A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis Prophylaxis in the United States

Rectal diclofenac versus indomethacin for prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (DIPPP): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Recent meta-analyses suggested diclofenac may be superior to indomethacin in preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy of 100 mg rectal indomethacin versus diclofenac on PEP incidences.

DESIGN

This multicentre, double-blinded, randomised controlled trial was conducted in nine tertiary centres in China. Patients with low and high risk for PEP and native papilla were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive 100 mg diclofenac or 100 mg indomethacin rectally before ERCP. The primary outcome was the occurrence of PEP defined by the Cotton consensus. The intention-to-treat principle was conducted for the analysis.

RESULTS

The trial was terminated early for futility after the predetermined first interim analysis. Between June 2023 and May 2024, 1204 patients were randomised into the diclofenac group (n=600) or indomethacin group (n=604). Baseline characteristics were balanced. The primary outcome occurred in 53 patients (8.8%) of 600 patients allocated to the diclofenac group and 37 patients (6.1%) of 604 patients allocated to the indomethacin group (relative risk 1.44; 95% CI 0.96 to 2.16, p=0.074). PEP occurred in 35 (14.2%) of 247 high-risk patients in the diclofenac group and 26 (9.8%) of 266 high-risk patients in the indomethacin group (p=0.124). PEP incidences were also comparable in low-risk patients between the two groups (18/353 (5.1%) vs 11/338 (3.3%), p=0.227). Other ERCP-related complications did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Pre-procedure 100 mg rectal diclofenac was not superior to the same dose of rectal indomethacin regarding preventing PEP. These findings supported current clinical practice guidelines of 100 mg indomethacin or diclofenac for PEP prophylaxis in patients without contraindications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05947461).

A network meta-analysis of optimal strategies for preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Numerous interventions have been proposed to reduce the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP), but it remains uncertain which approach is the most effective. The objective of this network meta-analysis was to evaluate and compare different preventive strategies for overall, mild, and moderate-to-severe PEP in both average- and high-risk patients. A systematic search was conducted for randomized controlled trials across the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases. The inclusion criteria encompassed studies that featured at least two of the following interventions: pre-procedural administration of 100 mg of rectal diclofenac (D) or indomethacin (I), aggressive hydration utilizing normal saline (NS) or lactated Ringer's solution (LR), 5-french pancreatic duct stent (S), and either a placebo or an active control (C). The interventions were ranked according to their surface under cumulative ranking (SUCRA) values. The study protocol has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024538533). Of the total 42 (n = 11,493) identified studies, 23 studies (n = 5,410) were categorized into the average-risk group and 19 studies (n = 6,083) were categorized into high-risk group. Based on SUCRA, I + NS was ranked as the best preventive method for overall and mild PEP in average-risk group. However, I + LR was the most effective method of prevention of moderate-to-severe PEP in this group. In high-risk group, I + S was the best preventive method of overall and mild PEP. However, D was the most effective method of prevention of moderate-to-severe PEP in this group. The findings of this network meta-analysis indicate that endoscopists should consider all available prophylactic options when performing ERCP, rather than favoring one over the others.

Updates in Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis

Although endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has been shown to be a safe and effective approach in treating these diseases while carrying lower morbidity than traditional surgical treatments, ERCP has associated risks, with post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) being the most common serious adverse event and carries significant morbidity and health care cost. PEP results from multifactorial factors involving trauma to the pancreatic duct and papilla, leading to subsequent obstruction and impairment of pancreatic drainage. Important risk factors for PEP include history of prior PEP, suspected sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, difficult cannulation, pancreatic duct contrast injections, and pancreatic sphincterotomy.

Post Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis: Novel Mechanisms and Prevention by Drugs

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is becoming more common than first-line therapy for pancreaticobiliary duct disorders. However, post-ERCP pancreatitis is the most common complication of ERCPs, and affects about 10% of cases. In this review, we provide an overview of the mechanisms purported to cause post-ERCP pancreatitis as well as associated risk factors. We discuss measures that are in practice for post-ERCP pancreatitis pharmaco-prophylaxis, along with advances in the pipeline. We emphasize that there is still a pressing need to narrow the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis and that a mechanistic approach may reveal the greatest benefit from utilizing a combination of targets.

Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs for the Prevention of Post-endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) remains the most frequent and severe complication following ERCP, elevating both patient suffering and healthcare costs, and posing challenges to the advancement of ERCP techniques. Empirical evidence supports the prophylactic use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the prevention of PEP, especially in high-risk populations, as endorsed by both the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) and the European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). However, the prophylactic efficacy of NSAIDs in average-risk individuals, alongside the ideal drug selection, dosing, and timing of NSAID administration, remains to be elucidated. Furthermore, the synergistic preventive potential of NSAIDs when integrated with other interventions, such as hydration, pancreatic stenting, somatostatin administration, sublingual nitrate application, and epinephrine, warrants further clarification. In this paper, we conduct an exhaustive review of the prophylactic effect and clinical administration of NSAIDs for PEP. We comprehensively synthesize findings from clinical trials investigating NSAIDs, both in monotherapy and combination regimens, for PEP prevention. Additionally, we scrutinize the current landscape of NSAID usage in clinical practice and evaluate their cost-effectiveness. Future research should concentrate on refining NSAID prophylaxis strategies for PEP in patients at different risk levels, while also enhancing adherence to clinical guidelines and alleviating the issue of NSAID cost inflation.

Indomethacin Does Not Reduce Post-ERCP Pancreatitis in High-Risk Patients Receiving Pancreatic Stenting

BACKGROUND

Rectal indomethacin reduces pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, there is insufficient evidence regarding its added benefits in patients already receiving prophylactic pancreatic stenting. Our goal was to evaluate the impact of indomethacin in high-risk patients undergoing pancreatic stenting.

METHODS

A cohort study was conducted on all patients who underwent the rescue cannulation technique for challenging bile duct cannulation (selected high-risk patients). Patients were split into two groups based on the prophylaxis method for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP): one receiving a combination of indomethacin and pancreatic stenting, while the other received pancreatic stenting alone. Comparative analyses were carried out on PEP, hyperamylasemia, gastrointestinal bleeding, and postoperative hospital stay among post-ERCP pancreatitis patients.

RESULTS

Between November 2017 and May 2023, a total of 607 patients with native papillae were enrolled, with 140 grouped into the indomethacin plus stent group and 467 into the stent alone group. The overall PEP rate was 4.4% in the entire cohort, with no statistical differences observed between the groups in terms of PEP rates (P = 0.407), mild PEP (P = 0.340), moderate to severe PEP (P = 1.000), hyperamylasemia (P = 0.543), gastrointestinal bleeding (P = 0.392), and postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.521). Furthermore, sensitivity analysis using multivariable analysis also validated these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Indomethacin did not reduce the incidence or severity of PEP in high-risk patients who routinely received prophylactic pancreatic stent placement. Therefore, the additional administration of rectal indomethacin to further mitigate PEP appears to be not necessary.

Rise in First-Time ERCP for Benign Indications >1 Year After Cholecystectomy Is Associated With Worse Outcomes

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Greater availability of less invasive biliary imaging to rule out choledocholithiasis should reduce the need for diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients who have a remote history of cholecystectomy. The primary aims were to determine the incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of individuals who undergo first-time ERCP >1 year after cholecystectomy (late-ERCP).

METHODS

Data from a commercial insurance claim database (Optum Clinformatics) identified 583,712 adults who underwent cholecystectomy, 4274 of whom underwent late-ERCP, defined as first-time ERCP for nonmalignant indications >1 year after cholecystectomy. Outcomes were exposure and temporal trends in late-ERCP, biliary imaging utilization, and post-ERCP outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine patient characteristics associated with undergoing late-ERCP.

RESULTS

Despite a temporal increase in the use of noninvasive biliary imaging (35.9% in 2004 to 65.6% in 2021; P < .001), the rate of late-ERCP increased 8-fold (0.5-4.2/1000 person-years from 2005 to 2021; P < .001). Although only 44% of patients who underwent late-ERCP had gallstone removal, there were high rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis (7.1%), hospitalization (13.1%), and new chronic opioid use (9.7%). Factors associated with late-ERCP included concomitant disorder of gut-brain interaction (odds ratio [OR], 6.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.88-6.91) and metabolic dysfunction steatotic liver disease (OR, 3.27; 95% CI, 2.79-3.55) along with use of anxiolytic (OR, 3.45; 95% CI, 3.19-3.58), antispasmodic (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.53-1.72), and chronic opioids (OR, 6.24; 95% CI, 5.79-6.52).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of late-ERCP postcholecystectomy is increasing significantly, particularly in patients with comorbidities associated with disorder of gut-brain interaction and mimickers of choledocholithiasis. Late-ERCPs are associated with disproportionately higher rates of adverse events, including initiation of chronic opioid use.

Assessing the impact of center volume on the cost-effectiveness of centralizing ERCP

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

ERCP is a complex endoscopic procedure in which the center's procedure volume influences outcomes. With the increasing healthcare expenses and limited resources, promoting cost-effective care becomes essential for healthcare provision. This study was a cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate the hypothesis that high-volume (HV) centers perform ERCP with higher quality at lower costs than low-volume (LV) centers.

METHODS

A baseline case compared the current distribution of ERCPs among HV and LV centers with a hypothetical scenario in which all ERCPs are performed at HV centers. A cost-effectiveness analysis was constructed, followed by 1- and 2-way sensitivity analyses, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulations.

RESULTS

In the baseline case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was -$151,270 per year, due to the hypothetical scenario's lower costs and slightly higher quality-adjusted life years. The model was most sensitive to changes in transportation costs (109.34%), probability of significant adverse events (AEs) after successful ERCP at LV centers (42.12%), utility after ERCP with significant AEs (30.10%), and probability of significant AEs after successful ERCP at HV centers (23.53%); only transportation costs above $3655 changed the study outcome, however. The current ERCP distribution would only be cost-effective if LV centers achieved higher success (≥92.4% vs 89.3%), with much lower significant AEs (≤.5% vs 6.7%). The study's main findings remained unchanged while combining all model parameters in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that HV centers have high-performance rates at lower costs, raising the need to consider the principle of centralization of ERCPs into HV centers to improve the quality of care.

Postendoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis Pathophysiology and Prevention

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is an essential procedure for the management of pancreato-biliary disorders. Pancreatitis remains the most frequent complication of the ERCP procedure, and it is, therefore, necessary to recognize the pathophysiology and risk factors contributing to the development of pancreatitis and understand the methods to prevent this complication.

Drainage of Complex Walled-Off Pancreatic Fluid Collections in LAMS Era: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

The lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) has been increasingly used for EUS-guided drainage of symptomatic walled-off pancreatic fluid collection (WOPFC) in recent years. Nevertheless, some WOPFCs may require additional drainage methods including another LAMS as a result of complexity of the lesions. This current study aimed to compare clinical parameters of patients with complex WOPFC requiring LAMS with additional methods (complex WOPFC: group A) versus single LAMS alone (noncomplex WOPFC; group B).

METHOD

Medical records of patients with complex (group A) versus noncomplex WOPFCs (group B) were reviewed and compared in three centers in Thailand and Malaysia, between January 2016 to December 2020.

RESULT

31 patients with WOPFCs were recruited. 6 of 31 (19%) patients were in group A. Multivariate analysis showed that the maximal diameter of WOPFCs in group A was significantly larger than that of group B (18 ± 6 versus 13 ± 3 cm in diameter, respectively, p = 0.021). Solid component proportion was higher in group A versus B (35.8% versus 17.8%, respectively, p = 0.025). The prevalence of pancreatic duct leakage was significantly higher in group A (67% versus 20%, p = 0.23). The need of direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) and the number of DEN sessions were higher in group A versus B (100% vs. 48%, p = 0.020 and 3.5 vs 0 p = 0.031, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Complex WOPFC had larger diameter of lesions, higher proportion of solid component, higher prevalence of pancreatic duct leakage, and higher number of DEN is required than group noncomplex lesions. Trial Registration. This trial is registered with TCTR20180223004.

A Prospective Cohort Study Evaluating PAN-PROMISE, a Patient-reported Outcome Measure to Detect Post-ERCP Morbidity

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The Cotton Consensus (CC) criteria for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) may not capture post-ERCP morbidity. PAN-PROMISE, a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM), was developed to quantify acute pancreatitis-related morbidity. This study aims to determine the value of PAN-PROMISE in independently defining ERCP-related morbidity.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing ERCP at 2 academic centers from September 2021 to August 2022. We administered PAN-PROMISE and assessed quality of life and work productivity at baseline, 48 to 72 hours, 7 days, and 30 days following ERCP. PEP was defined by a 3-physician committee using the CC criteria. We defined high morbidity following ERCP (elevated PROM) by an increase of PAN-PROMISE score of >7 at 7 days post-procedure. The McNemar test assessed discordance between PEP and elevated-PROM.

RESULTS

A total of 679 patients were enrolled. Choledocholithiasis (30%) and malignant biliary obstruction (29%) were the main indications for ERCP. Thirty-two patients (4.7%) developed PEP. One hundred forty-seven patients (21.6%) had an elevated PROM, whereas only 20 of them (13.4%) had PEP by the CC criteria (P < .001 for discordance). An elevated PROM strongly correlated with lower physical quality of life and increased direct and indirect health care costs ($80 and $25 per point increase in PAN-PROMISE, respectively). Patients with pancreatic cancer (odds ratio, 4.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.68-10.74) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (odds ratio, 1.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-2.45) had the highest odds of elevated PROM.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial number of patients experience significant morbidity after ERCP despite not developing PEP or other adverse events. Future studies are needed to characterize better the reasons behind this increase in symptoms and potential interventions to reduce the symptom burden post-ERCP.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov number, NCT05310409.