-
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Jun 2022Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic inflammatory immune-mediated disorder of the gut with frequent extra-intestinal complications. Pancreatic involvement in... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic inflammatory immune-mediated disorder of the gut with frequent extra-intestinal complications. Pancreatic involvement in IBD is not uncommon and comprises a heterogeneous group of conditions, including acute pancreatitis (AP), chronic pancreatitis (CP), autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) and pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI); however, data on such an association remain sparse and heterogeneous.
METHOD
PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for studies investigating pancreatic involvement in patients with IBD.
RESULTS
Four thousand one hundred and twenty-one records were identified and 547 screened; finally, 124 studies were included in the review. AP is the most frequent pancreatic manifestation in IBD; the majority of AP cases in IBD are due to gallstones and drugs but cases of idiopathic AP are increasingly reported. AIP is a rare disease, but a strong association with IBD has been demonstrated, especially for type 2 and ulcerative colitis. The pathogenetic link between IBD and AIP remains unclear, but an immune-mediated pathway seems plausible. An association between CP and PEI with IBD has also been suggested, but data are to date scarce and conflicting.
CONCLUSION
This is the first systematic review of the association between IBD and pancreatic diseases. Gallstones and drugs should be considered the most probable causes of AP in IBD, with type 2 AIP also being possible.
Topics: Acute Disease; Autoimmune Diseases; Chronic Disease; Colitis, Ulcerative; Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency; Gallstones; Humans; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Pancreatitis, Chronic
PubMed: 35505465
DOI: 10.1111/apt.16949 -
Cureus Oct 2023Acute pancreatitis is an acute inflammatory process of the pancreas with high prevalence and varying degrees of severity that can be potentially life-threatening. Much... (Review)
Review
Acute pancreatitis is an acute inflammatory process of the pancreas with high prevalence and varying degrees of severity that can be potentially life-threatening. Much is still unknown about which mechanisms determine the course and severity of acute pancreatitis. The primary objective of this review is to identify the potential association between circulating lymphocytes and the severity of acute pancreatitis. A systematic search was performed in Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrails.gov. The authors independently did the selection process as well as data extraction that was recorded into a flow diagram following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). Our initial search identified 27,783 studies which were narrowed down to 13 by applying strict inclusion and exclusion algorithms. The consistent findings across the studies indicated that peripheral blood lymphocytes are related to acute pancreatitis severity.
PubMed: 38022062
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.47532 -
Digestive Surgery 2021The management of the pancreas in patients with duodenal trauma or duodenal tumors remains a controversial issue. Pancreas-preserving total duodenectomy (PPTD) requires...
BACKGROUND
The management of the pancreas in patients with duodenal trauma or duodenal tumors remains a controversial issue. Pancreas-preserving total duodenectomy (PPTD) requires a meticulous surgical technique. The most common indication is familial duodenal adenomatous polyposis (FAP). The aims of this study are to carry out a systematic review of the literature on the indications for PPTD and to highlight the risks and benefits compared with other more aggressive procedures.
SUMMARY
A systematic literature review was performed following PRISMA recommendations of studies published in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library until May 2019. Thirty articles describing 211 patients were chosen. The mean age was 48 years. The surgical indication in 75% of patients was FAP. The mean operating time was 329 min and mean intraoperative bleeding 412 mL. Postoperative morbidity rate was 49.7% (76% Clavien-Dindo
97.8%. Key Messages: PPTD is indicated for patients with benign and premalignant duodenal lesions without involvement of the pancreatic head. It is a feasible procedure offering an alternative to other more aggressive procedures in selected patients. Mortality is below 1.5%. Topics: Adenomatous Polyposis Coli; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Duodenal Neoplasms; Duodenum; Humans; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 34000717
DOI: 10.1159/000515718 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2014Pancreas or kidney-pancreas transplantation improves survival and quality of life for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus and kidney failure. Immunosuppression after... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreas or kidney-pancreas transplantation improves survival and quality of life for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus and kidney failure. Immunosuppression after transplantation is associated with complications. Steroids have adverse effects on cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension, hyperglycaemia or hyperlipidaemia, increase risk of infection, obesity, cataracts, myopathy, bone metabolism alterations, dermatologic problems and cushingoid appearance. Whether avoiding steroids changes outcomes is unclear.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of steroid early withdrawal (treatment for less than 14 days after transplantation), late withdrawal (after 14 days after transplantation) or steroid avoidance in patients receiving a pancreas (including a vascularized organ) alone (PTA), simultaneous with a kidney (SPK) or after kidney transplantation (PAK).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register (to 18 June 2014) through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator. We handsearched: reference lists of nephrology textbooks, relevant studies, recent publications and clinical practice guidelines; abstracts from international transplantation society scientific meetings; and sent emails and letters seeking information about unpublished or incomplete studies to known investigators.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies of steroid avoidance (including early withdrawal) versus steroid maintenance or versus late withdrawal in pancreas or pancreas with kidney transplant recipients. We defined steroid avoidance as complete avoidance of steroid immunosuppression, early steroid withdrawal as steroid treatment for less than 14 days after transplantation and late withdrawal as steroid withdrawal after 14 days after transplantation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed the retrieved titles and abstracts, and where necessary the full text reports to determine which studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Authors of included studies were contacted to obtain missing information. Statistical analyses were performed using random effects models and results expressed as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Cohort studies were not meta-analysed, but their findings summarised descriptively.
MAIN RESULTS
Three RCTs enrolling 144 participants met our inclusion criteria. Two compared steroid avoidance versus late steroid withdrawal and one compared late steroid withdrawal versus steroid maintenance. All studies included SPK and only one also included PTA. All studies had an overall moderate risk of bias and presented only short-term results (six to 12 months). Two studies (89 participants) compared steroid avoidance or early steroid withdrawal versus late steroid withdrawal. There was no clear evidence of an impact on mortality (2 studies, 89 participants: RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.21 to 12.75), risk of kidney loss censored for death (2 studies, 89 participants: RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.09), risk of pancreas loss censored for death (2 studies, 89 participants: RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.04), or acute kidney rejection (1 study, 49 participants: RR 2.08, 95% CI 0.20 to 21.50), however results were uncertain and consistent with no difference or important benefit or harm of steroid avoidance/early steroid withdrawal. The study that compared late steroid withdrawal versus steroid maintenance observed no deaths, no graft loss or acute kidney rejection at six months in either group and reported uncertain effects on acute pancreas rejection (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.06 to 13.35). Of the possible adverse effects only infection was reported by one study. There were significantly more UTIs reported in the late withdrawal group compared to the steroid avoidance group (1 study, 25 patients: RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.66).We also identified 13 cohort studies and one RCT which randomised tacrolimus versus cyclosporin. These studies in general showed that steroid-sparing and withdrawal strategies had benefits in lowering HbAc1 and risk of infections (BK virus and CMV disease) and improved blood pressure control without increasing the risk of rejection. However, two studies found an increased incidence of acute pancreas rejection (HR 2.8, 95% CI 0.89 to 8.81, P = 0.066 in one study and 43.3% in the steroid withdrawal group versus 9.3% in the steroid maintenance, P < 0.05 at three years in the other) and one study found an increased incidence of acute kidney rejection (18.7% in the steroid withdrawal group versus 2.8% in the steroid maintenance, P < 0.05) at three years.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is currently insufficient evidence for the benefits and harms of steroid withdrawal in pancreas transplantation in the three RCTs (144 patients) identified. The results showed uncertain results for short-term risk of rejection, mortality, or graft survival in steroid-sparing strategies in a very small number of patients over a short period of follow-up. Overall the data was sparse, so no firm conclusions are possible. Moreover, the 13 observational studies findings generally concur with the evidence found in the RCTs.
Topics: Adult; Cohort Studies; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Graft Rejection; Humans; Immunosuppression Therapy; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Kidney Transplantation; Living Donors; Middle Aged; Pancreas Transplantation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Steroids; Withholding Treatment
PubMed: 25220222
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007669.pub2 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Apr 2018To evaluate the efficacy and safety of artificial pancreas treatment in non-pregnant outpatients with type 1 diabetes. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of artificial pancreas treatment in non-pregnant outpatients with type 1 diabetes.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and grey literature up to 2 February 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Randomised controlled trials in non-pregnant outpatients with type 1 diabetes that compared the use of any artificial pancreas system with any type of insulin based treatment. Primary outcome was proportion (%) of time that sensor glucose level was within the near normoglycaemic range (3.9-10 mmol/L). Secondary outcomes included proportion (%) of time that sensor glucose level was above 10 mmol/L or below 3.9 mmol/L, low blood glucose index overnight, mean sensor glucose level, total daily insulin needs, and glycated haemoglobin. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used to assess study quality.
RESULTS
40 studies (1027 participants with data for 44 comparisons) were included in the meta-analysis. 35 comparisons assessed a single hormone artificial pancreas system, whereas nine comparisons assessed a dual hormone system. Only nine studies were at low risk of bias. Proportion of time in the near normoglycaemic range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) was significantly higher with artificial pancreas use, both overnight (weighted mean difference 15.15%, 95% confidence interval 12.21% to 18.09%) and over a 24 hour period (9.62%, 7.54% to 11.7%). Artificial pancreas systems had a favourable effect on the proportion of time with sensor glucose level above 10 mmol/L (-8.52%, -11.14% to -5.9%) or below 3.9 mmol/L (-1.49%, -1.86% to -1.11%) over 24 hours, compared with control treatment. Robustness of findings for the primary outcome was verified in sensitivity analyses, by including only trials at low risk of bias (11.64%, 9.1% to 14.18%) or trials under unsupervised, normal living conditions (10.42%, 8.63% to 12.2%). Results were consistent in a subgroup analysis both for single hormone and dual hormone artificial pancreas systems.
CONCLUSIONS
Artificial pancreas systems are an efficacious and safe approach for treating outpatients with type 1 diabetes. The main limitations of current research evidence on artificial pancreas systems are related to inconsistency in outcome reporting, small sample size, and short follow-up duration of individual trials.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Humans; Hyperglycemia; Hypoglycemia; Outpatients; Pancreas, Artificial; Patient Safety; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29669716
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.k1310 -
Public Health Nutrition Oct 2016Conflicting results on the association between fruit consumption and cancer risk have been reported. Little is known about the cancer preventive effects of different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Conflicting results on the association between fruit consumption and cancer risk have been reported. Little is known about the cancer preventive effects of different fruit types. The present meta-analysis investigates whether an association exists between apple intake and cancer risk.
DESIGN
Relevant observational studies were identified by literature search (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase). A random-effect model was used to estimate the cancer risk in different anatomical sites. Between-study heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed using adequate statistical tests.
RESULTS
Twenty case-control (three on lung, five on colorectal, five on breast, two on oesophageal, three on oral cavity, two on prostate and one each on pancreas, bladder, larynx, ovary, kidney and brain cancer) and twenty-one cohort (seven on lung, two on colorectal, three on breast and one each on oesophageal, pancreas, bladder, kidney, endometrial, head-neck, urothelial and stomach cancer) studies met the inclusion criteria. Comparing the highest v. lowest level of apple consumption, the reduction of lung cancer risk was statistically highly significant in both case-control (OR=0·75; 95% CI 0·63, 0·88; P=0·001, I 2=0 %) and cohort studies (relative risk=0·89; 95% CI 0·84, 0·94; P<0·001, I 2=53 %). Instead, in the case of colorectal (OR=0·66; 95% CI 0·54, 0·81; P<0·001, I 2=55%), breast (OR=0·79; 95% CI 0·73, 0·87; P<0·001, I 2=1 %) and overall digestive tract (OR=0·50; 95% CI 0·36, 0·69; P<0·001, I 2=90 %) cancers a significant preventive effect of apples was found only in case-control studies while prospective studies indicated no effect. No evidence of publication bias could be detected for colorectal, oral cavity, oesophageal and breast cancer. However, some confounding effects may be present and related to the consumption of other fruit which have not been considered as adjusting factors.
CONCLUSIONS
The present meta-analysis indicates that consumption of apples is associated with a reduced risk of cancer in different anatomical sites.
Topics: Female; Fruit; Humans; Male; Malus; Neoplasms; Observational Studies as Topic; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 27000627
DOI: 10.1017/S136898001600032X -
Epidemiology and Health 2023Alcohol consumption is a well-established risk factor for cancer. Despite extensive research into the relationship between alcohol consumption and cancer risk, the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Alcohol consumption is a well-established risk factor for cancer. Despite extensive research into the relationship between alcohol consumption and cancer risk, the effect of light alcohol consumption on cancer risk remains a topic of debate. To contribute to this discourse, we conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Our systematic review aimed to investigate the associations between different levels of alcohol consumption and the risk of several cancer types. We focused on analyzing prospective associations using data from 139 cohort studies. Among them, 106 studies were included in the meta-analysis after a quantitative synthesis.
RESULTS
Our analysis did not find a significant association between light alcohol consumption and all-cause cancer risk (relative risk, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.99 to 1.04), but we observed a dose-response relationship. Light alcohol consumption was significantly associated with higher risks of esophageal, colorectal, and breast cancers. Light to moderate drinking was associated with elevated risks of esophageal, colorectal, laryngeal, and breast cancers. Heavy drinking was also found to contribute to the risk of stomach, liver, pancreas, and prostate cancers, thereby increasing the risk of almost all types of cancer. Additionally, females generally had lower cancer risks compared to males.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings highlight that cancer risks extend beyond heavy alcohol consumption to include light alcohol consumption as well. These findings suggest that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption associated with cancer risk. Our results underscore the importance of public health interventions addressing alcohol consumption to mitigate cancer risks.
Topics: Male; Humans; Alcohol Drinking; Risk Factors; Breast Neoplasms; Prostatic Neoplasms; Colorectal Neoplasms
PubMed: 37905315
DOI: 10.4178/epih.e2023092 -
International Journal of Environmental... Nov 2021The burden of pancreatic cancer varies greatly across countries, with the number of deaths, incident cases, and disability-adjusted life years more than doubling in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The burden of pancreatic cancer varies greatly across countries, with the number of deaths, incident cases, and disability-adjusted life years more than doubling in recent years, and with high-income countries having the highest incidence and mortality rates. We conducted this systematic review with meta-analysis with the goal of summarizing the current evidence on dietary fiber intake and its role in reducing the risk of pancreatic cancer, given the importance of identifying risk factors. This systematic review followed the guidelines of the Cochrane Collaboration and the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020. The structured literature search was conducted on PubMed/Medline and Scopus, combining free text words and medical subject headings. Our review contained 18 records at the end of the process. Our results show that dietary fiber intake reduces the risk of pancreatic cancer. When the analysis was differentiated according to the type of fiber considered, sub-grouped by gender (reduction of around 60% among women), and when case-control studies were conducted, the strength of the association increased. Clinicians and policymakers should improve interventions to raise the population's awareness regarding the consumption of high-fiber diets, both in practice and in terms of public health policy.
Topics: Case-Control Studies; Dietary Fiber; Female; Humans; Incidence; Observational Studies as Topic; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Risk Factors
PubMed: 34770068
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182111556 -
Transplant International : Official... 2023Thrombosis is a leading causes of pancreas graft loss after simultaneous pancreas kidney (SPK), pancreas after kidney (PAK), and pancreas transplant alone (PTA). There... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Thrombosis is a leading causes of pancreas graft loss after simultaneous pancreas kidney (SPK), pancreas after kidney (PAK), and pancreas transplant alone (PTA). There remains no standardized thromboprophylaxis protocol. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the impact of heparin thromboprophylaxis on the incidence of pancreas thrombosis, pancreas graft loss, bleeding, and secondary outcomes in SPK, PAK, and PTA. Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched BIOSIS®, PubMed®, Cochrane Library®, EMBASE®, MEDLINE®, and Web of Science® on April 21, 2021. Primary peer-reviewed studies that met inclusion criteria were included. Two methods of quantitative synthesis were performed to account for comparative and non-comparative studies. We included 11 studies, comprising of 1,122 patients in the heparin group and 236 patients in the no-heparin group. When compared to the no-heparin control, prophylactic heparinization significantly decreased the risk of early pancreas thrombosis and pancreas loss for SPK, PAK and PTA without increasing the incidence of bleeding or acute return to the operating room. Heparin thromboprophylaxis yields an approximate two-fold reduction in both pancreas thrombosis and pancreas loss for SPK, PAK and PTA. We report the dosage, frequency, and duration of heparin administration to consolidate the available evidence.
Topics: Humans; Heparin; Anticoagulants; Kidney Transplantation; Venous Thromboembolism; Pancreas Transplantation; Pancreas; Thrombosis; Graft Survival
PubMed: 36819126
DOI: 10.3389/ti.2023.10442 -
Surgical Endoscopy Jun 2022The outcomes of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage (EUSD) in treatment of pancreas fluid collection (PFC) after pancreas surgeries have not been evaluated... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The outcomes of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage (EUSD) in treatment of pancreas fluid collection (PFC) after pancreas surgeries have not been evaluated systematically. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the outcomes of EUSD in patients with PFC after pancreas surgery and compare it with percutaneous drainage (PCD).
METHODS
PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for studies reporting outcomes EUSD in treatment of PFC after pancreas surgeries, from their inception until January 2022. Two meta-analyses were performed: (A) a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis of EUSD (meta-analysis A) and (B) two-arm meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of EUSD and PCD (meta-analysis B). Pooled proportion of the outcomes in meta-analysis A as well as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) in meta-analysis B was calculated to determine the technical and clinical success rates, complications rate, hospital stay, and recurrence rate. ROBINS-I tool was used to assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS
The literature search retrieved 610 articles, 25 of which were eligible for inclusion. Included clinical studies comprised reports on 695 patients. Twenty-five studies (477 patients) were included in meta-analysis A and eight studies (356 patients) were included in meta-analysis B. In meta-analysis A, the technical and clinical success rates of EUSD were 94% and 87%, respectively, with post-procedural complications of 14% and recurrence rates of 9%. Meta-analysis B showed comparable technical and clinical success rates as well as complications rates between EUSD and PCD. EUSD showed significantly shorter duration of hospital stay compared to that of patients treated with PCD.
CONCLUSION
EUSD seems to be associated with high technical and clinical success rates, with low rates of procedure-related complications. Although EUSD leads to shorter hospital stay compared to PCD, the certainty of evidence was low in this regard.
Topics: Drainage; Endosonography; Humans; Length of Stay; Pancreas; Pancreatic Diseases
PubMed: 35246738
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09137-6