RESUMO
ABSTRACT Background This multicenter multinational RCT designed to compare the efficacy of suppository indomethacin and NAC for prevention of PEP. Methods: During a 6-month period, all of the ERCP cases in seven referral centers were randomly assigned to receive either 1200 mg oral NAC, indomethacin suppository 100 mg, 1200 mg oral NAC plus indomethacin suppository 100 mg or placebo 2 hours before ERCP. The primary outcomes were the rate and severity of any PEP. Results: A total of 432 patients included (41.4% male). They were originally citizens of 6 countries (60.87% Caucasian). They were randomly allocated to receive either NAC (group A, 84 cases), rectal indomethacin (group B, 138 cases), NAC + rectal indomethacin (group C, 115 cases) or placebo (group D, 95 cases). The rate of PEP in groups A, B and C in comparison with placebo were 10.7%, 17.4%, 7.8% vs 20% (P=0.08, 0.614 & 0.01 respectively). The NNT for NAC, indomethacin and NAC + indomethacin was 11, 38 and 8 respectively. Conclusion: Oral NAC is more effective than rectal indomethacin when compared to placebo for prevention of PEP and the combination of NAC and Indomethacin had the lowest incidence of PEP and may have synergistic effect in preventing of PEP (IRCT20201222049798N1; 29/12/2020).
RESUMO Contexto: Este estudo randomizado, controlado multicêntrico e multinacional foi projetado para comparar a eficácia da indometacina supositório e N-acetil cisteína (NAC) para prevenção de pancreatite pós colangiografia endoscópica. Métodos: Durante um período de 6 meses, todos os pacientes submetidos à CPRE em sete centros de referência foram aleatoriamente atribuídos para receber 1200 mg de NAC oral, supositório de indometacina 100 mg, 1200 mg de NAC oral mais supositório de indometacina 100 mg ou placebo 2 horas antes do procedimento. Os resultados primários foram a taxa e a gravidade de qualquer pancreatite pós procedimento (PPP). Resultados: Um total de 432 pacientes foram incluídos (41,4% do sexo masculino). Eram originalmente cidadãos de seis países (60,87% caucasianos). Foram alocados aleatoriamente para receber NAC (grupo A, 84 casos), indometacina retal (grupo B, 138 casos), NAC + indometacina retal (grupo C, 115 casos) ou placebo (grupo D, 95 casos). A taxa de PPP nos grupos A, B e C em comparação com o placebo foi de 10,7%, 17,4%, 7,8% vs 20% (P=0,08, 0,614 e 0,01, respectivamente). Conclusão A NAC oral é mais eficaz do que a indometacina retal quando comparado ao placebo para prevenção de PPP e a combinação de NAC e indometacina teve a menor incidência de PPP e pode ter efeito sinérgico na sua prevenção de PPP. (IRCT20201222049798N1; 29/12/2020).
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This multicenter multinational RCT designed to compare the efficacy of suppository indomethacin and NAC for prevention of PEP. METHODS: During a 6-month period, all of the ERCP cases in seven referral centers were randomly assigned to receive either 1200 mg oral NAC, indomethacin suppository 100 mg, 1200 mg oral NAC plus indomethacin suppository 100 mg or placebo 2 hours before ERCP. The primary outcomes were the rate and severity of any PEP. RESULTS: A total of 432 patients included (41.4% male). They were originally citizens of 6 countries (60.87% Caucasian). They were randomly allocated to receive either NAC (group A, 84 cases), rectal indomethacin (group B, 138 cases), NAC + rectal indomethacin (group C, 115 cases) or placebo (group D, 95 cases). The rate of PEP in groups A, B and C in comparison with placebo were 10.7%, 17.4%, 7.8% vs 20% (P=0.08, 0.614 & 0.01 respectively). The NNT for NAC, indomethacin and NAC + indomethacin was 11, 38 and 8 respectively. CONCLUSION: Oral NAC is more effective than rectal indomethacin when compared to placebo for prevention of PEP and the combination of NAC and Indomethacin had the lowest incidence of PEP and may have synergistic effect in preventing of PEP (IRCT20201222049798N1; 29/12/2020).
RESUMO
Fasciolosis is a common parasitic disease in many parts of the world. The current case study is the first report of the confirmed fasciolosis in the southwest of Iran. The patient was a 51-year-old woman whom was referred to hospital for hypochondria pain and mild fever. She had several travels history to north province and consumption of row watercress. Sonography and ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) finding showed two mature Fasciola spp. in her common bile duct (CBD). The helminths were pulled from CBD and was identified as F. gigantica. The sera of the patient and her family were examined. The titration of antibody against Fasciola was high in sera of the patient but not positive for other member of her family. In the area with low prevalence of fasciolosis, patients clinical history and travelling to endemic areas should be considered for correct diagnosis. Fasciolosis should be considered as a travel-borne diseases in endemic areas and the consumption of water vegetables should be avoided.