Indomethacin with or without prophylactic pancreatic stent placement to prevent pancreatitis after ERCP: a randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The combination of rectally administered indomethacin and placement of a prophylactic pancreatic stent is recommended to prevent pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk patients. Preliminary evidence suggests that the use of indomethacin might eliminate or substantially reduce the need for stent placement, a technically complex, costly, and potentially harmful intervention. METHODS: In this randomised, non-inferiority trial conducted at 20 referral centres in the USA and Canada, patients (aged ≥18 years) at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive rectal indomethacin alone or the combination of indomethacin plus a prophylactic pancreatic stent. Patients, treating clinicians, and outcomes assessors were masked to study group assignment. The primary outcome was post-ERCP pancreatitis. To declare non-inferiority, the upper bound of the two-sided 95% CI for the difference in post-ERCP pancreatitis (indomethacin alone minus indomethacin plus stent) would have to be less than 5% (non-inferiority margin) in both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02476279), and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 17, 2015, and Jan 25, 2023, a total of 1950 patients were randomly assigned. Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 145 (14·9%) of 975 patients in the indomethacin alone group and in 110 (11·3%) of 975 in the indomethacin plus stent group (risk difference 3·6%; 95% CI 0·6-6·6; p=0·18 for non-inferiority). A post-hoc intention-to-treat analysis of the risk difference between groups showed that indomethacin alone was inferior to the combination of indomethacin plus prophylactic stent (p=0·011). The relative benefit of stent placement was generally consistent across study subgroups but appeared more prominent among patients at highest risk for pancreatitis. Safety outcomes (serious adverse events, intensive care unit admission, and hospital length of stay) did not differ between groups. INTERPRETATION: For preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients, a strategy of indomethacin alone was not as effective as a strategy of indomethacin plus prophylactic pancreatic stent placement. These results support prophylactic pancreatic stent placement in addition to rectal indomethacin administration in high-risk patients, in accordance with clinical practice guidelines. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.

Extracorporeal Shock-Wave Lithotripsy and Endoscopy for the Treatment of Pain in Chronic Pancreatitis : A Sham-Controlled, Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: No randomized controlled trials have substantiated endoscopic decompression of the pancreatic duct in patients with painful chronic pancreatitis. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the pain-relieving effect of pancreatic duct decompression in patients with chronic pancreatitis and intraductal stones. DESIGN: 24-week, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03966781). SETTING: Asian Institute of Gastroenterology in India from February 2021 to July 2022. PARTICIPANTS: 106 patients with chronic pancreatitis. INTERVENTION: Combined extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) compared with sham procedures. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was pain relief on a 0- to 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were assessed after 12 and 24 weeks and included 30% pain relief, opioid use, pain-free days, questionaries, and complications to interventions. RESULTS: 52 patients in the ESWL/ERP group and 54 in the sham group were included. At 12 weeks, the ESWL/ERP group showed better pain relief compared with the sham group (mean difference in change, -0.7 [95% CI, -1.3 to 0] on the VAS; P = 0.039). The difference between groups was not sustained at the 24-week follow-up, and no differences were seen for 30% pain relief at 12- or 24-week follow-up. The number of pain-free days was increased (median difference, 16.2 days [CI, 3.9 to 28.5 days]), and the number of days using opioids was reduced (median difference, -5.4 days [CI, -9.9 to -0.9 days]) in the ESWL/ERP group compared with the sham group at 12-week follow-up. Safety outcomes were similar between groups. LIMITATION: Single-center study and limited duration of follow-up. CONCLUSION: In patients with chronic pancreatitis and intraductal stones, ESWL with ERP provided modest short-term pain relief. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Asian Institute of Gastroenterology and Aalborg University Hospital.

Sphincterotomy for biliary sphincter of Oddi disorder and idiopathic acute recurrent pancreatitis: the RESPOnD longitudinal cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Sphincter of Oddi disorders (SOD) are contentious conditions in patients whose abdominal pain, idiopathic acute pancreatitis (iAP) might arise from pressurisation at the sphincter of Oddi. The present study aimed to measure the benefit of sphincterotomy for suspected SOD. DESIGN: Prospective cohort conducted at 14 US centres with 12 months follow-up. Patients undergoing first-time endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with sphincterotomy for suspected SOD were eligible: pancreatobiliary-type pain with or without iAP. The primary outcome was defined as the composite of improvement by Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), no new or increased opioids and no repeat intervention. Missing data were addressed by hierarchal, multiple imputation scheme. RESULTS: Of 316 screened, 213 were enrolled with 190 (89.2%) of these having a dilated bile duct, abnormal labs, iAP or some combination. By imputation, an average of 122/213 (57.4% (95% CI 50.4% to 64.4%)) improved; response rate was similar for those with complete follow-up (99/161, 61.5% (54.0% to 69.0%)); of these, 118 (73.3%) improved by PGIC alone. Duct size, elevated labs and patient characteristics were not associated with response. AP occurred in 37/213 (17.4%) at a median of 6 months post ERCP and was more likely in those with a history of AP (30.9% vs 2.9%, p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Nearly 60% of patients undergoing ERCP for suspected SOD improve, although the contribution of a placebo response is unknown. Contrary to prevailing belief, duct size and labs are poor response predictors. AP recurrence was common and like observations from prior non-intervention cohorts, suggesting no benefit of sphincterotomy in mitigating future AP episodes.

Technical Factors Associated With the Benefit of Prophylactic Pancreatic Stent Placement During High-Risk Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Secondary Analysis of the SVI Trial Data Set.

INTRODUCTION: Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement (PSP) is effective for preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk cases, but the optimal technical approach to this intervention remains uncertain. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of 787 clinical trial patients who underwent successful stent placement, we studied the impact of (i) whether pancreatic wire access was achieved for the sole purpose of PSP or naturally during the conduct of the case, (ii) the amount of effort expended on PSP, (iii) stent length, (iv) stent diameter, and (v) guidewire caliber. We used logistic regression models to examine the adjusted association between each technical factor and post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). RESULTS: Ninety-one of the 787 patients experienced PEP. There was no clear association between PEP and whether pancreatic wire access was achieved for the sole purpose of PSP (vs occurring naturally; odds ratio [OR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-1.84), whether substantial effort expended on stent placement (vs nonsubstantial effort; OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.73-3.45), stent length (>5 vs ≤5 cm; OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.63-1.61), stent diameter (≥5 vs <5 Fr; OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.65-1.96), or guidewire caliber (0.035 vs 0.025 in; 0.83, 95% CI 0.49-1.41). DISCUSSION: The 5 modifiable technical factors studied in this secondary analysis of large-scale randomized trial data did not appear to have a strong impact on the benefit of prophylactic PSP in preventing PEP after high-risk ERCP. Within the limitations of post hoc subgroup analysis, these findings may have important implications in procedural decision making and suggest that the benefit of PSP is robust to variations in technical approach.

Development of clinical screening tool for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency in patients with definite chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: No simple, accurate diagnostic tests exist for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI), and EPI remains underdiagnosed in chronic pancreatitis (CP). We sought to develop a digital screening tool to assist clinicians to predict EPI in patients with definite CP. METHODS: This was a retrospective case-control study of patients with definite CP with/without EPI. Overall, 49 candidate predictor variables were utilized to train a Classification and Regression Tree (CART) model to rank all predictors and select a parsimonious set of predictors for EPI status. Five-fold cross-validation was used to assess generalizability, and the full CART model was compared with 4 additional predictive models. EPI misclassification rate (mRate) served as primary endpoint metric. RESULTS: 274 patients with definite CP from 6 pancreatitis centers across the United States were included, of which 58 % had EPI based on predetermined criteria. The optimal CART decision tree included 10 variables. The mRate without/with 5-fold cross-validation of the CART was 0.153 (training error) and 0.314 (prediction error), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.889 and 0.682, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity without/with 5-fold cross-validation was 0.888/0.789 and 0.794/0.535, respectively. A trained second CART without pancreas imaging variables (n = 6), yielded 8 variables. Training error/prediction error was 0.190/0.351; sensitivity was 0.869/0.650, and specificity was 0.728/0.649, each without/with 5-fold cross-validation. CONCLUSION: We developed two CART models that were integrated into one digital screening tool to assess for EPI in patients with definite CP and with two to six input variables needed for predicting EPI status.

Alterations in exocrine pancreatic function after acute pancreatitis.

Exocrine pancreatic dysfunction (EPD) is a malabsorptive complication of pancreatic disorders that can lead to a host of symptoms ranging from flatulence to diarrhea and contribute to weight loss and metabolic bone disease. It is increasingly recognized to occur after acute pancreatitis (AP), including episodes with mild severity. The risk of developing EPD after AP is influenced by a range of factors, including the degree of acinar cell destruction and inflammation during AP, and persistent structural derangements following AP. In this article, we discuss the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and clinical management of EPD after AP while highlighting key knowledge gaps.

Development of a novel CT-based index for predicting the number of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) sessions required for successful fragmentation of obstructing pancreatic duct stones.

BACKGROUND & AIM: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is used for the treatment of pancreatic duct stones (PDS) in patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP). We aimed to develop a CT based index to predict the required number of ESWL sessions for technical success. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients with PDS secondary to CP who underwent ESWL. Technical success was defined as the complete fragmentation of stones to <3 mm. CT features including PDS size, number, location, and density in Hounsfield units (HU) were noted. We analyzed the relationship between PDS characteristics and the number of ESWL sessions required for technical success. A multiple linear regression model was used to combine size and density into the pancreatic duct stone (PDS) index that was translated into a web-based calculator. RESULTS: There were 206 subjects (mean age 38.6 ± 13.7 years, 59.2% male) who underwent ESWL. PDS size showed a moderate correlation with the number of ESWL sessions (r = 0.42, p < 0.01). PDS in the head required a fewer number of sessions in comparison to those in the body (1.4 ± 0.6 vs. 1.6 ± 0.7, p = 0.01). There was a strong correlation between PDS density and the number of ESWL sessions (r = 0.617, p-value <0.01). The PDS index {0.3793 + [0.0009755 x PDS density (HU)] + [0.02549 x PDS size (mm)]} could accurately predict the required number of ESWL sessions with an AUC of 0.872 (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The PDS index is a useful predictor of the number of ESWL sessions needed for technical success that can help in planning and patient counseling.

Development and validation of a machine learning-based, point-of-care risk calculator for post-ERCP pancreatitis and prophylaxis selection.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A robust model of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) risk is not currently available. We aimed to develop a machine learning-based tool for PEP risk prediction to aid in clinical decision making related to periprocedural prophylaxis selection and postprocedural monitoring. METHODS: Feature selection, model training, and validation were performed using patient-level data from 12 randomized controlled trials. A gradient-boosted machine (GBM) model was trained to estimate PEP risk, and the performance of the resulting model was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) with 5-fold cross-validation. A web-based clinical decision-making tool was created, and a prospective pilot study was performed using data from ERCPs performed at the Johns Hopkins Hospital over a 1-month period. RESULTS: A total of 7389 patients were included in the GBM with an 8.6% rate of PEP. The model was trained on 20 PEP risk factors and 5 prophylactic interventions (rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], aggressive hydration, combined rectal NSAIDs and aggressive hydration, pancreatic duct stenting, and combined rectal NSAIDs and pancreatic duct stenting). The resulting GBM model had an AUC of 0.70 (65% specificity, 65% sensitivity, 95% negative predictive value, and 15% positive predictive value). A total of 135 patients were included in the prospective pilot study, resulting in an AUC of 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility and utility of a novel machine learning-based PEP risk estimation tool with high negative predictive value to aid in prophylaxis selection and identify patients at low risk who may not require extended postprocedure monitoring.

The Impact of Difficult Biliary Cannulation on Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Secondary Analysis of the Stent versus Indomethacin Trial Dataset.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Difficult biliary cannulation (DBC) is a known risk factor for developing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). To better understand how DBC increases PEP risk, we examined the interplay between technical aspects of DBC and known PEP risk factors. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing rectal indomethacin alone with the combination of rectal indomethacin and prophylactic pancreatic duct (PD) stent placement for PEP prophylaxis in high-risk patients. Participants were categorized into 3 groups: 1) DBC with high pre-procedure risk for PEP, 2) DBC without high pre-procedure risk, and 3) non-DBC at high pre-procedure risk. RESULTS: In all, 1601 (84.1%) participants experienced DBC, which required a mean of 12 (SD 10) cannulation attempts and mean duration of 14.7 minutes (SD 14.9). PEP rate was highest (20.7%) in DBC with high pre-procedure risk, followed by non-DBC with high pre-procedure risk (13.5%) and then DBC without high pre-procedure risk (8.8%). Increasing number of PD-wire passages (aOR:1.97, 95% CI:1.25-3.1) was associated with PEP in DBC, but PD injection, pancreatic sphincterotomy and number of cannulation attempts were not associated with PEP. Combining indomethacin with PD stenting lowered PEP risk (aOR:0.61, 95% CI:0.44-0.84) in DBCs. This protective effect was evident in up to at least 4 PD wire passages. CONCLUSIONS: DBC confers higher PEP risk in additive fashion to pre-procedural risk factors. PD wire passages appear to add the greatest PEP risk in DBCs, but combining indomethacin with PD stenting reduces this risk, even with increasing PD wire passages.

Minimally invasive total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation for chronic pancreatitis: the robotic approach.

INTRODUCTION: Total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation (TPIAT) treats refractory pain in chronic pancreatitis, prevents episodes of acute exacerbation, and mitigates postoperative brittle diabetes. The minimally invasive (MIS) approach offers a decreased surgical access trauma and enhanced recovery. Having established a laparoscopic TPIAT program, we adopted a robotic approach (R-TPIAT) and studied patient outcomes compared to open TPIAT. METHODS: Between 2013 and 2021, 61 adult patients underwent TPIAT after a comprehensive evaluation (97% chronic pancreatitis). Pancreatic islets were isolated on-site during the procedure. We analyzed and compared intraoperative surgical and islet characteristics, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and 1-year glycemic outcomes. RESULTS: MIS-TPIAT was performed in 41 patients (67%, 15 robotic and 26 laparoscopic), and was associated with a shorter mean length of intensive care unit stay compared to open TPIAT (2.9 vs 4.5 days, p = 0.002). R-TPIAT replaced laparoscopic TPIAT in 2017 as the MIS approach of choice and demonstrated decreased blood loss compared to open TPIAT (324 vs 843 mL, p = 0.004), similar operative time (609 vs 562 min), 30-day readmission rate (7% vs 15%), and 90-day complication rate (13% vs 20%). The glycemic outcomes including C-peptide detection at 1-year (73% vs 88%) and insulin dependence at 1-year (75% vs 92%) did not differ. The mean length of hospital stay after R-TPIAT was 8.6 days, shorter than for laparoscopic (11.5 days, p = 0.031) and open TPIAT (12.6 days, p = 0.017). Both MIS approaches had a 1-year mortality rate of 0%. CONCLUSIONS: R-TPIAT was associated with a 33% reduction in length of hospital stay (4-day benefit) compared to open TPIAT. R-TPIAT was similar to open TPIAT on measures of feasibility, safety, pain control, and 1-year glycemic outcomes. Our data suggest that robotic technology, a new component in the multidisciplinary therapy of TPIAT, is poised to develop into the primary surgical approach for experienced pancreatic surgeons.

Preventive Measures and Risk Factors for Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication of ERCP, with limited studies comparing combined prophylactic measures and their efficacy relative to individual patient risk profiles. This study aims to perform an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) to evaluate the contribution of patient and ERCP-related risk factors to PEP development and to identify the best prophylaxis strategies according to the patient's risk profile. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases until November 2022 for randomized controlled PEP prophylaxis trials. We invited authors to share individual patient data, including PEP risk profile and prophylaxes used. PEP incidence rates for different prophylaxis were calculated. Efficacy was compared using multilevel logistic regression and expressed as relative risk (RR). Subgroup analysis evaluated the role of patient and ERCP-related risk factors in developing PEP. RESULTS: Data from 11 studies, including 6430 patients, were analyzed. After adjusting for risk factors, rectal NSAIDs (RR 0.69, 95%CI 0.54-0.88) and peri-procedural high-volume intravenous fluid (IVF) (RR 0.40, 95%CI 0.21-0.79) were effective in reducing PEP incidence, while no benefit was noted with pancreatic duct (PD) stents (RR 1.25, 95%CI 0.91-1.73). In patients receiving rectal NSAIDs (n = 2617), difficult cannulation (RR 1.99, 1.45-2.73), contrast injection into the pancreatic duct (PD) (RR2.37, 1.68-3.32), and prior history of PEP (RR 1.90, 1.06-3.41) were associated with increased PEP risk. CONCLUSION: This IPDMA confirms that rectal NSAIDs and peri-procedural IVF are effective PEP prophylactic strategies. Further studies focusing on combination therapy or the development of personalized PEP risk calculators are needed to improve prophylactic strategies.

Lactated Ringers Use in the First 24 Hours of Hospitalization Is Associated With Improved Outcomes in 999 Patients With Acute Pancreatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Recent pilot trials in acute pancreatitis (AP) found that lactated ringers (LR) usage may result in decreased risk of moderately severe/severe AP compared with normal saline, but their small sample sizes limit statistical power. We investigated whether LR usage is associated with improved outcomes in AP in an international multicenter prospective study. METHODS: Patients directly admitted with the diagnosis of AP were prospectively enrolled at 22 international sites between 2015 and 2018. Demographics, fluid administration, and AP severity data were collected in a standardized prospective manner to examine the association between LR and AP severity outcomes. Mixed-effects logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the direction and magnitude of the relationship between the type of fluid administered during the first 24 hours and the development of moderately severe/severe AP. RESULTS: Data from 999 patients were analyzed (mean age 51 years, female 52%, moderately severe/severe AP 24%). Usage of LR during the first 24 hours was associated with reduced odds of moderately severe/severe AP (adjusted odds ratio 0.52; P = 0.014) compared with normal saline after adjusting for region of enrollment, etiology, body mass index, and fluid volume and accounting for the variation across centers. Similar results were observed in sensitivity analyses eliminating the effects of admission organ failure, etiology, and excessive total fluid volume. DISCUSSION: LR administration in the first 24 hours of hospitalization was associated with improved AP severity. A large-scale randomized clinical trial is needed to confirm these findings.

Pancreatic duct pressure: A review of technical aspects and clinical significance.

Pancreatic duct pressure (PDP) dynamics comprise an intricately modulated system that helps maintain homeostasis of pancreatic function. It is affected by various factors, including the rate of pancreatic fluid secretion, patency of the ductal system, sphincter of Oddi function, and pancreatic fluid characteristics. Disease states such as acute and chronic pancreatitis can alter the normal PDP dynamics. Ductal hypertension or increased PDP is suspected to be involved in the pathogenesis of pancreatic pain, endocrine and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and recurrent pancreatitis. This review provides a comprehensive appraisal of the available literature on PDP, including the methods used in the measurement and clinical implications of elevated PDP.

Incident diabetes following acute pancreatitis in a multicenter prospective observational cohort.

Diabetes mellitus following an episode of acute pancreatitis (AP) is an increasingly discussed complication, but there are sparse prospective data on the incidence and risk factors. We evaluated data from a prospective, multicenter observational cohort study that enrolled adults hospitalized with AP between 2017 and 2021 and followed them for one year. Ninety-eight participants who completed 12-month follow-up were included in this analysis. Diabetes status was assessed using a combination of measured glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at predetermined time intervals or physician diagnosis. In 68 participants without diabetes at enrollment, the cumulative incidence of new-onset diabetes was 4.4 % (n = 3) at 3 months and 10.3 % (n = 7) at 12 months. No differences were observed in demographic or pancreatitis-related characteristics between those who did versus did not develop diabetes, in part due to small sample size. In summary, new-onset diabetes was identified in approximately 10 % within one year after an episode of AP. Larger prospective studies are needed to further define the incidence, risk factors, and mechanisms of diabetes and pre-diabetes following AP. NCT03063398.

Position statement on the definition, incidence, diagnosis and outcome of acute on chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Acute on chronic pancreatitis (ACP) is a relatively common condition, but there are significant gaps in our knowledge on the definition, incidence, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. METHODS: A systematic review that followed PICO (Population; Intervention; Comparator; Outcome) recommendation for quantitative questions and PICo (Population, Phenomenon of Interest, Context) for qualitative research was done to answer 10 of the most relevant questions about ACP. Quality of evidence was judged by the GRADE criteria (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). The manuscript was sent for review to 12 international experts from various disciplines and continents using a Delphi process. RESULTS: The quality of evidence, for most statements, was low to very low, which means that the recommendations in general are only conditional. Despite that, it was possible to reach strong levels of agreement by the expert panel for all 10 questions. A new consensus definition of ACP was reached. Although common, the real incidence of ACP is not known, with alcohol as a major risk factor. Although pain dominates, other non-specific symptoms and signs can be present. Serum levels of pancreatic enzymes may be less than 3 times the upper limit of normal and cross-sectional imaging is considered more accurate for the diagnosis in many cases. It appears that it is less severe and with a lower mortality risk than acute pancreatitis. CONCLUSIONS: Although the evidence base is poor, this position statement provides a foundation from which to advance management of ACP.

Incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 145 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) largely remain unknown with changing trends in ERCP use, indication, and techniques. We sought to determine the incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP in consecutive and high-risk patients based on a systemic review and meta-analysis of patients in placebo and no-stent arms of randomized control trials (RCTs). METHODS: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from the inception of each database to June 2022 to identify full-text RCTs evaluating PEP prophylaxes. The incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP from the placebo or no-stent arms of RCTs were recorded for consecutive and high-risk patients. A random-effects meta-analysis for a proportions model was used to calculate PEP incidence, severity, and mortality. RESULTS: One hundred forty-five RCTs were found with 19,038 patients in the placebo or no-stent arms. The overall cumulative incidence of PEP was 10.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.3-11.3), predominantly among the academic centers conducting such RCTs. The cumulative incidences of severe PEP and mortality were .5% (95% CI, .3-.7) and .2% (95% CI, .08-.3), respectively, across 91 RCTs with 14,441 patients. The cumulative incidences of PEP and severe PEP were 14.1% (95% CI, 11.5-17.2) and .8% (95% CI, .4-1.6), respectively, with a mortality rate of .2% (95% CI, 0-.3) across 35 RCTs with 3733 patients at high risk of PEP. The overall trend for the incidence of PEP among patients randomized to placebo or no-stent arms of RCTs has remained unchanged from 1977 to 2022 (P = .48). CONCLUSIONS: The overall incidence of PEP is 10.2% but is 14.1% among high-risk patients based on this systematic review of placebo or no-stent arms of 145 RCTs; this rate has not changed between 1977 and 2022. Severe PEP and mortality from PEP are relatively uncommon.

Predicting Persistent Acute Respiratory Failure in Acute Pancreatitis: The Accuracy of Two Lung Injury Indices.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Early and accurate identification of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) at high risk of persistent acute respiratory failure (PARF) is crucial. We sought to determine the accuracy of simplified Lung Injury Prediction Score (sLIPS) and simplified Early Acute Lung Injury (sEALI) for predicting PARF in ward AP patients. METHODS: Consecutive AP patients in a training cohort from West China Hospital of Sichuan University (n = 912) and a validation cohort from The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University (n = 1033) were analyzed. PARF was defined as oxygen in arterial blood/fraction of inspired oxygen < 300 mmHg that lasts for > 48 h. The sLIPS was composed by shock (predisposing condition), alcohol abuse, obesity, high respiratory rate, low oxygen saturation, high oxygen requirement, hypoalbuminemia, and acidosis (risk modifiers). The sEALI was calculated from oxygen 2 to 6 L/min, oxygen > 6 L/min, and high respiratory rate. Both indices were calculated on admission. RESULTS: PARF developed in 16% (145/912) and 22% (228/1033) (22%) of the training and validation cohorts, respectively. In these patients, sLIPS and sEALI were significantly increased. sLIPS ≥ 2 predicted PARF in the training (AUROC 0.87, 95% CI 0.84-0.89) and validation (AUROC 0.81, 95% CI 0.78-0.83) cohorts. sLIPS was significantly more accurate than sEALI and current clinical scoring systems in both cohorts (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Using routinely available clinical data, the sLIPS can accurately predict PARF in ward AP patients and outperforms the sEALI and current existing clinical scoring systems.

Overlap and cumulative effects of pancreatic duct obstruction, abnormal pain processing and psychological distress on patient-reported outcomes in chronic pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: Several factors have been suggested to mediate pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis. However, it is unknown whether these factors are overlapping and if they have cumulative effects on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). DESIGN: We performed a multicentre cross-sectional study of 201 prospectively enrolled subjects with definitive chronic pancreatitis. All subjects underwent evaluation for pancreatic duct obstruction, abnormalities in pain processing using quantitative sensory testing, and screening for psychological distress (anxiety, depression and pain catastrophising) based on validated questionnaires. Abnormality was defined by normal reference values. PROs included pain symptom severity (Brief Pain Inventory short form) and quality of life (EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire). Associations between pain-related factors and PROs were investigated by linear trend analyses, multiple regression models and mediation analyses. RESULTS: Clinical evaluation suggestive of pancreatic duct obstruction was observed in 29%, abnormal pain processing in 23%, anxiety in 47%, depression in 39% and pain catastrophising in 28%; each of these factors was associated with severity of at least one PRO. Two or more factors were present in 51% of subjects. With an increasing number of factors, there was an increase in pain severity scores (p<0.001) and pain interference scores (p<0.001), and a reduction in quality of life (p<0.001). All factors had independent and direct effects on PROs, with the strongest effect size observed for psychological distress. CONCLUSION: Pain-related factors in chronic pancreatitis are often present in an overlapping manner and have a cumulative detrimental effect on PROs. These findings support a multidisciplinary strategy for pain management. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03434392).

Pancreatic QST Differentiates Chronic Pancreatitis Patients into Distinct Pain Phenotypes Independent of Psychiatric Comorbidities.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Quantitative sensory testing (QST) has been previously used to study pain in chronic pancreatitis (CP) but included methods that are not suitable for clinical purposes. The aims of this study were to determine if pancreatic QST (P-QST) can differentiate patients into distinct pain phenotypes and to determine the association of these with their clinical pain and psychiatric comorbidities. METHODS: A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted where patients completed validated questionnaires assessing quality of life (QoL), depression and anxiety scores as well as clinical pain symptoms followed by P-QST which included a cold pressor test, repetitive pinprick stimuli and pressure stimulation of the upper abdominal (T10) and control dermatomes. P-QST categorized patients into pain phenotypes based on a previously established nomogram. QoL, clinical pain and psychiatric assessment scores were compared across these groups. RESULTS: A total of 179 patients were enrolled with a mean age of 54.1±13.6 years among whom 59% were males and 42% had an alcoholic etiology. P-QST showed no hyperalgesia in 91 (51%), segmental hyperalgesia in 50 (28%) and widespread hyperalgesia in 38 (21%) patients. Patients with widespread hyperalgesia had significantly higher pain intensity scores (P = .03) and rates of constant pain (P = .002) as well as decreased QoL (P < .001) and physical functioning (P =.03) in comparison with the other two pain phenotypes. In contrast, psychiatric comorbidities were similar across all groups. CONCLUSIONS: P-QST may serve as a novel unbiased pain assessment tool in CP as it categorizes patients into distinct pain phenotypes independent of their psychiatric comorbidities.

Development of the Comprehensive Pain Assessment Tool Short Form for Chronic Pancreatitis: Validity and Reliability Testing.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Pain is the foremost complication to chronic pancreatitis (CP), but no validated questionnaires for assessment exist. The COMPAT questionnaire includes all relevant pain dimensions in CP, but a short form is needed to make it usable in clinical practice. METHODS: The full COMPAT questionnaire was completed by 91 patients and systematically reduced to 6 questions. Pain severity and analgesic use were merged, leaving 5 pain dimensions. The pain dimension ratings were normalized to a 0-100 scale, and the weighted total score was calculated, where 3 dimensions were weighted double. Reliability of the short form was tested in a test-retest study in 76 patients, and concurrent validity tested against the Brief Pain Inventory and Izbicki pain questionnaire. Convergent validity was verified using confirmatory factor analysis, and criterion validity tested against quality-of-life and hospitalization rates. RESULTS: The COMPAT-SF questionnaire consisted of the following pain dimensions: a) pain severity, b) pain pattern, c) factors provoking pain, d) widespread pain, and e) a qualitative pain-describing dimension. Quality of life correlated with the total score and all pain dimensions (P <.05). The total score, pain severity, pain pattern, and factors provoking pain were correlated with hospitalization rates (P <.05). The total score correlated with the Izbicki and Brief Pain Inventory scores (P <.0001). The reliability of the questionnaire in patients in a stable phase was good with an interclass correlation coefficient of 0.89. CONCLUSION: The COMPAT-SF questionnaire includes the most relevant aspects of pain in CP and is a feasible, reliable, and valid pain assessment instrument recommended to be used in future trials.