Prospective Validation of a Prediction Model for the Diagnosis of Acute Pancreatitis.

Importance: While most patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) fulfill diagnostic criteria with characteristic abdominal pain and serum lipase levels of at least 3 times the upper limit of normal (reference range) at presentation, early imaging is often used for confirmation. A prior prediction model and corresponding point-based score were developed using nonimaging parameters to diagnose AP in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). Objective: To evaluate the performance of the prediction model to diagnose AP in a prospective patient cohort. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective diagnostic study included consecutive adult patients presenting to the ED between January 1, 2020, and March 9, 2021, at 2 large academic medical centers in the northeastern US with serum lipase levels at least 3 times the upper limit of normal. Patients transferred from outside institutions or with malignant disease and established intra-abdominal metastases, acute trauma, or altered mentation were excluded. Data were analyzed from October 15 to October 23, 2023. Exposures: Participants were assigned scores for initial serum lipase level, number of prior AP episodes, prior cholelithiasis, abdominal surgery within 2 months, presence of epigastric pain, pain of worsening severity, duration from pain onset to presentation, and pain level at ED presentation. Main Outcome and Measures: A final diagnosis of AP, established by expert review of hospitalization records. Results: Prospective scores in 349 participants (mean [SD] age, 53.0 [18.8] years; 184 women [52.7%]; 66 Black [18.9%]; 199 White [57.0%]) demonstrated an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.91. A score of at least 6 points achieved highest accuracy (F score, 82.0), corresponding to a sensitivity of 81.5%, specificity of 85.9%, positive predictive value of 82.6%, and negative predictive value of 85.1% for AP diagnosis. Early computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging was performed more often in participants predicted to have AP (116 of 155 [74.8%] with a score ≥6 vs 111 of 194 [57.2%] with a score <6; P < .001). Early imaging revealed an alternative diagnosis in 8 of 116 participants (6.9%) with scores of at least 6 points, 1 of 93 (1.1%) with scores of at least 7 points, and 1 of 73 (1.4%) with scores of at least 8 points. Conclusions and Relevance: In this multicenter diagnostic study, the prediction model demonstrated excellent AP diagnostic accuracy. Its application may be used to avoid unnecessary confirmatory imaging.

A Shift Toward Early Oral Feeding in Acute Pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVES: The 2018 American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) guidelines strongly recommended early oral feeding as tolerated in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). We compare early oral feeding rates in AP patients hospitalized in the periods before (2013-2016, Period A) and after (2019-2020, Period B) publication of the AGA guidelines, hypothesizing increased adherence in Period B. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of AP patients presenting to the emergency department during each period. Early oral feeding was defined as diet initiation within the first 48 hours of presentation. RESULTS: The cohort included 276 AP cases in period A and 104 in period B. A higher percentage of patients were offered early oral feeding during period B as compared to period A (70.2% vs. 43.5%). Similarly, more patients in period B were started on solid diet as compared to period A (34.6% vs. 20.3%). On multivariable regression analysis, the independent predictors of delayed oral feeding included early opioid analgesics use (OR 0.37), presence of pancreatic necrosis (OR 0.14), and organ failure (OR 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: More AP patients were initiated on early oral feeding in the period following the publication of the AGA guidelines. Opioid analgesics use, pancreatic necrosis, and organ failure were associated with delayed oral feeding.

Pancreatitis and Hyperlipasemia in the Setting of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced pancreatic injury (ICI-PI) ranges from asymptomatic hyperlipasemia to symptomatic acute pancreatitis (AP). The proportion of pancreatic injury while receiving ICIs that is attributable to therapy remains unclear. We evaluated the etiology of hyperlipasemia in patients receiving ICIs, and the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of ICI-PI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We assessed 6,450 consecutive adult patients with cancer who received ICI doses between 2011 and 2019, 364 of whom had at least 1 instance of elevated serum lipase after ICI initiation and were included in our trial. Primary outcomes were the development of ICI-PI and ICI-induced acute pancreatitis (ICI-AP). RESULTS: Pancreatic injury was attributable to ICI use in 105 individuals (29% of those with hyperlipasemia; 1.6% overall). Of 27 patients with ICI-AP, 4 (15%) presented asymptomatically with hyperlipasemia and pancreatic inflammation on imaging. In multivariable regression, the presence of other immune-related adverse events was positively associated with ICI-AP (≥2 events: odds ratio, 5.43; 95% CI, 1.47-26.03). Compared with patients with other ICI-PI, those with ICI-AP more frequently required steroids (74% vs 4%), intravenous fluids (85% vs 10%), hospitalization (89% vs 9%), and permanent cessation of ICIs due to pancreatic injury (70% vs 3%), and less frequently continued therapy uninterrupted (0% vs 40%) (P<.01 for all). Of the 105 patients, 3 (3%) developed exocrine insufficiency and 9 (9%) developed endocrine insufficiency, which were concentrated among those with ICI-AP. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of occurrences of pancreatitis and hyperlipasemia in patients receiving ICIs are due to these therapies, supporting NCCN recommendations to exclude alternative etiologies. Because a notable proportion of patients with ICI-AP were asymptomatic but warranted treatment per current guidelines, abdominal imaging is diagnostically valuable in those with significant hyperlipasemia. Patients with ICI-AP should be monitored for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. Many with hyperlipasemia who do not meet the criteria for AP can continue therapy uninterrupted.

Drug-induced acute pancreatitis due to medications used for inflammatory bowel disease: A VigiBase pharmacovigilance database study.

BACKGROUND: Nearly all medications used for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have been reported as causes of acute pancreatitis (AP), with the thiopurines being among the most frequently described. However, with the development of newer medications, thiopurine monotherapy has largely been replaced by newer immunosuppressive drugs. There are few data on the association between AP and biologic/small molecule agents. METHODS: VigiBase, the World Health Organization's Global Individual Case Safety Report database, was used to assess the association between AP and common IBD medications. A case/non-case disproportionality analysis was performed and disproportionality signals were reported as a reporting odds ratio (ROR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 4,223 AP episodes were identified for common IBD medications. Azathioprine (ROR 19.18, 95% CI 18.21-20.20), 6-mercaptopurine (ROR 13.30, 95% CI 11.73-15.07), and 5-aminosalicylic acid (ROR 17.44, 95% CI 16.24-18.72) all had strong associations with AP, while the biologic/small molecule agents showed weaker or no disproportionality. The association with AP was much higher for thiopurines when used for Crohn's disease (ROR 34.61, 95% CI 30.95-38.70) compared to ulcerative colitis (ROR 8.94, 95% CI 7.47-10.71) or rheumatologic conditions (ROR 18.87, 95% CI 14.72-24.19). CONCLUSIONS: We report the largest real-world database study investigating the association between common IBD medications and AP. Among commonly used IBD medications including biologic/small molecule agents, only thiopurines and 5-aminosalicylic acid are strongly associated with AP. The association between thiopurines and AP is much stronger when the drug is used for Crohn's disease compared to ulcerative colitis and rheumatologic conditions.

Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) Predicts Adverse Outcomes Among Hospitalized Patients with Chronic Pancreatitis.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of frailty among patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP) and its impact on clinical outcomes is unclear. We report the impact of frailty on mortality, readmission rates, and healthcare utilization among patients with chronic pancreatitis in the United States. METHODS: We extracted data on patients hospitalized with a primary or secondary diagnosis of CP from the Nationwide Readmissions Database 2019. We applied a previously validated hospital frailty risk scoring system to classify CP patients into frail and non-frail on index hospitalization and compared the characteristics of frail and non-frail patients. We studied the impact of frailty on mortality, readmission, and healthcare utilization. RESULTS: Of 56,072 patients with CP, 40.78% of patients were classified as frail. Frail patients experienced a higher rate of unplanned and preventable hospitalizations. Almost two-thirds of frail patients were younger than 65, and one-third had no or only single comorbidity. On multivariate analysis, frailty was independently associated with two times higher mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.05; 95% CI 1.7-2.5). Frailty was also associated with a higher risk of all-cause readmission with an aHR of 1.07; (95% CI 1.03-1.1). Frail patients experienced a longer length of stay, higher hospitalization costs, and hospitalization charges. Infectious causes were the most common cause of readmission among frail patients compared to acute pancreatitis among non-frail patients. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is independently associated with higher mortality, readmission rates, and healthcare utilization among patients with chronic pancreatitis in the US.

Long-Term Impact of Medicaid Expansion on Colorectal Cancer Screening in Its Targeted Population.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer screening continuously decreased its mortality and incidence. In 2010, the Affordable Care Act extended Medicaid eligibility to low-income and childless adults. Some states elected to adopt Medicaid at different times while others chose not to. Past studies on the effects of Medicaid expansion on colorectal cancer screening showed equivocal results based on short-term data following expansion. AIMS: To examine the long-term impact of Medicaid expansion on colorectal cancer screening among its targeted population at its decade mark. METHODS: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data were extracted for childless adults below 138% federal poverty level in states with different Medicaid expansion statuses from 2012 to 2020. States were stratified into very early expansion states, early expansion states, late expansion states, and non-expansion states. Colorectal cancer screening prevalence was determined for eligible respondents. Difference-in-differences analyses were used to examine the effect of Medicaid expansion on colorectal cancer screening in states with different expansion statuses. RESULTS: Colorectal cancer screening prevalence in very early, early, late, and non-expansion states all increased during the study period (40.45% vs. 48.14%, 47.52% vs 61.06%, 46.06% vs 58.92%, and 43.44% vs 56.70%). Difference-in-differences analysis showed significantly increased CRC screening prevalence in very early expansion states during 2016 compared to non-expansion states (Crude difference-in-differences + 16.45%, p = 0.02, Adjusted difference-in-differences + 15.9%, p = 0.03). No statistical significance was observed among other years and groups. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal cancer screening increased between 2012 and 2020 in all states regardless of expansion status. However, Medicaid expansion is not associated with long-term increased colorectal cancer screening prevalence.

A Pilot Study to Assess Opportunistic Use of CT-Scan for Osteoporosis Screening in Chronic Pancreatitis.

Objectives: CT scans are commonly performed in patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP). Osteopathy and fractures are recognized in CP but no osteoporosis screening guidelines are recommended. "Opportunistic" CT scan-derived bone density thresholds are assessed for identifying osteoporosis in CP. Methods: Retrospective pilot cohort study. CP subjects who had CT scans and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) within 1 year were included. CT-derived bone density was measured at the L1 level. Pearson's correlation was performed between age and CT-derived bone density in Hounsfield unit (HU). Univariate analysis using HU to identify osteoporosis was performed at various thresholds of bone density. The discriminatory ability of the model was evaluated with the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). Several HU thresholds were tested. Results: Twenty-seven CP subjects were included, of whom 11 had normal bone density, 12 osteopenia, and four osteoporosis on DXA. The mean age was 59.9 years (SD 13.0). There was a negative correlation of age with HU (r = -0.519, p = 0.006). CT-derived bone density predicted DXA-based osteoporosis in the univariable analysis (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.97 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.94-1.00, p = 0.03). HU thresholds were tested. A threshold of 106 HU maximized the accuracy (AUC of 0.870). Conclusions: CT scan may be repurposed for "opportunistic" screening to rule out osteoporosis in CP. A larger study is warranted to confirm these results.

Characteristics of 30-Day All-Cause Hospital Readmissions Among Patients with Acute Pancreatitis and Substance Use.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Previous studies on healthcare resource utilization and 30-day readmission risks among patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) have focused upon opioid and alcohol use. The data on other substance types are lacking. In this study we aim to estimate the 30-day readmission rates, predictors of readmission, impact of readmission on patient outcomes and resulting economic burden among patients with AP and substance use in the USA. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study, based upon data from 2017 National Readmission Database of adult patients with AP and substance use (alcohol in combination, opioid, cannabis, cocaine, sedatives, other stimulants, other hallucinogens, other psychoactive, inhalant and miscellaneous). We estimated the 30-day readmission rates and predictors of 30-day readmission. RESULTS: Among 25,795 eligible patients, most were male, belonged to the lower income quartile, resided in the urban facility and had a Charlson comorbidity score of 0 or 1. The use of a combination of substances was the most common in 17,265 (66.9%) patients followed by only opioids in 4691 (18.2%) patients and only marijuana in 3839 (14.9%) patients. A total of 14.6% patients were readmitted within 30 days after discharge for non-elective causes with the highest risk of readmission within the 1st week after discharge with 5.2% readmissions. Among top ten causes of readmission, most of the principal diagnosis were related to AP in 53.1%. Compared to index admission, readmitted patients had significantly higher rates of acute cardiac failure, shock, and higher in-hospital mortality rate. Overall, readmission attributed to an additional 17,801 days of hospitalization resulting in a total of $150 million in hospitalization charges and $36 million in hospitalization costs in 2017. On multivariate analysis, chronic pancreatitis, self-discharge against medical advice, treatment at the highest volume centers, higher Charlson comorbidity index, increasing length of stay and severe disease were associated with higher odds of readmission while female gender and private insurance were associated with lower odds. CONCLUSION: Readmission was associated with higher morbidity and in-hospital mortality among patients with AP and substance use and resulted in a significant monetary burden on the US healthcare system. Several factors identified in this study may be useful for categorizing patients at higher risk of readmission warranting special attention during discharge planning.

Provider Differences in Monitoring and Management of Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency in Chronic Pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a common cause of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI). Regular monitoring and treatment are recommended to decrease morbidity. This study evaluates whether provider type impacts EPI monitoring and management in CP. METHODS: Fecal elastase 1 (FE-1) testing and pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) utilization were retrospectively compared between primary care providers (PCPs), gastroenterologists and pancreas specialists using pairwise comparisons. Multivariate analysis was conducted to study the association between adequate PERT and age, sex, race, insurance status, provider type, and etiology. RESULTS: Among 256 patients, FE-1 was measured in 115 (44.9%) and of 143 (55.9%) patients who received PERT, 100 (69.9%) received adequate dosage. Fecal elastase 1 testing was performed in 7/57 (12.3%) by PCP, 11/38 (28.9%) by gastroenterologists, and 97/161 (60.2%) by pancreas specialists (P < 0.0001). Adequate PERT was prescribed in 7/24 (29.2%) patients by PCPs, 11/20 (55.0%) by gastroenterologists, and 82/99 (82.8%) by pancreas specialists (P < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, pancreas specialists were significantly more likely to prescribe adequate PERT compared with PCP (odds ratio, 11.3; 95% confidence interval, 3.3-38.2; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with CP receive inadequate surveillance and EPI treatment. Pancreas specialists are more likely to surveil and treat EPI adequately.

Clinical course and outcome among patients with acute pancreatitis and COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The data on clinical course and outcome of acute pancreatitis among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are sparse. In this study, we analyzed the clinical profiles of patients with COVID 19 and acute pancreatitis. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted on Research Patient Data Registry data which was pooled from five Mass General Brigham Healthcare Network hospitals. We extracted data on demographics, symptoms, ICU transfer, mechanical ventilation, laboratories' profiles, imaging findings, and patient outcomes. RESULT: Of 985 screened adult patients, 17 were eligible for the study, 9 (52.9%) were admitted primarily for respiratory failure and developed acute pancreatitis after a median of 22.5 days (13-76 days) from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. On contrary, eight patients presented with typical symptoms and were diagnosed with acute pancreatitis, the majority with mild severity (62.5%) on admission. Patients who were admitted primarily with severe COVID-19 illness were younger (median age 57 vs. 63 years), females (55.6 vs. 25%), of Hispanic ethnicity (55.6 vs. 25%), and obese (88.9 vs. 37.5%). The median peak lipase, C reactive protein, ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase, D-dimer were higher among patients who developed acute pancreatitis later during hospitalization. Patients who developed acute pancreatitis later also experienced higher episodes of necrotizing pancreatitis (11.1% vs. 0), thromboembolic complications (55.6 vs. 12.5%), and higher mortality (37.5 vs. 12.5%). CONCLUSION: Acute pancreatitis is not common among patients with COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 who had acute pancreatitis on admission had more benign course and overall better outcome as compared to the patients who developed acute pancreatitis during hospitalization.

Does Provider Type Affect Bone Health Surveillance in Chronic Pancreatitis?

BACKGROUND: Bone density screening (DEXA) and vitamin D serum assay (Vit-D) are recommended in chronic pancreatitis, but adherence by providers is unknown. AIMS: Assess DEXA/Vit-D testing according to provider type. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of chronic pancreatitis patients followed in a tertiary hospital (August 2017-2018) was conducted. Provider type was primary care (PCP), gastroenterologist, and pancreas specialist. Chi-square test and multivariable analysis were conducted to assess the relation between provider type and DEXA/Vit-D testing. Subset analyses were performed among patients with fecal elastase < 200 mcg/g. RESULTS: A total of 478 charts were reviewed, and 256 (53.6%) met diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis; 184 (71.9%) definite, 45 (17.6%) probable, and 27 (10.6%) borderline chronic pancreatitis. DEXA was tested in 112/256 (43%) patients; 16/57(28%) patients followed by PCP, 11/38 (28.9%) by gastroenterologists, and 85/161(52.2%) by pancreas specialists (p = 0.001). Vit-D was tested in 210/256 (82.0%) patients; 42/57(73.7%) followed by PCP, 29/38 (76.3%) by gastroenterologists, and 139/161(86.3%) by pancreas specialists (p = 0.06). Multivariate analysis assessing DEXA/Vit-D testing showed pancreas specialists were more likely to test compared to PCP (DEXA: OR 3.70, CI 1.77-7.74, p = 0.001. Vit-D: OR 3.24, CI 1.43-7.38, p = 0.005), but gastroenterologists were not. In patients with low fecal elastase, pancreas specialists were more likely to test DEXA (pancreas specialists: 62.1%, PCP: 40.0%, Gastroenterologists: 11.1%, p = 0.01) and all patients received Vit-D testing. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic pancreatitis patients often do not receive optimal preventive care. Pancreas specialists were more likely to perform DEXA and Vit-D testing compared to PCP and gastroenterologists. More physician education is needed.

Provider type influences adherence to lifestyle changes in chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: /Objectives: Alcohol and smoking cessation are recommended in chronic pancreatitis. The aim of this study is to measure the rates of alcohol and smoking cessation counselling among providers and adherence to recommendations. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of chronic pancreatitis patients at a tertiary hospital. Provider types were defined as primary care (PCP), gastroenterologist, or pancreas specialist. Pairwise comparisons and multivariable analysis were conducted to assess the relation between provider type and smoking/alcohol cessation. RESULTS: Of 256 patients with chronic pancreatitis, 142 (55.5%) consumed alcohol and 130 (91.5%) were advised to stop. Alcohol cessation was advised to 88.9, 96.0 and 92.5% of patients followed by PCP, gastroenterologists and pancreas specialists, respectively. Sixty-one patients (46.9%) were compliant with the recommendation: 31.3, 44.0 and 54.1% of patients followed by PCP, gastroenterologists and pancreas specialists, respectively (Pairwise comparisons PCP vs Pancreas: p = 0.03, others nonsignificant). In multivariable analysis, patients followed by pancreas specialists were more likely to adhere to alcohol cessation recommendation compared to those followed by PCP (OR = 4.31, CI 1.52-12.20, p = 0.006). Smoking cessation was advised to all the 127 current smokers (100%). Fifty-six (44.1%) were compliant with the recommendation: 24.1, 58.3 and 47.3% of patients followed by PCP, gastroenterologists and pancreas specialists, respectively (Pairwise comparisons PCP vs Pancreas: p = 0.03, PCP vs. Gastroenterologist: p = 0.01, others nonsignificant). Multivariable analysis did not confirm this finding. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of providers counsel for alcohol/smoking cessation. Less than half the patients follow the recommendations. Patients followed by pancreas specialists were more likely to adhere to alcohol cessation recommendation.

Hypertriglyceridemia and acute pancreatitis.

Hypertriglyceridemia is the third most common cause of acute pancreatitis. It typically occurs in patients with an underlying disorder of lipoprotein metabolism and in the presence of a secondary condition such as uncontrolled diabetes, alcohol abuse, or medication use. The presentation of hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis is similar to that of acute pancreatitis due to other causes; however, patients with hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis are more likely to have severe disease courses and have a higher likelihood of persistent organ failure. The initial treatment of hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis is also similar to acute pancreatitis from other causes and consists of aggressive fluid resuscitation, pain control, and nutritional support. Hypertriglyceridemia is specifically treated with apheresis or insulin therapy when necessary. The prompt recognition of hypertriglyceridemia in the setting of acute pancreatitis is essential in both the initial and long-term management of this disease and are essential to prevent recurrent acute pancreatitis. The review seeks to highlight the etiology, pathogenesis, and clinical course of hypertriglyceridemia-induced acute pancreatitis.

Lipase Elevation in Patients With COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Although coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been associated with gastrointestinal manifestations, its effect on the pancreas remains unclear. We aimed to assess the frequency and characteristics of hyperlipasemia in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients across 6 US centers with COVID-19. RESULTS: Of 71 patients, 9 (12.1%) developed hyperlipasemia, with 2 (2.8%) greater than 3 times upper limit of normal. No patient developed acute pancreatitis. Hyperlipasemia was not associated with poor outcomes or symptoms. DISCUSSION: Although a mild elevation in serum lipase was observed in some patients with COVID-19, clinical acute pancreatitis was not seen.

Opiate Prescriptions at Discharge Are Not Associated with Early Readmissions in Acute Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Early readmissions in acute pancreatitis (AP) are common. The impact of opiate prescriptions on readmissions is unknown. AIMS: To determine whether the prescription of opiates at hospital discharge and the dose prescribed are associated with early readmissions in AP. METHODS: Direct admissions from the Emergency Department (ED) for AP from September 1, 2013, to August 31, 2016 were identified. Opiate prescription was defined as a new prescription at discharge in an opiate-naïve patient. Early readmission was ED visit or hospitalization within 30 days for an AP-related reason. Multivariable logistic regression was performed, adjusted for age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, pancreatic necrosis, baseline opiate use, non-opiate analgesics, and pain score at discharge. RESULTS: A total of 318 AP patients were identified; the overall early readmission rate was 18%. One hundred and twenty-one (38%) were prescribed opiates at discharge, and 22% had an early readmission. One hundred and ninety-seven (62%) were not prescribed opiates, and 16% had an early readmission. Median opiate dose was 48 mg (24-h morphine equivalents). On multivariable analysis, neither the prescription of opiates (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.6-2.4, p = 0.55) nor the dose of opiates (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.00, p = 0.39) was associated with early readmission. In subset analysis of patients discharged with an opiate prescription, those on opiates at baseline were significantly more likely to have an early readmission (OR 4.19, 95% CI 1.04-16.94, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In AP patients, neither prescription of opiates at discharge nor prescribed dose was associated with early readmission. Patients on opiates at baseline discharged with an opiate prescription were more likely to have an early readmission.

Are Opioid-Naive Patients With Acute Pancreatitis Given Opioid Prescriptions at Discharge?

OBJECTIVES: Opioids are commonly used in the management of acute pancreatitis (AP). Inpatient opioid exposure is known to increase the risk of chronic opioid use after discharge. Prescription patterns for opioids at discharge for AP are unknown. METHODS: Medical records of adult AP patients who presented to the emergency department from September 1, 2013, to August 31, 2016, were reviewed. Opioid prescription at discharge was defined as a prescription for opioids in a patient who was opioid naive at admission. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of opioid prescription at discharge. RESULTS: A total of 259 opioid-naive AP patients were identified. Of these, 108 (41.6%) of 259 were discharged with an opioid prescription and 61 (56.5%) of 108 had discharge pain scores of 3 or lower. Two hundred twenty-two (85.7%) received opioids during admission and 105 (47.3%) of 222 were discharged with an opioid prescription. On multivariable analysis, predictors of discharge opioid prescription included inpatient use of opioids, female sex, and discharge pain score greater than 3. CONCLUSIONS: In opioid-naive AP patients, 41.6% were discharged from the hospital with a new prescription for opioids, even though a significant proportion had pain scores of 3 or lower. Guidelines are needed for opioid prescriptions at discharge for AP.

Comparison of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale with an Auditable Application of the US Multi-Society Task Force Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Existing bowel preparation scales (BPS) only modestly predict interval to next colonoscopy. The US Multi-Society Task Force (MSTF) recommends repeating colonoscopies within the year if the preparation does not allow detection of polyps over 5 mm. AIM: This study aims to assess reliability and validity of an auditable application of the MSTF compared with the Boston BPS (BBPS). METHODS: We compared an auditable application of MSTF guidelines termed the Montreal BPS (MBPS) with the BBPS using a total cut-off score ≥6 with each segment score ≥2 (BBPS2-6). In sensitivity analyses, we applied the MBPS using a cut-off of 3 mm rather than 5 mm and also assessed the BBPS using an adequacy threshold of total score ≥5 (BBPS5). Videos of 83 colonoscopies (eight for intra-rater agreements) were independently evaluated by nine physicians. Weighted kappas quantified intra- and inter-rater agreements. Associations between scores and clinical outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: The BBPS2-6 and 5 mm MBPS showed moderate to substantial intra-rater agreements (κ=0.44 to 0.63 and κ=0.50 to 0.53, respectively); inter-rater agreements were only fair to moderate and slight to moderate (κ=0.25 to 0.48 and κ=0.19 to 0.50, respectively). Similar results were noted using alternate thresholds of BBPS5 and 3 mm MBPS. No significant associations were found between scores and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: For all scales, intra-rater kappas were superior to inter-rater values, the latter reflecting at best moderate agreement. This modest performance may reflect the dichotomized interpretation of the scales (adequate versus inadequate), differing from previous publications assessing scores as continuous variables. Further studies are required to optimally interpret bowel preparation scales with regard to interval to next colonoscopy.