Biliary stenting with or without sphincterotomy for malignant biliary obstruction: A meta-analysis

AIM: To investigate the benefits of endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) before stent placement by meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Science Citation Index databases up to March 2014 were searched. The primary outcome was incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) and successful stent insertion rate. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of post-ERCP bleeding, stent migration and occlusion. The free software Review Manager was used to perform the meta-analysis.RESULTS: Three studies (n = 338 patients, 170 in the EST group and 168 in the non-EST group) were included. All three studies described a comparison of baseline patient characteristics and showed that there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Three RCTs, including 338 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. Most of the analyzed outcomes were similar between the groups. Although EST reduced the incidence of PEP, it also led to a higher incidence of post-ERCP bleeding (OR = 0.34, 95%CI: 0.12-0.93, P = 0.04; OR = 9.70, 95%CI: 1.21-77.75, P = 0.03, respectively).CONCLUSION: EST before stent placement may be useful in reducing the incidence of PEP. However, EST-related complications, such as bleeding and perforation, may offset this effect.     

Incidence and risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis in pancreas divisum patients without chronic pancreatitis

Abstract

Aims: The studies on post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) in pancreas divisum (PD) patients without chronic pancreatitis (CP) are rare. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the incidence of PEP in PD patients without CP and the risk and protective factors for PEP.

Methods: Consecutive patients with symptomatic PD that underwent ERCP from January 2005 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into PD without CP group and CP group. The basic information and medical records of patients were collected. The risk and protective factors for PEP in PD patients without CP were analyzed by univariate logistic analysis.

Results: A total of 89 ERCP procedures were performed in 51 PD patients without CP, and 249 procedures in 136 patients with CP. The incidence of PEP was significantly higher in PD patients without CP than those with CP (15.7% vs. 5.6%, p?=?.005). Female gender were independent risk factors for PEP, while dorsal duct stent placement was a protective factor.

Conclusion: CP may be a protective factor against PEP in PD patients. Female was a risk factor for PEP in PD patients and dorsal duct stent placement was a preventive factor that reduced the incidence of PEP in PD patients without CP.     

Placement of prophylactic pancreatic stents to prevent post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in high-risk patients: A meta-analysis

AIM:To assess the effectiveness of pancreatic stents for preventing pancreatitis in high-risk patients after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP).METHODS:PubMed,Embase,Science Citation Index,and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched to identify relevant trials published in English.Inclu-sion and exclusion criteria were used to screen for suitable studies.Two reviewers independently judged the study eligibility while screening the citations.The methodological quality of the included trials was assessed using the Jadad scoring system.All results were expressed as OR and 95%CI.Data were analyzed using Stata12.0 software.RESULTS:Ten eligible randomized controlled trials were selected,including 1176 patients.A fixed-effects model in meta-analysis supported that pancreatic duct stents significantly decreased the incidence of postERCP pancreatitis(PEP)in high-risk patients(OR=0.25;95%CI:0.17-0.38;P<0.001).Pancreatic stents also alleviated the severity of PEP(mild pancreatitis after ERCP:OR=0.33;95%CI:0.21-0.54;P<0.001;moderate pancreatitis after ERCP:OR=0.30;95%CI:0.13-0.67;P=0.004).The result of severe pancreatitis after ERCP was handled more rigorously(OR=0.24;95%CI:0.05-1.16;P=0.077).Serum amylase levels were not different between patients with pancreatic stents and control patients(OR=1.08;95%CI:0.82-1.41;P=0.586).CONCLUSION:Placement of prophylactic pancreatic stents may lower the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients and alleviate the severity of this condition.     

Aggressive hydration with lactated ringer solution in prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:Acute pancreatitis is the most common complication of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). There was no conclusion on the prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis (PEP) by Lactated Ringer Solution.Aim:The purpose of this meta analyses is to determine whether aggressive hydration with Lactated Ringer Solution reduced the incidence of PEP.Methods:We retrieved randomized clinical trials comparing the preventive effects of aggressive hydration with Lactated Ringer Solution and standard hydration on PEP from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, the Web of Science, Clinical Trial.gov, Scopus database, CNKI, CQVIP and WanFang Data. Primary outcome was incidence of PEP. Secondary outcomes included incidence of hyperamylasemia, abdominal pain and adverse events.Results:Ten randomized controlled trials with 2200 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that compared with standard hydration, aggressive hydration reduced the incidence of PEP (odds ratio [OR], 0.40; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.26–0.63; P < .0001). Compared with standard hydration, aggressive hydration also reduced the incidence of hyperamylasemia after ERCP (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.38–0.60; P < .0001). There was significant difference between aggressive hydration and standard hydration in the incidence of abdominal pain (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.11–0.73; P = .008). There was no difference in adverse events between aggressive hydration and standard hydration (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.21–4.13; P = .93). Sensitivity analyses showed that neither alternative effect measures nor statistical models regarding heterogeneity affected the conclusions of this meta-analysis.Conclusion:Aggressive hydration with Lactated Ringer Solution during perioperative period of ERCP can prevent PEP.     

Can wire‐guided cannulation reduce the risk of post‐endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis? A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background and Aim:  The use of wire-guided cannulation (WGC) for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is controversial. The aim of the present study was to assess the overall effect of WGC for PEP compared with conventional contrast-assisted cannulation by carrying out a meta-analysis of all available randomized controlled trials (RCT).
Methods:  Electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library and the Science Citation Index, were searched to retrieve relevant trials. In addition, meeting abstracts and the reference lists of retrieved articles were reviewed for further relevant studies. Outcome measures were the incidence of PEP.
Results:  Four RCT, enrolling a total of 1413 patients, were included. The meta-analysis failed to indicate a significant association between the use of WGC and the reduction of PEP (RR 0.34; 95% CI: 0.10–1.17; P  = 0.09). Subgroup analysis including trials without cross-over design showed a significant benefit with the use of WGC in reducing PEP (RR 0.20; 95% CI: 0.09–0.40; P  < 0.00001) and trials without precut used failed to indicate a significant differences between the two group (RR 0.38; 95% CI: 0.01–11.73; P  = 0.58).
Conclusions:  This meta-analysis showed only a non-significant reduction in the rate of PEP with the use of WGC. Further well-designed RCT are required to confirm the effect of WGC, especially in patients who were easier to cannulate.     

Need for pancreatic stenting after sphincterotomy in patients with difficult cannulation

AIM: To investigate the need for pancreatic stenting after endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in patients with difficult biliary cannulation.METHODS: Between April 2008 and August 2013, 2136 patients underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-related procedures. Among them, 55 patients with difficult biliary cannulation who underwent EST after bile duct cannulation using the pancreatic duct guidewire placement method (P-GW) were divided into two groups: a stent group (n = 24; pancreatic stent placed) and a no-stent group (n = 31; no pancreatic stenting). We retrospectively compared the two groups to examine the need for pancreatic stenting to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) in patients undergoing EST after biliary cannulation by P-GW.RESULTS: No differences in patient characteristics or endoscopic procedures were observed between the two groups. The incidence of PEP was 4.2% (1/24) and 29.0% (9/31) in the Stent and no-stent groups, respectively, with the no-stent group having a significantly higher incidence (P = 0.031). The PEP severity was mild for all the patients in the stent group. In contrast, 8 had mild PEP and 1 had moderate PEP in the no-stent group. The mean serum amylase levels (means ± SD) 3 h after ERCP (183.1 ± 136.7 vs 463.6 ± 510.4 IU/L, P = 0.006) and on the day after ERCP (209.5 ± 208.7 vs 684.4 ± 759.3 IU/L, P = 0.002) were significantly higher in the no-stent group. A multivariate analysis identified the absence of pancreatic stenting (P = 0.045; odds ratio, 9.7; 95%CI: 1.1-90) as a significant risk factor for PEP.CONCLUSION: In patients with difficult cannulation in whom the bile duct is cannulated using P-GW, a pancreatic stent should be placed even if EST has been performed.     

Effect of precut sphincterotomy on post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis:A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM:To conduct a systemic review and meta-analysis to investigate the role of early precut technique.Multiple randomized controlled trails(RCTs)have reported conflicting results of the early precut sphincterotomy.METHODS:MEDLINE/PubMed,EMBASE,Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews,and recent abstracts from major conference proceedings were searched(June 2013).Randomized and non-randomized studies comparing early precut technique with prolonged standard methods were included.Pooled estimates of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP)pancreatitis(PEP),cannulation and adverse events were analyzed by using odds ratio(OR).Random and fixed effects models were used as appropriate.Publication bias was assessed by funnel plots.Heterogeneity among studies was assessed by calculating I2 measure of inconsistency.RESULTS:Seven randomized and seven non-randomized trials met inclusion criteria.Meta-analysis of RCTs showed a decrease trend for PEP with early precut sphincterotomy but was not statistically significant(OR=0.58;95%CI:0.32-1.05;P=0.07).No heterogeneity was noted among the studies with I2 of 0%.CONCLUSION:Early precut technique for common bile duct cannulation decreases the trend of post-ERCP pancreatitis.     

Effectiveness of nonsteroidal anti-in?ammatory 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.     

Prophylactic Effect of Somatostatin in Preventing Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Background/Aims:Somatostatin is regarded as a prophylactic agent on post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP), but studies are still controversial.Results:Eleven randomized controlled trials (RCTs), enrolling a total of 2869 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. After data were pooled from somatostatin trials, PEP occurred in 8.36% of controls versus 5.62% of the treated group, with a slight significance [relative risk (RR) =0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35–0.98, P = 0.04]. The funnel plot showed no asymmetry with a negative slope (P = 0.108). The meta-analysis produced negative results for short-term infusion of somatostatin (RR = 1.40, 95% CI 0.93–2.12, P = 0.11), whereas a bolus or long-term injection of the drug proved effective (RR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.13–0.47, P < 0.0001; RR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.27–0.71, P = 0.0008). Postprocedure hyperamylasemia and pain was also observed in the meta-analysis, the pooled RR was significant for reduced risk of postprocedure hyperamylasemia (RR = 0.72, 95%CI 0.63 to 0.81, P < 0.00001), but not for the pain (RR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.08, P = 0.10).Conclusion:The current meta-analysis on the prophylactic use of somatostatin in patients undergoing ERCP documents a lack of benefit when given as short-term infusion, but showed an advantage of a single bolus or long-term injection. The beneficial effect of somatostatin, in reducing the incidence of postprocedural hyperamylasemia seems of marginal clinical significance. However, more new confirmatory data are needed to settle residual doubts.     

Randomized controlled trial of pancreatic stenting to prevent pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

AIM:To determine the effectiveness of pancreatic duct(PD) stent placement for the prevention of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) in high risk patients.METHODS:Authors conducted a single-blind,randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a pancreatic spontaneous dislodgement stent against post-ERCP pancreatitis,including rates of spontaneous dislodgement and complications.Authors defined high risk patients as having any of the following:sphincter of Oddi dysfunction,difficult cannulation,prior history of post-ERCP pancreatitis,pre-cut sphincterotomy,pancreatic ductal biopsy,pancreatic sphincterotomy,intraductal ultrasonography,or a procedure time of more than 30 min.Patients were randomized to a stent group(n = 60) or to a non-stent group(n = 60).An abdominal radiograph was obtained daily to assessspontaneous stent dislodgement.Post-ERCP pancreatitis was diagnosed according to consensus criteria.RESULTS:The mean age(± standard deviation) was 67.4 ± 13.8 years and the male:female ratio was 68:52.In the stent group,the mean age was 66 ± 13 years and the male:female ratio was 33:27,and in the non-stent group,the mean age was 68 ± 14 years and the male:female ratio was 35:25.There were no significant differences between groups with respect to age,gender,final diagnosis,or type of endoscopic intervention.The frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis in PD stent and non-stent groups was 1.7%(1/60) and 13.3%(8/60),respectively.The severity of pancreatitis was mild in all cases.The frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis in the stent group was significantly lower than in the non-stent group(P = 0.032,Fisher's exact test).The rate of hyperamylasemia were 30%(18/60) and 38.3%(23 of 60) in the stent and non-stent groups,respectively(P = 0.05,χ2 test).The placement of a PD stent was successful in all 60 patients.The rate of spontaneous dislodgement by the third day was 96.7%(58/60),and the median(range) time to dislodgement was 2.1(2-3) d.The rates of stent migration,hemorrhage,perforation,infection(cholangitis or cholecystitis) or other complicationss were 0%(0/60),0%(0/60),0%(0/60),0%(0/60),0%(0/60),respectively,in the stent group.Univariate analysis revealed no significant differences in high risk factors between the two groups.The pancreatic spontaneous dislodgement stent safely prevented post-ERCP pancreatitis in high risk patients.CONCLUSION:Pancreatic stent placement is a safe and effective technique to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis.Therefore authors recommend pancreatic stent placement after ERCP in high risk patients.     

Risk factors for the development of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in patients with asymptomatic common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND Previous studies have revealed that patients with asymptomatic common bile duct(CBD) stones are at a high risk of developing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) pancreatitis(PEP). However, no studies to date have addressed the risk factors for PEP in patients with asymptomatic CBD stones.AIM To examine the risk factors for PEP in patients with asymptomatic CBD stones.METHODS Using medical records of three institutions in Japan for 6 years, we identified a total of 1135 patients with choledocholithiasis including 967 symptomatic patients and 168 asymptomatic patients with native papilla who underwent therapeutic ERCP. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to examine the risk factors for PEP in the 168 patients with asymptomatic CBD stones.RESULTS The overall incidence rate of PEP in all the patients with during study period was4.7%(53/1135). Of the 168 patients with asymptomatic CBD stones, 24(14.3%)developed PEP. In univariate analysis, precut sphincterotomy(P = 0.009) and biliary balloon sphincter dilation(P = 0.043) were significant risk factors for PEP.In multivariate analysis, precut sphincterotomy(P = 0.002, 95%CI: 2.2-27.8, odds ratio = 7.7), biliary balloon sphincter dilation(P = 0.015, 95%CI: 1.4-17.3, odds ratio = 4.9), and trainee endoscopists(P = 0.048, 95%CI: 1.01-8.1, odds ratio = 2.9)were significant risk factors for PEP.CONCLUSION ERCP for asymptomatic CBD stones should be performed by experienced endoscopists. When performing precut sphincterotomy or biliary balloon sphincter dilation in patients with asymptomatic CBD stones, the placement of a prophylactic pancreatic stent is strongly recommended to prevent PEP.     

Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement and post-ERCP pancreatitis: an updated meta-analysis

Background and aim

Pancreatitis is one of the most frequent post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) complications. Previous meta-analyses show that prophylactic pancreatic stent (PS) placement after ERCP is beneficial for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). However, the results of these meta-analyses are controversial due to the limited sample size of the eligible studies, in which six additional randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are not included. Our aim is, therefore, to update the current meta-analyses regarding PS placement for prevention of PEP.

Methods

We conducted a meta-analysis to identify RCTs comparing PS placement and the subsequent incidence of PEP. The primary outcome was the incidence of PEP.

Results

Fourteen studies were enrolled in this meta-analysis. Of the 1,541 patients, 760 patients received a PS and 781 patients were allocated to the control group. PS placement was associated with a statistically significant reduction of PEP [relative risk (RR) 0.39; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.29–0.53; P < 0.001]. Subgroup analysis stratified according to the severity of PEP showed that a PS was beneficial in patients with mild to moderate PEP (RR 0.45; 95 % CI 0.32–0.62; P < 0.001) and in patients with severe PEP (RR 0.26; 95 %CI 0.09–0.76; P = 0.01). In addition, subgroup analysis performed according to patient selection demonstrated that PS placement was effective for both high-risk and mixed case groups.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis showed that PS placement prevented PEP after ERCP as compared with no PS placement. We therefore recommend PS placement after ERCP for the prevention of PEP.     

Network meta-analysis of prophylactic pancreatic stents and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the prevention of moderate-to-severe post-ERCP pancreatitis

BackgroundThere is an ongoing debate that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) or prophylactic pancreatic stents (PPS) are more beneficial in preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). In our present network meta-analysis, we aimed to compare PPSs to rectal NSAIDs in the prevention of moderate and severe PEP in average- and high-risk patients.MethodsWe performed a systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCT) from MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Central databases. RCTs using prophylactic rectal NSAIDs or PPSs in patients subjected to ERCP at average- and high-risk population were included. The main outcome was moderate and severe PEP defined by the Cotton criteria. Pairwise Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed, and interventions were ranked based on surface under cumulative ranking (SUCRA) values.ResultsSeven NSAID RCTs (2593 patients), and 2 PPS RCTs (265 patients) in the average-risk, while 5 NSAID RCTs (1703 patients), and 8 PPS RCTs (974 patients) in the high-risk group were included in the final analysis. Compared to placebo, only PPS placement reduced the risk of moderate and severe PEP in both patient groups (average-risk: RR = 0.07, 95% CI [0.002–0.58], high-risk: RR = 0.20, 95% CI [0.051–0.56]) significantly. Rectal NSAID also reduced the risk, but this effect was not significant (average-risk: RR = 0.58, 95% CI [0.22–1.3], high-risk: RR = 0.58, 95% CI [0.18–2.3]). Based on SUCRA, PPS placement was ranked as the best preventive method.ConclusionProphylactic pancreatic stent placement but not rectal NSAID seems to prevent moderate-to-severe PEP better both, in average- and high-risk patients.     

Endoscopic prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) pancreatitis(PEP) is not an uncommon adverse event but may be an avoidable complication. Although pancreatitis of severe grade is reported in 0.1%-0.5% of ERCP patients, a serious clinical course may be lethal. For prevention of severe PEP, patient risk stratification, appropriate selection of patients using noninvasive diagnostic imaging methods such as magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography or endoscopic ultrasonography(EUS), and avoidance of unnecessary invasive procedures, are important measures to be taken before any procedure. Pharmacological prevention is also commonly attempted but is usually ineffective. No ideal agent has not yet been found and the available data conflict. Currently, rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are used to prevent PEP in high-risk patients, but additional studies using larger numbers of subjects are necessary to confirm any prophylactic effect. In this review, we focus on endoscopic procedures seeking to prevent or decrease the severity of PEP. Among various cannulation methods, wire-guided cannulation,precut fistulotomy,and transpancreatic septostomy are reviewed.Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement,which is the best-known prophylactic method,is reviewed with reference to the ideal stent type,adequate duration of stent placement,and stentrelated complications.Finally,we comment on other treatment alternatives,and make the point that further advances in EUS-guided techniques may afford useful PEP prophylaxis.     

Nitroglycerin in the Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Meta-Analysis

The objective of this research paper is to evaluate the effect of prophylactic nitroglycerin in the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) by performing a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, and the Science Citation Index, were searched to retrieve relevant trials. Outcome measures were the incidence of PEP. Four RCTs, enrolling a total of 856 patients, were included. Meta-analysis of these trials indicated a significant association between the use of nitroglycerin and the reduction of PEP (RR 0.60; 95%CI: 0.39–0.92; P = 0.02). However, subsequent sensitive analysis failed to confirm that nitroglycerin was statistically superior to a placebo in reducing PEP (RR 0.68; 95%CI: 0.41–1.11; P = 0.12). Based on the limitations in this meta-analysis, prophylactic use of nitroglycerine for all patients who underwent ERCP is not recommended. Further clinical trials are required to confirm the effect of nitroglycerin in the prevention of PEP.     

Effect of somatostatin on prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To perform a meta-analysis of all available studies on the effect of prophylactic somatostatin administration on prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) and post-ERCP hyperamylasemia (PEHA).

Role of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis:a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND:The role of prophylactic nonsteroidal anti- inflammatory drugs(NSAIDs)for reduction of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)is debated.We performed a meta-analysis of all published randomized controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy of NSAIDs in the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis. DATA SOURCES:Searches were conducted in the databases PubMed,EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. Six randomized clinical trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria and addressed...     

Antioxidant drugs to prevent post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: What does evidence suggest?

AIM: To determine whether or not the use of antioxidant supplementation aids in the prevention of post- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis.METHODS: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was made to evaluate the preventive effect of prophylactic antioxidant supplementation in post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP). The inclusion criteria included: acute post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis in adults; randomized clinical trials with the use of any antioxidant as an intervention compared with placebo, to reduce PEP. The outcome measure was the incidence and severity of PEP. Twelve RCTs involving 3110 patients since 1999 were included. The antioxidants used were selenite, β-carotene, and pentoxifylline (each one in one trial), N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in three trials, and allopurinol in six trials. The group of patients treated with NAC received different doses; either oral or intravenous, and allopurinol-treated patients received five different oral doses in two different administration periods. The results are expressed with raw numbers, proportions, as well as mean and standard deviations. The incidence of pancreatitis between groups was analyzed with Pearson’s χ² test or Fisher’s exact test (F). The main outcome is expressed as relative risks and 95%CI.RESULTS: The incidence of pancreatitis in all antioxidant treatment groups was 8.6%, whereas it was 9.7% in the control group. The antioxidants used were selenite, β-carotene, and pentoxifylline (each one in one trial), NAC in three trials, and allopurinol in six trials. In allopurinol trials, three different dosifications were used; two trials reported a low dosage (of less than 400 mg), two trials reported a moderate dose (600 mg) and the remaining two employed higher doses (more than 900 mg). Supplementation was not associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of PEP [relative risk (RR) = 0.93; 95%CI: 0.82-1.06; P = 0.28]. In addition, the incidences of PEP in patients treated with allopurinol and those treated with other antioxidants were similar to that observed in patients who received the placebo (RR for trials with allopurinol, 0.92; 95%CI: 0.78-1.08; P = 0.31) and, with the use of other antioxidants, the incidence of PEP was 8.9%, whereas it was 9.7% in the control group (RR = 0.95; 95%CI: 0.77-1.18; P = 0.19).CONCLUSION: Antioxidant supplementation shows no beneficial effect on the incidence of PEP. There is a lack of robust trials to support the use of antioxidants for prevention.     

EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF PROPHYLACTIC PANCREATIC DUCT STENT (PIT‐STENT) PLACEMENT IN PATIENTS AT HIGH RISK OF POST‐ERCP PANCREATITIS

Background: The usefulness of prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for preventing post‐endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis has been reported. We developed a new pancreatic duct stent, which was a 5 Fr, 4 cm‐long stent with a single duodenal pigtail (Pit‐stent). Patients and Methods: Pancreatic duct stenting using a Pit‐stent was attempted in 76 patients (40 men, 36 women; mean age, 65 years; age range, 42–91 years) at high risk of post‐ERCP pancreatitis. The frequency of post‐ERCP pancreatitis and spontaneous passage of the stent were investigated. Results: Pancreatic duct stent placement was successfully performed in 93% of the patients. One patient developed mild pancreatitis after ERCP (1.4%). Spontaneous passage of the stent was observed in 92%. There were no other complications or procedure‐related deaths in this group. Conclusions: Pancreatic duct stent insertion may reduce the incidence of post‐ERCP pancreatitis in patients at high risk of post‐ERCP pancreatitis. Spontaneous migration of a pancreatic stent that contributes to a lessening of the need for additional ERCP can be expected with the use of a Pit‐stent.     

Reducing the risk of post‐endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

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