use of a variety of drugs and supplements by bodybuilders and athletes is common and can lead to severe adverse complications. Only a small proportion of acute pancreatitis cases are drug induced, and case reports are essential for identifying potential drug-related risks for pancreatitis. Here we present the first case report published of acute pancreatitis linked to recreational use of anabolic–androgenic steroids, subcutaneous growth hormone, and clenbuterol in a previously healthy male after excluding all other causes of pancreatitis.

Case presentation

A 31-year-old Arab male bodybuilder presented with acute abdominal pain associated with nausea and sharp pain radiating to the back. The patient was not using tobacco or alcohol but was using multiple drugs related to bodybuilding, including anabolic–androgenic steroids, subcutaneous growth hormone, clenbuterol, and multiple vitamin supplements. Laboratory studies revealed a normal white blood cell count, elevated C-reactive protein, minimally elevated aspartate aminotransferase and total bilirubin with normal remaining liver tests, and elevated amylase and lipase. The patient had no hypertriglyceridemia or hypercalcemia, and had had no recent infections, abdominal procedures, trauma, or scorpion exposure. Imaging and laboratory investigations were negative for biliary disease and IgG4 disease. Abdominal computed tomography revealed hepatomegaly and diffuse thickening and edema of the body and tail of the pancreas with peripancreatic fat stranding. An abdominal ultrasound showed slight hepatomegaly with no evidence of cholelithiasis. Genetic testing for hereditary pancreatitis-related mutations was negative. A diagnosis of drug-induced acute pancreatitis was made, and he was treated with aggressive intravenous hydration and pain management. The patient has avoided further use of these drugs and supplements and had no further episodes of pancreatitis during 1 year of follow-up.

Conclusions

This case describes a patient with drug-induced acute pancreatitis after the intake of anabolic–androgenic steroids, subcutaneous growth hormone, and clenbuterol, where all other common causes of acute pancreatitis were excluded. Clinicians should be alert to the possibility of drug-induced acute pancreatitis occurring in bodybuilders and athletes using similar drug combinations.

Hypertriglyceridemia is often under recognized as an aetiologic risk factor for acute pancreatitis: A population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Severe hypertriglyceridemia (HTG) is a well-known risk factor for acute pancreatitis, but updated population-based estimates on incidence of HTG-associated pancreatitis are lacking.

METHODS

We identified all individuals with severe HTG (triglyceride level >10 mmol/L [886 mg/dL]) in a population-based sample from 2008 to 2019 and linked these with Danish nationwide health-registers to identify patients with acute pancreatitis. Pancreatitis cases were subsequently confirmed by a detailed medical chart review. Crude and standardized incidence rates were estimated and studied in relation to age, gender and time-period. In addition, aetiological classification designated during index hospitalization, severity and follow-up of individuals with HTG-associated pancreatitis were studied.

RESULTS

Among 2146 individuals with severe HTG during the observation period, 75 were diagnosed with acute pancreatitis (3.5%). The mean incidence rate of HTG-associated pancreatitis was 1.4 (95% CI, 1.1-1.7) per 100,000 person years for the total population, for women it was 0.7 (95% CI, 0.5-1.1) and for men 2.0 (95% CI, 1.5-2.6) per 100,000 person-years. The mean incidence rate increased from 0.7 to 1.7 per 100,000 person-years from 2008 to 2019 (p_trend = 0.01). The highest incidence rate of HTG-associated pancreatitis was observed for men in the age group 50-59 years. An elevated triglyceride level was recognized as aetiological risk factor in 35% of patients during index hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Only a fraction of patients with severe HTG are hospitalized for acute pancreatitis, but the incidence is increasing. In more than half of patients elevated triglycerides is not recognized as a risk factor for acute pancreatitis during index hospitalization.

Endoscopic ultrasonography can detect a cause in the majority of patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) has a 25 % pancreatitis recurrence rate. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) may diagnose treatable causes of IAP and hence prevent recurrence. The goal of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to determine the diagnostic yield of EUS and its impact on recurrence.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for English studies on EUS in adults with IAP. The primary outcome was diagnostic yield. Secondary outcomes included recurrence. Methodological quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 score. Meta-analysis was performed to calculate the pooled diagnostic yield and risk ratio with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model with inverse variance method.

RESULTS

22 studies were included, with 1490 IAP patients who underwent EUS. Overall diagnostic yield was 59 % (874 /1490; 95 %CI 52 % - 66 %). The most common etiologies were biliary (429 /1490; 30 %, 95 %CI 21 % - 41 %) and chronic pancreatitis (271 /1490; 12 %, 95 %CI 8 % - 19 %). In 2 % of patients, neoplasms were detected (45 /1490; 95 %CI 1 % - 4 %). There was no difference in yield between patients with or without recurrent IAP before EUS (risk ratio 0.89, 95 %CI 0.71 - 1.11).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS is able to identify a potential etiology in the majority of patients with IAP, detecting mostly biliary origin or chronic pancreatitis, but also neoplasms in 2 % of patients. EUS may be associated with a reduction of recurrence rate. Future studies should include complete diagnostic work-up and preferably include patients with a first episode of IAP only.

Insufficient etiological workup of COVID-19-associated acute pancreatitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, mostly causing respiratory symptoms, is also known to affect the gastrointestinal tract. Several case reports hypothesize that SARS-CoV-2 could be an etiological factor in acute pancreatitis (AP).

AIM

To assess all the available evidence in the literature relating to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and AP.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the available literature on the topic. The systematic search was conducted on 15 May 2020 on MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science and Scopus with a search key using the terms “amylase,” “lipase,” “pancr*,” “COVID-19” and synonyms. Due to the low quality and poor comparability of the studies, a meta-analysis was not performed.

RESULTS

Six case reports and two retrospective cohorts were included, containing data on eleven COVID-19 patients with AP. Five patients had AP according to the Atlanta classification. Other publications did not provide sufficient information on the diagnostic criteria. Most cases were considered SARS-CoV-2-induced, while several established etiological factors were not investigated. We were able to identify other possible causes in most of them.

CONCLUSION

We strongly highlight the need for adherence to the guidelines during a diagnostic and etiological workup, which could alter therapy.

Progression to recurrent acute pancreatitis after a first attack of acute pancreatitis in adults

PURPOSE

Patients with a first attack of acute pancreatitis (AP) can develop recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP). Hence, this study aimed to investigate the clinical features of the disease and the risk factors for RAP.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 522 patients from Jan 1 to Dec 31, 2006. All patients with AP were followed for 36 months. The primary end point was the rate of RAP. The secondary end points were the risk factors that were evaluated by Cox regression analysis. The cumulative risk of RAP was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

56 of the 522 patients (10.7%) developed RAP. Among those RAP patients, 37 (7.1%) experienced one relapse, 10 (1.9%) experienced two relapses, and 9 (1.7%) experienced three or more relapses. Univariate analysis indicated that age (p = 0.016), male sex, etiology of AP (p = 0.001), local complications (p = 0.001) and Length of stay (LOS) (p = 0.007) were associated with RAP. Multivariate analysis with the Cox proportional hazards model showed that male sex (HR = 2.486, 95% CI, 0.169-0.960, p = 0.04), HTG-associated etiology (HR = 5.690, 95% CI, 2.138-15.146, p = 0.001), alcohol-associated etiology (HR = 5.867, 95% CI, 1.446-23.803, p = 0.013) and current local complications at index admission (HR = 8.917, 95% CI, 3.650-21.789, p = 0.001) were significant independent risk factors for RAP.

CONCLUSIONS

A first attack of AP led to RAP in 10.7% of patients within 3 years. Male sex was significantly associated with RAP. The etiologies of alcohol and HTG and local complications were the strongest risk factors for recurrent disease. Patients with these characteristics should be given special attention and followed-up closely.

Role of endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnostic work-up of idiopathic acute pancreatitis (PICUS): study protocol for a nationwide prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) remains a dilemma for physicians as it is uncertain whether patients with IAP may actually have an occult aetiology. It is unclear to what extent additional diagnostic modalities such as endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) are warranted after a first episode of IAP in order to uncover this aetiology. Failure to timely determine treatable aetiologies delays appropriate treatment and might subsequently cause recurrence of acute pancreatitis. Therefore, the aim of the Pancreatitis of Idiopathic origin: Clinical added value of endoscopic UltraSonography (PICUS) Study is to determine the value of routine EUS in determining the aetiology of pancreatitis in patients with a first episode of IAP.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

PICUS is designed as a multicentre prospective cohort study of 106 patients with a first episode of IAP after complete standard diagnostic work-up, in whom a diagnostic EUS will be performed. Standard diagnostic work-up will include a complete personal and family history, laboratory tests including serum alanine aminotransferase, calcium and triglyceride levels and imaging by transabdominal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography after clinical recovery from the acute pancreatitis episode. The primary outcome measure is detection of aetiology by EUS. Secondary outcome measures include pancreatitis recurrence rate, severity of recurrent pancreatitis, readmission, additional interventions, complications, length of hospital stay, quality of life, mortality and costs, during a follow-up period of 12 months.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

PICUS is conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki and Guideline for Good Clinical Practice. Five medical ethics review committees assessed PICUS (Medical Ethics Review Committee of Academic Medical Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Radboud University Medical Center, Erasmus Medical Center and Maastricht University Medical Center). The results will be submitted for publication in an international peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Netherlands Trial Registry (NL7066). Prospectively registered.