-
Journal of Digestive Diseases Oct 2021Pancreatic stones result from chronic pancreatitis and can occur in the main pancreatic duct, pancreatic branches or parenchyma. Although extracorporeal shock wave... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Pancreatic stones result from chronic pancreatitis and can occur in the main pancreatic duct, pancreatic branches or parenchyma. Although extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is considered the first-line treatment, per-oral pancreatoscopy (POP) has emerged as a useful method for treating pancreatic stones. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy and safety of POP-guided lithotripsy, electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) and laser lithotripsy (LL), in patients with pancreatolithiasis.
METHODS
Literature review was conducted in PubMed, OVID, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases for studies published up to August 2020.
RESULTS
Altogether 15 studies were analyzed, of which 11 were retrospective and four were prospective. The studies comprised 370 patients, of whom 66.4% were male. The patients underwent 218 EHL and 155 LL. The pooled technical and clinical success rate of the overall POP was 88.1% and 87.1%. For EHL-POP, the pooled technical success rate was 90.9% (95% CI 87.2%-95.2%) and the pooled clinical success rate was 89.8% (95% CI 87.2%-95.2%). While for LL-POP, the pooled technical and clinical success rate was 88.4% (95% CI 85.9%-95.1%) and 85.8% (95% CI 80.6%-91.6%). In total 43 adverse events occurred (12.1%; 95% CI 8.7%-15.5%).
CONCLUSION
POP-guided lithotripsy has a high rate of technical and clinical success for managing pancreatolithiasis with a low complication rate. Both EHL-POP and LL-POP achieve similar efficacy in the endoscopic therapy of pancreatolithiasis. Further large randomized controlled trials are needed to compare EHL-POP and LL-POP with ESWL and evaluate whether POP may replace ESWL as the first-line management of pancreatolithiasis.
Topics: Humans; Lithotripsy; Male; Pancreatic Diseases; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34436824
DOI: 10.1111/1751-2980.13041 -
Surgery May 2022Thoracopancreatic fistulae are a rare complication of chronic pancreatitis. The aim of the present study is to evaluate potential risk factors for endoscopic treatment... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Thoracopancreatic fistulae are a rare complication of chronic pancreatitis. The aim of the present study is to evaluate potential risk factors for endoscopic treatment failure and explore the safety of surgery when utilized either upfront or as a "bail-out" procedure after failed endoscopic treatment.
METHOD
A comprehensive literature search was conducted on the MedLine, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Knowledge databases for cases of thoracopancreatic fistulae. Data regarding patient demographics, fistula anatomy, and treatment interventions performed were extracted for further analysis.
RESULTS
The study pool consisted of 75 case reports and 19 case series published between the years 1972 and 2020. Duct disruption in the pancreatic body was most commonly encountered (41.1%), and a left pleural effusion was the most common manifestation (46%). Endoscopic treatment was attempted for 104 patients with an overall success rate of 42.3% (n = 44). Predictive factors for eventual success of endoscopic treatment were the ability of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography to diagnose the thoracopancreatic leak (odds ratio 9.76, 95% confidence interval 2.71-35.09, P < .001), the use of pancreatic duct stents (odds ratio 22.1, 95% confidence interval 7.92-61.61, P < .001), and the use of sphincterotomy (odds ratio 7.96, 95% confidence interval 2.1-30.1, P < .001). Conversely, the presence of pancreatic duct calculi was associated with endoscopic treatment failure (odds ratio 0.34, 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.94, P = .03). Pooled results suggest that surgical outcomes were comparable between the primary and salvage surgery groups.
CONCLUSION
A step-up approach from endoscopic management to salvage surgery may be effectively employed in cases of thoracopancreatic fistulae refractory to endoscopic treatment.
Topics: Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Fistula; Humans; Pancreas; Pancreatic Ducts; Pancreatitis, Chronic; Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic; Stents; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34742569
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2021.08.052 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2021To compare perioperative and oncological outcomes of pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after laparoscopic open pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD OPD), we performed a...
BACKGROUND
To compare perioperative and oncological outcomes of pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after laparoscopic open pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD OPD), we performed a meta-analysis of currently available propensity score matching studies and large-scale retrospective cohorts to compare the safety and overall effect of LPD to OPD for patients with PDAC.
METHODS
A meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO and the registration number is CRD42021250395. PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched based on a defined search strategy to identify eligible studies before March 2021. Data on operative times, blood loss, 30-day mortality, reoperation, length of hospital stay (LOS), overall morbidity, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), blood transfusion, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), and oncologic outcomes (R0 resection, lymph node dissection, overall survival, and long-term survival) were subjected to meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Overall, we identified 10 retrospective studies enrolling a total of 11,535 patients (1,514 and 10,021 patients underwent LPD and OPD, respectively). The present meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in overall survival time, 1-year survival, 2-year survival, 30-day mortality, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications, POPF, DGE, PPH, and lymph node dissection between the LPD and OPD groups. Nevertheless, compared with the OPD group, LPD resulted in significantly higher rate of R0 resection (OR: 1.22; 95% CI 1.06-1.40; = 0.005), longer operative time (WMD: 60.01 min; 95% CI 23.23-96.79; = 0.001), lower Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III rate ( = 0.02), less blood loss (WMD: -96.49 ml; 95% CI -165.14 to -27.83; = 0.006), lower overall morbidity rate (OR: 0.65; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.85; = 0.002), shorter LOS (MD = -2.73; 95% CI -4.44 to -1.03; = 0.002), higher 4-year survival time ( = 0.04), 5-year survival time ( = 0.001), and earlier time to starting adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery (OR: -10.86; 95% CI -19.42 to -2.30; = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
LPD is a safe and feasible alternative to OPD for patients with PDAC, and compared with OPD, LPD seemed to provide a similar OS.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails.
PubMed: 34778064
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.749140 -
Endoscopy International Open Nov 2020Endoscopic ultrasound guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is a minimal-invasive therapeutic option to surgery and in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde...
Endoscopic ultrasound guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) is a minimal-invasive therapeutic option to surgery and in patients with failed endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP). The aim of this review was to quantitatively appraise the clinical outcomes of EUS-PDD by meta-analysis methods. We searched multiple databases from inception through March 2020 to identify studies that reported on EUS-PDD. Pooled rates of technical success, successful drainage of pancreatic duct, clinical success, and adverse events were calculated. Study heterogeneity was assessed using I % and 95 % prediction interval. A total of 22 studies (714 patients) were included. The pooled rate of technical success in EUS-PDD was 84.8 % (95 % CI 79.1-89.2). The pooled rate of successful PD drained by EUS-PDD was 77.5 % (95 % CI 63.1-87.4). The pooled rate of clinical success of EUS-PDD was 89.2 % (95 % CI 82.1-93.7). The pooled rate of all adverse events was 18.1 % (95 % CI 14.2-22.9). On sub-group analysis, the pooled technical success and clinical success of EUS-PDD from Japanese data were considerably superior (91.2 %, 83-95.6 & 92.5 %, 83.9-96.7, respectively). The pooled rate of post EUS-PDD acute pancreatitis was 6.6 % (95 % CI 4.5-9.4), bleeding was 4.1 % (95 % CI 2.7-6.2), perforation and/or pneumoperitoneum was 3.1 % (95 % CI 1.9-5), pancreatic leak and/or pancreatic fluid collection was 2.3 % (95 % CI 1.4-4), and infection was 2.8 % (95 % CI 1.7-4.6). EUS-PDD demonstrates high technical success and clinical success rates with acceptable adverse events. Technical success was especially high for anastomotic strictures.
PubMed: 33140022
DOI: 10.1055/a-1236-3350 -
Surgery Feb 2021Postoperative hyperamylasemia is a frequent finding after pancreatoduodenectomy, but its incidence and clinical implications have not yet been analyzed systematically....
BACKGROUND
Postoperative hyperamylasemia is a frequent finding after pancreatoduodenectomy, but its incidence and clinical implications have not yet been analyzed systematically. The aim of this review is to reappraise the concept of postoperative hyperamylasemia with postoperative acute pancreatitis, including its definition, interpretation, and correlation.
METHODS
Online databases were used to search all available relevant literature published through June 2019. The following search terms were used: "pancreaticoduodenectomy," "amylase," and "pancreatitis." Surgical series reporting data on postoperative hyperamylasemia or postoperative acute pancreatitis were selected and screened.
RESULTS
Among 379 screened studies, 39 papers were included and comprised data from a total of 9,220 patients. Postoperative hyperamylasemia was rarely defined in most of these series, and serum amylase values were measured at different cutoff levels and reported on different postoperative days. The actual levels of serum amylase activity and the representative cutoff levels required to reach a diagnosis of postoperative acute pancreatitis were markedly greater on the first postoperative days and tended to decrease over time. Most studies analyzing postoperative hyperamylasemia focused on its correlation with postoperative pancreatic fistula and other postoperative morbidities. The incidence of postoperative acute pancreatitis varied markedly between studies, with its definition completely lacking in 40% of the analyzed papers. A soft pancreatic parenchyma, a small pancreatic duct, and pathology differing from cancer or chronic pancreatitis were all predisposing factors to the development of postoperative hyperamylasemia.
CONCLUSION
Postoperative hyperamylasemia has been proposed as the biochemical expression of pancreatic parenchymal injury related to localized ischemia and inflammation of the pancreatic stump. Such phenomena, analogous to those associated with acute pancreatitis, could perhaps be renamed as postoperative acute pancreatitis from a clinical standpoint. Patients with postoperative acute pancreatitis experienced an increased rate of all postoperative complications, particularly postoperative pancreatic fistula. Taken together, the discrepancies among previous studies of postoperative hyperamylasemia and postoperative acute pancreatitis outlined in the present review may provide a basis for stronger evidence necessary for the development of universally accepted definitions for postoperative hyperamylasemia and postoperative acute pancreatitis.
Topics: Amylases; Diagnosis, Differential; Humans; Hyperamylasemia; Incidence; Pancreas; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatitis; Postoperative Complications; Review Literature as Topic
PubMed: 32641279
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.04.062 -
European Radiology Apr 2024To evaluate the diagnostic performance of quantitative magnetic resonance (MR) imaging biomarkers in distinguishing between inflammatory pancreatic masses (IPM) and... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the diagnostic performance of quantitative magnetic resonance (MR) imaging biomarkers in distinguishing between inflammatory pancreatic masses (IPM) and pancreatic cancer (PC).
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science through August 2023. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) was used to evaluate the risk of bias and applicability of the studies. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated using the DerSimonian-Laird method. Univariate meta-regression analysis was used to identify the potential factors of heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies were included in this meta-analysis. The two main types of IPM, mass-forming pancreatitis (MFP) and autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP), differ in their apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values. Compared with PC, the ADC value was higher in MFP but lower in AIP. The pooled sensitivity/specificity of ADC were 0.80/0.85 for distinguishing MFP from PC and 0.82/0.84 for distinguishing AIP from PC. The pooled sensitivity/specificity for the maximal diameter of the upstream main pancreatic duct (dMPD) was 0.86/0.74, with a cutoff of dMPD ≤ 4 mm, and 0.97/0.52, with a cutoff of dMPD ≤ 5 mm. The pooled sensitivity/specificity for perfusion fraction (f) was 0.82/0.68, and 0.82/0.77 for mass stiffness values.
CONCLUSIONS
Quantitative MR imaging biomarkers are useful in distinguishing between IPM and PC. ADC values differ between MFP and AIP, and they should be separated for consideration in future studies.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT
Quantitative MR parameters could serve as non-invasive imaging biomarkers for differentiating malignant pancreatic neoplasms from inflammatory masses of the pancreas, and hence help to avoid unnecessary surgery.
KEY POINTS
• Several quantitative MR imaging biomarkers performed well in differential diagnosis between inflammatory pancreatic mass and pancreatic cancer. • The ADC value could discern pancreatic cancer from mass-forming pancreatitis or autoimmune pancreatitis, if the two inflammatory mass types are not combined. • The diameter of main pancreatic duct had the highest specificity for differentiating autoimmune pancreatitis from pancreatic cancer.
PubMed: 38639911
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-024-10720-9 -
Journal of Surgical Oncology Nov 2022Germline BRCA1/2 mutations lead to malfunction of DNA damage repair pathways and predispose to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The aim of this study is to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Germline BRCA1/2 mutations lead to malfunction of DNA damage repair pathways and predispose to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The aim of this study is to synthesise the available research on this topic. Four studies reporting risk ratio (RR) were included in the final meta-analysis to minimise misrepresenting our results by combining separate risk estimates. Our meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant increased risk of PDAC in BRCA carriers overall (RR: 2.65, 95% confidence interval: 1.43-4.91, p = 0.002).
Topics: BRCA1 Protein; BRCA2 Protein; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Germ-Line Mutation; Humans; Mutation; Pancreatic Ducts; Pancreatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 35770919
DOI: 10.1002/jso.26994 -
Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology &... 2022While endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic tool in primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), there is conflicting... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
While endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic tool in primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), there is conflicting data on associated adverse events. The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis are to (1) compare ERCP-related adverse events in patients with and without PSC and (2) determine risk factors for ERCP-related adverse events in PSC.
METHODS
Embase, PubMed, and CENTRAL were searched between January 1, 2000, and May 12, 2021. Eligible studies included adults with PSC undergoing ERCP and reported at least one ERCP-related adverse event (cholangitis, pancreatitis, bleeding, and perforation) or an associated risk factor. The risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2. Raw event rates were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and then pooled using random-effects models.
RESULTS
Twenty studies met eligibility criteria, of which four were included in a meta-analysis comparing post-ERCP adverse events in patients with PSC ( = 715) to those without PSC ( = 9979). We found a significant threefold increase in the 30-day odds of cholangitis in PSC compared to those without (OR 3.263, 95% CI 1.076-9.896; =0.037). However, there were no significant differences in post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), bleeding, or perforation. Due to limitations in primary data, only risk factors contributing to PEP could be analyzed. Accidental passage of the guidewire into the pancreatic duct (OR 7.444, 95% CI 3.328-16.651; < 0.001; = 65.0%) and biliary sphincterotomy (OR 4.802, 95% CI 1.916-12.033; =0.001; = 73.1%) were associated with higher odds of PEP in a second meta-analysis including five studies.
CONCLUSIONS
In the context of limited comparative data and heterogeneity, PSC patients undergoing ERCP have higher odds of cholangitis despite the majority receiving antibiotics. Additionally, accidental wire passage and biliary sphincterotomy increased the odds of PEP. Future studies on ERCP-related risks and preventive strategies are needed.
Topics: Adult; Catheterization; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Cholangitis; Cholangitis, Sclerosing; Humans; Pancreatitis
PubMed: 35910039
DOI: 10.1155/2022/2372257 -
Endoscopy International Open Aug 2020Pain is the most frequent and dominant symptom of chronic pancreatitis. Currently, these patients are treated using a step-up approach, including analgesics and...
Pain is the most frequent and dominant symptom of chronic pancreatitis. Currently, these patients are treated using a step-up approach, including analgesics and lifestyle adjustments, endoscopic, and eventually surgical treatment. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is indicated after failure of the first step in patients with symptomatic intraductal stones larger than 5 mm in the head or body of the pancreas. To assess the complete ductal clearance rate and pain relief after ESWL in patients with symptomatic chronic pancreatitis with pancreatic duct stones, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. A systematic literature search from January 2000 to December 2018 was performed in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE for studies on ductal clearance rate of ESWL in patients with symptomatic chronic pancreatitis with pancreatic duct stones. After screening 486 studies, 22 studies with 3868 patients with chronic pancreatitis undergoing ESWL for pancreatic duct stones were included. The pooled proportion of patients with complete ductal clearance was 69.8 % (95 % CI 63.8-75.5). The pooled proportion of complete absence of pain during follow-up was 64.2 % (95 % CI 57.5-70.6). Complete stone fragmentation was 86.3 % (95 % CI 76.0-94.0). Post-procedural pancreatitis and cholangitis occurred in 4.0 % (95 % CI 2.5-5.8) and 0.5 % (95 % CI 0.2-0.9), respectively. Treatment with ESWL results in complete ductal clearance rate in a majority of patients, resulting in absence of pain during follow up in over half of patients with symptomatic chronic pancreatitis caused by obstructing pancreatic duct stones.
PubMed: 32743061
DOI: 10.1055/a-1171-1322 -
Digestive Diseases and Sciences May 2021Severe pancreatitis may result in a disrupted pancreatic duct, which is associated with a complicated clinical course. Diagnosis of a disrupted pancreatic duct is not...
BACKGROUND
Severe pancreatitis may result in a disrupted pancreatic duct, which is associated with a complicated clinical course. Diagnosis of a disrupted pancreatic duct is not standardized in clinical practice or international guidelines. We performed a systematic review of the literature on imaging modalities for diagnosing a disrupted pancreatic duct in patients with acute pancreatitis.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library databases to identify all studies evaluating diagnostic modalities for the diagnosis of a disrupted pancreatic duct in acute pancreatitis. All data regarding diagnostic accuracy were extracted.
RESULTS
We included 8 studies, evaluating five different diagnostic modalities in 142 patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Study quality was assessed, with proportionally divided high and low risk of bias and low applicability concerns in 75% of the studies. A sensitivity of 100% was reported for endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. The sensitivity of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with or without secretin was 83%. A sensitivity of 92% was demonstrated for a combined cohort of secretin-magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. A sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 50% was found for amylase measurements in drain fluid compared with ERCP.
CONCLUSIONS
This review suggests that various diagnostic modalities are accurate in diagnosing a disrupted pancreatic duct in patients with acute pancreatitis. Amylase measurement in drain fluid should be standardized. Given the invasive nature of other modalities, secretin-magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography would be recommended as first diagnostic modality. Further prospective studies, however, are needed.
Topics: Amylases; Biomarkers; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Cholangiopancreatography, Magnetic Resonance; Clinical Enzyme Tests; Endosonography; Humans; Pancreatic Ducts; Pancreatitis; Predictive Value of Tests; Reproducibility of Results; Secretin; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 32594462
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-020-06413-0