Acute Pancreatitis Recurrences Augment Long-Term Pancreatic Cancer Risk.

INTRODUCTION: In animal models, inflammation caused by experimental acute pancreatitis (AP) promotes pancreatic carcinogenesis that is preventable by suppressing inflammation. Recent studies noted higher long-term risk of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after AP. In this study, we evaluated whether the long-term PDAC risk after AP was influenced by the etiology of AP, number of recurrences, and if it was because of progression to chronic pancreatitis (CP). METHODS: This retrospective study used nationwide Veterans Administration database spanning 1999-2015. A 2-year washout period was applied to exclude patients with preexisting AP and PDAC. PDAC risk was estimated in patients with AP without (AP group) and with underlying CP (APCP group) and those with CP alone (CP group) and compared with PDAC risk in patients in a control group, respectively, using cause-specific hazards model. RESULTS: The final cohort comprised 7,147,859 subjects (AP-35,550 and PDAC-16,475). The cumulative PDAC risk 3-10 years after AP was higher than in controls (0.61% vs 0.18%), adjusted hazard ratio (1.7 [1.4-2.0], P < 0.001). Adjusted hazard ratio was 1.5 in AP group, 2.4 in the CP group, and 3.3 in APCP group. PDAC risk increased with the number of AP episodes. Elevated PDAC risk after AP was not influenced by the etiology of AP (gallstones, smoking, or alcohol). DISCUSSION: There is a higher PDAC risk 3-10 years after AP irrespective of the etiology of AP, increases with the number of episodes of AP and is additive to higher PDAC risk because of CP.

Coeliac disease screening is suboptimal in a tertiary gastroenterology setting.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Coeliac disease (CD) is widely prevalent in North America, but case-finding techniques currently used may not be adequate for patient identification. We aimed to determine the adequacy of CD screening in an academic gastroenterology (GI) practice. METHODS: Consecutive initial visits to a tertiary academic GI practice were surveyed over a 3-month period as a fellow-initiated quality improvement project. All electronic records were reviewed to look for indications for CD screening according to published guidelines. The timing of screening was noted (before or after referral), as well as the screening method (serology or biopsy). Data were analysed to compare CD screening practices across subspecialty clinics. RESULTS: 616 consecutive patients (49±0.6 years, range 16-87 years, 58.5% females, 94% Caucasian) fulfilled inclusion criteria. CD testing was indicated in 336 (54.5%), but performed in only 145 (43.2%). The need for CD screening was highest in luminal GI and inflammatory bowel disease clinics, followed by biliary and hepatology clinics (p<0.0001); CD screening rate was highest in the luminal GI clinic (p=0.002). Of 145 patients screened, 4 patients (2.4%) had serology consistent with CD, of which 2 were proven by duodenal biopsy. Using this proportion, an additional 5 patients might have been diagnosed in 191 untested patients with indications for CD screening. CONCLUSIONS: More than 50% of patients in a tertiary GI clinic have indications for CD screening, but <50% of indicated cases are screened. Case-finding techniques therefore are suboptimal, constituting a gap in patient care and an important target for future quality improvement initiatives.