» Articles » PMID: 11900675

Predicting and Preventing Post-ERCP Pancreatitis

Overview
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2002 Mar 20
PMID 11900675
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Pancreatitis is rightly the most feared complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Ten percent to 15% of cases of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) are severe by clinical and radiologic criteria. Such cases carry significant morbidity and mortality and are responsible for the vast majority of ERCP-related deaths. The prediction and prevention of PEP have been of great interest to endoscopists since the introduction of ERCP 30 years ago. Prediction and diagnosis of PEP have become more accurate with the widespread availability of serum amylase estimation. A variety of cytokines (eg, interleukin -1, IL-6, and IL-8) and acute phase reactants (eg, C-reactive protein) are also elevated in the serum in acute pancreatitis, and these form the basis of evolving tests for PEP. Urine testing (for amylase) in acute pancreatitis is obsolete, but it may soon undergo a revival in the form of a rapid (3-minute) dipstick test for trypsinogen-2, a sensitive and specific test for this disease. The prevention of PEP takes multiple forms. The following steps are recommended for clinicians: 1) avoid ERCP when other, less invasive or noninvasive imaging tests can do the job (eg, CT or magnetic resonance imaging); 2) avoid high-risk (of PEP) procedures, such as needle-knife papillotomy, balloon dilation of the biliary sphincter, and pancreatic sphincterotomy, and take steps to reduce risk when these procedures are unavoidable; 3) ensure that those who perform ERCP have adequate training and experience; and 4) consider pharmacologic intervention. Despite a depressing catalog of drug interventions that have failed over the years (eg, antihistamines, anticholinergics, and corticosteroids), three agents have recently shown promise: somatostatin; its octapeptide analogue, octreotide; and gabexate mesylate, a protease inhibitor.

Citing Articles

Comparative performance of non-contrast MRI with HASTE vs. contrast-enhanced MRI/3D-MRCP for possible choledocholithiasis in hospitalized patients.

Kang S, Heacock L, Doshi A, Ream J, Sun J, Babb J Abdom Radiol (NY). 2017; 42(6):1650-1658.

PMID: 28154911 PMC: 5457321. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-016-1039-6.


Mild ERCP-induced and non-ERCP-related acute pancreatitis: two distinct clinical entities?.

Abid G, Siriwardana H, Holt A, Ammori B J Gastroenterol. 2007; 42(2):146-51.

PMID: 17351804 DOI: 10.1007/s00535-006-1979-7.


MRCP compared to diagnostic ERCP for diagnosis when biliary obstruction is suspected: a systematic review.

Kaltenthaler E, Walters S, Chilcott J, Blakeborough A, Bravo Vergel Y, Thomas S BMC Med Imaging. 2006; 6:9.

PMID: 16907974 PMC: 1579209. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2342-6-9.

References
1.
Mergener K, Suhocki P, Enns R, Jowell P, Branch M, Baillie J . Endoscopic nasobiliary drain placement facilitates subsequent percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography. Gastrointest Endosc. 1999; 49(2):240-2. DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(99)70493-1. View

2.
Cotton P . Outcomes of endoscopy procedures: struggling towards definitions. Gastrointest Endosc. 1994; 40(4):514-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(94)70228-4. View

3.
Kemppainen E, Hedstrom J, Puolakkainen P, Halttunen J, Sainio V, Haapiainen R . Increased serum trypsinogen 2 and trypsin 2-alpha 1 antitrypsin complex values identify endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography induced pancreatitis with high accuracy. Gut. 1998; 41(5):690-5. PMC: 1891573. DOI: 10.1136/gut.41.5.690. View

4.
Binmoeller K, Schafer T . Endoscopic management of bile duct stones. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2001; 32(2):106-18. DOI: 10.1097/00004836-200102000-00004. View

5.
Deviere J, Le Moine O, Van Laethem J, Eisendrath P, GHILAIN A, Severs N . Interleukin 10 reduces the incidence of pancreatitis after therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Gastroenterology. 2001; 120(2):498-505. DOI: 10.1053/gast.2001.21172. View