The revised Atlanta criteria more accurately reflect severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis compared to the consensus criteria.

Background and objective: Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is the most prevalent complication after ERCP with an incidence of 3.5%. PEP severity is classified according to either the consensus criteria or the revised Atlanta criteria. In this international cohort study we investigated which classification is the strongest predictor of PEP-related mortality. Methods: We reviewed 13,384 consecutive ERCPs performed between 2012 and 2017 in eight hospitals. We gathered data on all pancreatitis-related adverse events and compared the predictive capabilities of both classifications. Furthermore, we investigated the correlation between the two classifications and identified reasons underlying length of stay. Results: The total sample consisted of 387 patients. The revised Atlanta criteria have a higher sensitivity (100 vs. 55%), specificity (98 vs. 72%) and positive predictive value (58 vs. 5%). There is a significant difference (p < 0.001) between the two classifications. In 124 patients (32%), the length of stay was influenced by concomitant diseases. Conclusion: The revised Atlanta classification is superior in predicting mortality and better reflects PEP severity. This has important implications for researchers, clinicians and patients. For the diagnosis of PEP pancreatitis, the consensus criteria remain the golden standard. However, the revised Atlanta criteria are preferable for defining PEP severity.

Chronic anemia due to gastrointestinal bleeding: when do gastroenterologists transfuse?

BACKGROUND: The hypothesis is that decision-making for transfusion varies considerably among gastroenterologists. The aim is to identify preferences and predictors of transfusion decision-making in chronic anemia. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Between February and April of 2015, a computerized adaptive choice-based conjoint survey was administered to gastroenterologists in the Netherlands. The survey included seven patient attributes: hemoglobin levels, hemoglobin stability, age, iron indices, the presence of anemia-related symptoms, cardiovascular comorbidities, and the number of transfusions in the past half year. Predictors of transfusion preferences were assessed by multivariable regression. RESULTS: 113 gastroenterologists completed the survey (response rate = 29%; mean age = 47 years; 24% women). Absolute hemoglobin level was the most important incentive of transfusion, accounting for 42% of decision-making, followed by age (15%), hemoglobin stability (12%), anemia-related symptoms (10%), and cardiovascular comorbidities (10%). A hemoglobin level >9.6 g/dL is an inflection point, where gastroenterologists would not prescribe transfusions. Age of the patient is more important in the decision-making process to younger gastroenterologists (OR -2.9, 95% CI -5.3 to -0.5). CONCLUSION: Absolute hemoglobin level is the most important factor to transfusion decision-making. This is contradictory to transfusion guidelines for chronic anemia which address the importance of symptoms.

A call for a consortium for optimal management of drug-drug interactions in patient care.

During clinical development of medicines, manufacturers are obliged to assess the risk of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with their new drug. There is no doubt that product labels of drugs that are nowadays introduced to the market contain much more information on DDIs than in the past. Indeed, the drug label is often the first source for DDIs available to physicians and pharmacists. But how informative are the data presented in the drug labels?