-
Heliyon Apr 2024Predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) early poses a challenge in clinical practice. While there are well-established clinical scoring tools, their actual...
BACKGROUND
Predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) early poses a challenge in clinical practice. While there are well-established clinical scoring tools, their actual predictive performance remains uncertain. Various studies have explored the application of machine-learning methods for early AP prediction. However, a more comprehensive evidence-based assessment is needed to determine their predictive accuracy. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the predictive accuracy of machine learning in assessing the severity of AP.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched until December 5, 2023. The risk of bias in eligible studies was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Subgroup analyses, based on different machine learning types, were performed. Additionally, the predictive accuracy of mainstream scoring tools was summarized.
RESULTS
This systematic review ultimately included 33 original studies. The pooled c-index in both the training and validation sets was 0.87 (95 % CI: 0.84-0.89) and 0.88 (95 % CI: 0.86-0.90), respectively. The sensitivity in the training set was 0.81 (95 % CI: 0.77-0.84), and in the validation set, it was 0.79 (95 % CI: 0.71-0.85). The specificity in the training set was 0.84 (95 % CI: 0.78-0.89), and in the validation set, it was 0.90 (95 % CI: 0.86-0.93). The primary model incorporated was logistic regression; however, its predictive accuracy was found to be inferior to that of neural networks, random forests, and xgboost. The pooled c-index of the APACHE II, BISAP, and Ranson were 0.74 (95 % CI: 0.68-0.80), 0.77 (95 % CI: 0.70-0.85), and 0.74 (95 % CI: 0.68-0.79), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Machine learning demonstrates excellent accuracy in predicting the severity of AP, providing a reference for updating or developing a straightforward clinical prediction tool.
PubMed: 38655348
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29603 -
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Apr 2024Increasing evidence support endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) as a potential alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Increasing evidence support endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) as a potential alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided biliary drainage (ERCP-BD) in the primary treatment of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of both techniques as the initial approach for MBO.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing both techniques and reporting at least one of the outcomes of interest. The pooled estimates were calculated using the random-effects model and I statistics were used to evaluate heterogeneity.
RESULTS
We included six RCTs (577 patients). There were no significant differences between groups in stent patency (MD 8.18 days; 95% CI -22.55, 38.91), procedure time (MD -6.31 minutes; 95% CI -12.68, 0.06), and survival (MD 4.59 days; 95% CI -34.23, 43.40). Technical success (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.96, 1.13), clinical success (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.96, 1.08), overall adverse events (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.24, 1.43), and cholangitis (RR 1.19; 95% CI 0.39, 3.61) were also similar between groups. However, hospital stay was significantly shorter (MD -1.03 days; 95% CI -1.53, -0.53), and risk of reintervention (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.37, 0.88), post-procedure pancreatitis (RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.03, 0.66), and tumor in/overgrowth (RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.11, 0.70) were significantly lower with EUS-BD.
CONCLUSIONS
EUS-BD and ERCP-BD had similar efficacy and safety as the initial approach for MBO. However, EUS-BD had a significantly lower risk of reintervention, post-procedure pancreatitis, tumor in/overgrowth, and reduced hospital stay.
PubMed: 38648989
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.04.019 -
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 -
Infectious Diseases & Clinical... Sep 2023This study aimed to determine the effect of prophylactic use of carbapenems for acute pancreatitis on clinical outcomes. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to determine the effect of prophylactic use of carbapenems for acute pancreatitis on clinical outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
It was conducted according to the preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines by using the keywords "Pancrea AND carbapenem OR imipenem OR ertapenem OR meropenem OR doripenem." Primer outcomes were mortality, surgical intervention, and pancreatic and non-pancreatic infection. Subgroup analyses were also performed to reduce the risk of bias.
RESULTS
Ten studies with 4038 patients were included in the meta-analyses. While eight of ten were randomized controlled trials, two were observational studies. The prophylactic use of carbapenems had no statistically significant effect on mortality (OR=0.82, 95% CI=0.65-1.04, I²=0%) and surgical intervention. (OR=0.81, 95% CI=0.57-1.17, I²=0%). However, the real impact of prophylaxis on reducing the incidence of mortality and surgical intervention was uncertain due to the insufficient sample size. The prophylactic use of carbapenems was significantly associated with a lower risk of peripancreatic (OR=0.37, 95% CI=0.25-0.55, I²=61%) and non-pancreatic infection risk (OR=0.60, 95% CI=0.46-0.78, I²=65%). The definitions of infection in the articles were not clear, and the diagnostic approach to infection was based on subjective criteria. In addition, there was inadequate collateral damage and safety assessments. In high-quality studies with a low risk of bias, prophylactic carbapenems had no effect on peripancreatic infection (RR=1.54, 95% CI=0.65-3.47, I²=0%) and non-pancreatic infection (RR=0.72, 95% CI=0.48-1.07, I²=0%).
CONCLUSION
Although there is a reduction in the infection risk, routine carbapenem use in acute pancreatitis cases should not be recommended based on current evidence. Cooperation with Infectious Disease specialists and developing diagnostic algorithms are required instead of routine prophylaxis to prevent infection, especially non-pancreatic infection.
PubMed: 38633556
DOI: 10.36519/idcm.2023.239 -
Peptides Jul 2024In this systematic review, we assessed the safety and possible safety events of native glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP)(1-42) in human studies with... (Review)
Review
In this systematic review, we assessed the safety and possible safety events of native glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP)(1-42) in human studies with administration of synthetic human GIP. We searched the PubMed database for all trials investigating synthetic human GIP(1-42) administration. A total of 67 studies were included. Study duration ranged from 30 min to 6 days. In addition to healthy individuals, the studies included individuals with impaired glucose tolerance, type 2 diabetes, type 1 diabetes, chronic pancreatitis and secondary diabetes, latent autoimmune diabetes in adults, diabetes caused by a mutation in the hepatocyte nuclear factor 1-alpha gene, end-stage renal disease, chronic renal insufficiency, critical illness, hypoparathyroidism, or cystic fibrosis-related diabetes. Of the included studies, 78% did not mention safety events, 10% of the studies reported that no safety events were observed in relation to GIP administration, and 15% of the studies reported safety events in relation to GIP administration with most frequently reported event being a moderate and transient increased heart rate. Gastrointestinal safety events, and changes in blood pressure were also reported. Plasma concentration of active GIP(1-42) increased linearly with dose independent of participant phenotype. There was no significant correlation between achieved maximal concentration of GIP(1-42) and reported safety events. Clearance rates of GIP(1-42) were similar between participant groups. In conclusion, the available data indicate that GIP(1-42) in short-term (up to 6 days) infusion studies is generally well-tolerated. The long-term safety of continuous GIP(1-42) administration is unknown.
Topics: Humans; Gastric Inhibitory Polypeptide; Peptide Fragments; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Glucose Intolerance; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1
PubMed: 38615716
DOI: 10.1016/j.peptides.2024.171214 -
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Apr 2024Patient-Derived Tumor Organoids (PDTOs) is a promising new disease model in pancreatic cancer for use in personalized medicine, but overall success rate (SR) of...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Patient-Derived Tumor Organoids (PDTOs) is a promising new disease model in pancreatic cancer for use in personalized medicine, but overall success rate (SR) of establishing these cultures from endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsies is unknown.
METHODS
We searched relevant databases publications reporting SR of PDTO establishment from pancreatic cancer. The primary outcome was SR stratified on tissue acquisition method (EUS-guided biopsies, percutaneous biopsies, and surgical specimens).
RESULTS
We identified 24 studies including 1,053 attempts at establishing PDTOs. Overall SR was 63% (95% CI: 54%-72%). Pooled SR of PDTO establishment from EUS-guided biopsies, percutaneous biopsies, and surgical specimens were 60% (95% CI: 43-76%), 36% (95% CI: 14-61%) and 62% (95% CI: 48-75%), respectively and did not differ significantly (p = 0.1975).
CONCLUSION
The SR of PDTO establishment from EUS-guided biopsies is comparable to surgical specimens. Both techniques are suitable for tissue acquisition for PDTOs in clinical and research settings.
PubMed: 38593932
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.04.012 -
Cureus Mar 2024Acute pancreatitis, marked by sudden inflammation of the pancreas, presents a complex spectrum of causative factors including gallstone obstruction, alcohol abuse, and... (Review)
Review
Acute pancreatitis, marked by sudden inflammation of the pancreas, presents a complex spectrum of causative factors including gallstone obstruction, alcohol abuse, and viral infections. Recent studies have illuminated the emergence of vaccine-induced acute pancreatitis, notably associated with COVID-19 vaccinations, presenting diverse mechanisms ranging from direct viral-mediated injury to autoimmune reactions. Understanding this link is pivotal for public health, yet challenges persist in identifying and managing cases post-vaccination. Comprehensive literature reviews employing the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement outline the potential pathways and mechanisms leading to vaccine-induced pancreatitis, emphasizing the need for deeper investigations into underlying health conditions and modifications to vaccine components. Notably, the rare occurrences of vaccine-induced pancreatitis extend beyond COVID-19 vaccines, with reports also documenting associations with measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR), human papillomavirus (HPV), and other viral vaccinations. Mechanistically, hypotheses such as molecular mimicry and immunologic injury have been proposed, necessitating ongoing vigilance and exploration. Regulatory agencies play a crucial role in monitoring and communicating vaccine safety concerns, emphasizing transparency to address potential risks and maintain public trust. Understanding and communicating these rare adverse events with transparency remain integral for informed vaccination policies and to allay concerns surrounding vaccine safety.
PubMed: 38571842
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.55426 -
Journal of Internal Medicine Jun 2024Nutritional administration in acute pancreatitis (AP) management has sparked widespread discussion, yet contradictory mortality results across meta-analyses necessitate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Nutritional administration in acute pancreatitis (AP) management has sparked widespread discussion, yet contradictory mortality results across meta-analyses necessitate clarification. The optimal nutritional route in AP remains uncertain. Therefore, this study aimed to compare mortality among nutritional administration routes in patients with AP using consistency model.
METHODS
This study searched four major databases for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two authors independently extracted and checked data and quality. Network meta-analysis was conducted for estimating risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) based on random-effects model. Subgroup analyses accounted for AP severity and nutrition support initiation.
RESULTS
A meticulous search yielded 1185 references, with 30 records meeting inclusion criteria from 27 RCTs (n = 1594). Pooled analyses showed the mortality risk reduction associated with nasogastric (NG) (RR = 0.34; 95%CI: 0.16-0.73) and nasojejunal (NJ) feeding (RR = 0.46; 95%CI: 0.25-0.84) in comparison to nil per os. Similarly, NG (RR = 0.45; 95%CI: 0.24-0.83) and NJ (RR = 0.60; 95%CI: 0.40-0.90) feeding also showed lower mortality risk than total parenteral nutrition. Subgroup analyses, stratified by severity, supported these findings. Notably, the timing of nutritional support initiation emerged as a significant factor, with NJ feeding demonstrating notable mortality reduction within 24 and 48 h, particularly in severe cases.
CONCLUSION
For severe AP, both NG and NJ feeding appear optimal, with variations in initiation timings. NG feeding does not appear to merit recommendation within the initial 24 h, whereas NJ feeding is advisable within the corresponding timeframe following admission. These findings offer valuable insights for optimizing nutritional interventions in AP.
Topics: Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pancreatitis; Network Meta-Analysis; Enteral Nutrition; Nutritional Support; Intubation, Gastrointestinal; Acute Disease
PubMed: 38561603
DOI: 10.1111/joim.13782 -
Digestive Diseases and Sciences May 2024Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the standard of care for the management of choledocholithiasis but carries risk of complications which may... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the standard of care for the management of choledocholithiasis but carries risk of complications which may result in significant morbidity and mortality. While currently available guidelines endorse the use of ERCP for the management of symptomatic common bile duct stones, the need for ERCP in incidentally found asymptomatic choledocholithiasis is more controversial, and practice varies on a geographic and institutional level. This systematic review and meta-analysis is conducted to compare post-ERCP adverse events between asymptomatic and symptomatic choledocholithiasis patients.
METHODS
We searched PubMed/Embase/Web of Science databases to include all studies comparing post-ERCP outcomes between asymptomatic and symptomatic choledocholithiasis patients. The primary outcome was post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), while secondary outcomes included post-ERCP cholangitis, bleeding, and perforation. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method within a random-effect model.
RESULTS
Our analysis included six observational studies, totaling 2,178 choledocholithiasis patients (392 asymptomatic and 1786 symptomatic); 53% were female. Asymptomatic patients exhibited a higher risk of PEP compared with symptomatic patients (11.7% versus 4.8%; RR 2.59, 95% CI 1.56-4.31, p ≤ 0.001). No significant difference was observed in post-ERCP cholangitis, bleeding, or perforation rates between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Asymptomatic patients with choledocholithiasis appear to have a higher risk of PEP than symptomatic patients, while the risk of other post-ERCP adverse events is similar between the two groups. Interventional endoscopists should thoroughly discuss potential adverse events (particularly PEP) with asymptomatic patients before performing ERCP and utilize PEP-prevention measures more liberally in this subgroup of patients.
Topics: Humans; Choledocholithiasis; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Pancreatitis; Asymptomatic Diseases; Cholangitis; Risk Factors; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 38555329
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-024-08374-0 -
Endoscopy International Open Mar 2024Noninvasive ampullary neoplasms may be removed by surgery or endoscopy. However, given the morbidity and mortality associated with surgery, endoscopic papillectomy (EP)...
Noninvasive ampullary neoplasms may be removed by surgery or endoscopy. However, given the morbidity and mortality associated with surgery, endoscopic papillectomy (EP) is the preferred approach. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) after EP has emerged as a promising alternative therapy to avoid surgery after incomplete EP. Our goal was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of RFA for residual or recurrent lesions with intraductal extension after endoscopic papillectomy. The inclusion criteria include clinical trials, cohort studies, and case series evaluating patients with residual or recurrent lesions with intraductal extension after EP treated with RFA. Case reports, duplicated data, and studies with follow-up periods < 10 months were excluded. The metanalysis evaluated adverse events, surgical conversion rate, clinical success and recurrence. Seven studies were selected, totaling 124 patients. RFA was associated with a clinical success rate of 75.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 65.0-88.0%; I = 23.484) in a mean follow-up period < 10 months. However, the biliary stricture rate was 22.2% (95% CI 12.1-28.4%; I = 61.030), 14.3% of pancreatitis (95% CI 8.8-22.3%; I < 0.001), 7.0% of cholangitis (95% CI 3.3-14.5%; I < 0.001), 4.0% of bleeding (95% CI 1.7-9.3%; I < 0.001), and recurrence of 24.3% (95% CI 16.0-35.0%; I = 23.484). RFA is feasible and appears to be effective for managing residual or recurrent lesions with intraductal extension after EP. However, long-term follow-up and high-quality studies are required to confirm our findings.
PubMed: 38550766
DOI: 10.1055/a-2226-0928