Is high-dose nafamostat mesilate effective for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis, especially in high-risk patients?

Clinical Practice Guidelines for post-ERCP pancreatitis 2023

The Clinical Practice Guidelines for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) 2023 provide updated recommendations for the prevention, diagnosis, and management of PEP. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), a valuable procedure for diagnosing and treating pancreatobiliary diseases, can result in PEP as the most common adverse event. Since the first guidelines were published in 2015, advances in techniques and new research findings have necessitated this revision. The guidelines developed using the GRADE methodology target adult patients undergoing ERCP. They offer a comprehensive framework for clinicians to minimize the risk of PEP. For high-risk patients, endoscopic ultrasound before ERCP is recommended to avoid unnecessary procedures. The guidelines also discuss procedural and patient-related risk factors for PEP, highlighting that operator experience does not significantly affect PEP rates if performed under the supervision of skilled endoscopists. The diagnostic criteria include monitoring serum pancreatic enzyme levels postprocedure, and early computed tomography is advised in suspected cases. For treatment, the guidelines recommend following acute pancreatitis protocols. Key preventive measures include the use of temporary pancreatic duct stents and rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, both of which are supported by strong evidence for reducing the incidence of PEP. Overall, these guidelines aim to enhance clinical outcomes by reducing PEP incidence and improving its management through evidence-based practices.

Effectiveness of the pharmacological therapy to prevent post ERCP acute pancreatitis: a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of the different pharmacological agents in preventing post-ERCP acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

We included clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for prophylaxis of acute post-ERCP pancreatitis. The event evaluated was acute pancreatitis. We conducted a search strategy in MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to nowadays. We reported the information in terms of relative risks (RR) with a 95% confidence interval. We assessed the heterogeneity using the I2 test.

RESULTS

We included 84 studies for analysis (30,463 patients). The mean age was 59.3 years (SD ± 7.01). Heterogeneity between studies was low (I2 = 34.4%) with no inconsistencies (p = 0.2567). Post ERCP pancreatitis was less in prophylaxis with NSAIDs (RR 0.65 95% CI [0.52 to 0.80]), aggressive hydration with Lactate Ringer (RR 0.32 95% CI [0.12-0.86]), NSAIDs + isosorbide dinitrate (RR 0.28 95% CI [0.11-0.71]) and somatostatin and analogues (RR 0.54 [0.43 to 0.68]) compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

NSAIDs, the Combination of NSAIDs + isosorbide dinitrate, somatostatin and analogues, and aggressive hydration with lactate ringer are pharmacological strategies that can prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis when compared to placebo. More clinical trials are required to determine the effectiveness of these drugs.

Nafamostat Reduces the Incidence of post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). As the management of pancreatitis is limited, clinical approaches focus on the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). In theory, the serine protease inhibitor nafamostat can reduce circulating inflammatory mediators in pancreatitis. We aimed to investigate the effect of nafamostat in the prevention of PEP in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The protocol for this review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022367988). We systematically searched 5 databases without any filters on September 26, 2022. The eligible population was adult patients undergoing ERCP. We compared the PEP preventive effect of nafamostat to placebo. The main outcome was the occurrence of PEP. We calculated the pooled odds ratios (ORs), mean differences, and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) and multilevel model. The risk of bias was assessed using the Rob2 tool. Seven randomized controlled trials involving 2,962 patients were eligible for inclusion. Nafamostat reduced the overall incidence rate of PEP (20 mg, OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.30-0.82 and 50 mg, OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.24-0.96). However, the occurrence of mild PEP was significantly reduced only in the subgroup receiving 20 mg nafamostat (OR, 0.49, 95% CI: 0.31-0.77). Overall, nafamostat therapy reduced moderate PEP in high-risk patients (OR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.0.4-0.84) and mild PEP in low-risk patients (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.17-0.61). Nafamostat is an effective therapy in the prevention of mild post-ERCP pancreatitis. Further research is required to determine the cost-effectiveness of this therapy.

Efficacy of nafamostat mesylate in the prevention of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of nafamostat on the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). PubMed, Web of Science, and Ichushi Web were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using nafamostat to prevent PEP. In subgroup analyses, we studied the preventive effects of nafamostat according to the severity of PEP, risk category, and dose. A random-effects model was adopted; heterogeneity between studies was examined using the chi-squared test and I2 statistics. This analysis uses the PRISMA statement as general guidance. 9 RCTs involving 3321 patients were included. The risk of PEP was lower in the nafamostat group than in the control group [4.4% vs. 8.3%, risk ratio (RR): 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.68]. In subgroup analyses, the protective effects were evident in low-risk patients for PEP before ERCP (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.21-0.55). The association between PEP and nafamostat was significant only in patients who developed mild PEP (RR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.36-0.69). The benefits were independent of the dose. The prophylactic use of nafamostat resulted in a lower risk of PEP. The subgroup analyses suggested uncertain benefits for severe PEP or high-risk patients for PEP. This warrants further investigation through additional RCTs.

Nafamostat mesilate for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on prospective, randomized, and controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of nafamostat mesilate in the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) by conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHOD

We retrieved for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about compare nafamostat mesilate with placebo in preventing PEP published before August 23, 2022, in 5 major electronic databases. The primary outcome was PEP rate, and the secondary outcome was post-ERCP hyperamylasemia (PEHA) rate. Subgroup analyses were performed to reveal the factors that may affect the preventive effect of nafamostat. Assessment of the quality of evidence was conducted based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

According to the search strategy and criteria of inclusion and exclusion, 8 articles with a number of 3210 patients were included. The PEP incidence of the nafamostat group was inferior compared with the placebo group (4.6% vs 8.5%, RR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.38-0.66). Subgroup analyses revealed that nafamostat had a preventive effect on patients with different risk stratification (High-risk: RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.43-0.86, Low-risk: RR = 0.28; 95% CI: 0.17-0.47). Different doses (20 mg: RR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.36-0.69, 50 mg: RR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.27-0.74) and duration (<12 hour: RR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.37-0.81, ≥12 h: RR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.29-0.66) of administration of nafamostat are adequate for the prevention of PEP, but postoperative administration may not help (preoperative: RR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.39-0.69, postoperative: RR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.23-1.23). Nafamostat may not efficacious in preventing severe PEP (Mild: RR = 0.49, 95% CI, 0.35-0.68, Moderate: RR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.25-0.86, Severe: RR = 0.91, 95% CI, 0.25-3.29) or in low-quality studies (Low-quality: RR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.13-3.60, High-quality: RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.37-0.65).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative use of nafamostat can effectively prevent PEP in patients with various risk stratification. Nafamostat can prevent mild and moderate PEP, but may not prevent severe PEP and PEHA. There should be more high-quality RCTs in future to strengthen the evidence of nafamostat in preventing PEP.

Incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 145 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) largely remain unknown with changing trends in ERCP use, indication, and techniques. We sought to determine the incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP in consecutive and high-risk patients based on a systemic review and meta-analysis of patients in placebo and no-stent arms of randomized control trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from the inception of each database to June 2022 to identify full-text RCTs evaluating PEP prophylaxes. The incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP from the placebo or no-stent arms of RCTs were recorded for consecutive and high-risk patients. A random-effects meta-analysis for a proportions model was used to calculate PEP incidence, severity, and mortality.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five RCTs were found with 19,038 patients in the placebo or no-stent arms. The overall cumulative incidence of PEP was 10.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.3-11.3), predominantly among the academic centers conducting such RCTs. The cumulative incidences of severe PEP and mortality were .5% (95% CI, .3-.7) and .2% (95% CI, .08-.3), respectively, across 91 RCTs with 14,441 patients. The cumulative incidences of PEP and severe PEP were 14.1% (95% CI, 11.5-17.2) and .8% (95% CI, .4-1.6), respectively, with a mortality rate of .2% (95% CI, 0-.3) across 35 RCTs with 3733 patients at high risk of PEP. The overall trend for the incidence of PEP among patients randomized to placebo or no-stent arms of RCTs has remained unchanged from 1977 to 2022 (P = .48).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall incidence of PEP is 10.2% but is 14.1% among high-risk patients based on this systematic review of placebo or no-stent arms of 145 RCTs; this rate has not changed between 1977 and 2022. Severe PEP and mortality from PEP are relatively uncommon.

Nafamostat has anti-asthmatic effects associated with suppressed pro-inflammatory gene expression, eosinophil infiltration and airway hyperreactivity

Introduction

Asthma is characterized by an imbalance between proteases and their inhibitors. Hence, an attractive therapeutic option could be to interfere with asthma-associated proteases. Here we exploited this option by assessing the impact of nafamostat, a serine protease inhibitor known to neutralize mast cell tryptase.

Methods

Nafamostat was administered in a mouse model for asthma based on sensitization by house dust mite (HDM) extract, followed by the assessment of effects on airway hyperreactivity, inflammatory parameters and gene expression.

Results

We show that nafamostat efficiently suppressed the airway hyperreactivity in HDM-sensitized mice. This was accompanied by reduced infiltration of eosinophils and lymphocytes to the airways, and by lower levels of pro-inflammatory compounds within the airway lumen. Further, nafamostat had a dampening impact on goblet cell hyperplasia and smooth muscle layer thickening in the lungs of HDM-sensitized animals. To obtain deeper insight into the underlying mechanisms, a transcriptomic analysis was conducted. This revealed, as expected, that the HDM sensitization caused an upregulated expression of numerous pro-inflammatory genes. Further, the transcriptomic analysis showed that nafamostat suppressed the levels of multiple pro-inflammatory genes, with a particular impact on genes related to asthma.

Discussion

Taken together, this study provides extensive insight into the ameliorating effect of nafamostat on experimental asthma, and our findings can thereby provide a basis for the further evaluation of nafamostat as a potential therapeutic agent in human asthma.

Untapping host-targeting cross-protective efficacy of anticoagulants against SARS-CoV-2

Responding quickly to emerging respiratory viruses, such as SARS-CoV-2 the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, is essential to stop uncontrolled spread of these pathogens and mitigate their socio-economic impact globally. This can be achieved through drug repurposing, which tackles inherent time- and resource-consuming processes associated with conventional drug discovery and development. In this review, we examine key preclinical and clinical therapeutic and prophylactic approaches that have been applied for treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We break these strategies down into virus- versus host-targeting and discuss their reported efficacy, advantages, and disadvantages. Importantly, we highlight emerging evidence on application of host serine protease-inhibiting anticoagulants, such as nafamostat mesylate, as a potentially powerful therapy to inhibit virus activation and offer cross-protection against multiple strains of coronavirus, lower inflammatory response independent of its antiviral effect, and modulate clotting problems seen in COVID-19 pneumonia.

Broad antiviral and anti-inflammatory efficacy of nafamostat against SARS-CoV-2 and seasonal coronaviruses in primary human bronchiolar epithelia

Antiviral strategies that target host systems needed for SARS-CoV-2 replication and pathogenesis may have therapeutic potential and help mitigate resistance development. Here, we evaluate nafamostat mesylate, a potent broad-spectrum serine protease inhibitor that blocks host protease activation of the viral spike protein. SARS-CoV-2 is used to infect human polarized mucociliated primary bronchiolar epithelia reconstituted with cells derived from healthy donors, smokers and subjects with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Nafamostat markedly inhibits apical shedding of SARS-CoV-2 from all donors (log10 reduction). We also observe, for the first-time, anti-inflammatory effects of nafamostat on airway epithelia independent of its antiviral effects, suggesting a dual therapeutic advantage in the treatment of COVID-19. Nafamostat also exhibits antiviral properties against the seasonal human coronaviruses 229E and NL6. These findings suggest therapeutic promise for nafamostat in treating SARS-CoV-2 and other human coronaviruses.

Nafamostat Mesylate is Not Effective in Preventing Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is associated with complications such as post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). Protease inhibitors, including nafamostat mesylate (NM), have been evaluated for prophylaxis against PEP.

AIM

We describe the first multicenter randomized controlled trial assessing the prophylactic efficacy of NM against PEP.

METHODS

In this multicenter prospective study, we aimed to enroll 800 patients aged ≥ 20 years with a planned ERCP between December 2012 and March 2019. The primary outcome was the incidence and severity of PEP in patients who did not receive NM (non-NM) versus those who did (NM; 20 mg). Secondary outcomes included the incidence of PEP by NM initiation (pre- and post-ERCP), risk factors for PEP, and NM-related adverse events.

RESULTS

Only 441 of the planned 800 patients were enrolled (non-NM: n = 149; NM: n = 292 [pre-ERCP NM: n = 144; post-ERCP NM: n = 148]). Patient characteristics were balanced at baseline with no significant differences between groups. PEP occurred in 40/441 (9%) patients (non-NM: n = 15 [10%]; NM: n = 25 [9%]), including 17 (12%) and eight (8%) in the pre-ERCP and post-ERCP NM groups, respectively. In the NM group, the incidence of PEP was lower in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group. Pancreatic injection and double-guidewire technique were independent risk factors for PEP. NM-related adverse events of hyperkalemia occurred in two (0.7%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence for the prophylactic effect of NM against PEP, regardless of the timing of administration; however, further studies are needed.

Does restricting fluid volume impact post-ERCP pancreatitis in patient with heart disease?

METHODS

Two hundred and forty seven of 480 patients with naïve papilla undergoing therapeutic ERCP between April 2013 and March 2018 were enrolled for the study. The following patient characteristics were investigated: age, sex, body mass index, previous diseases (heart disease, renal failure, cerebrovascular disorders, coexisting malignancy and pulmonary disease), history of PEP, common bile duct diameter, diverticula and volume of fluid infused 24 hours after the procedure. All ERCP cases had naïve papilla and had undergone treatment.

RESULTS

The incidence of PEP was 8.5%. Significant differences were observed in the volume of fluid infused between patients without and with a history of heart disease (1,380 vs. 1,755 mL). The mean volume of the infused fluid was significantly lower in the PEP than non-PEP group (1,483 vs. 1,688 mL, P = 0.02). Moreover, PEP incidence differed according to a fluid infusion cutoff of 1,000 mL (7 vs. 11 cases of PEP in those with ≦1,000 mL and >1,000 mL fluid volume, respectively, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Restricted fluid volume was a newly identified risk factor for PEP, particularly in patients with heart and renal diseases as comorbidities.

Cathepsin L-selective inhibitors: A potentially promising treatment for COVID-19 patients

The widespread coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has already infected over 4 million people worldwide, with a death toll over 280,000. Current treatment of COVID-19 patients relies mainly on antiviral drugs lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol, and remdesivir, the anti-malarial drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, and traditional Chinese medicine. There are over 2,118 on-going clinical trials underway, but to date none of these drugs have consistently proven effective. Cathepsin L (CatL) is an endosomal cysteine protease. It mediates the cleavage of the S1 subunit of the coronavirus surface spike glycoprotein. This cleavage is necessary for coronavirus entry into human host cells, virus and host cell endosome membrane fusion, and viral RNA release for next round of replication. Here we summarize data regarding seven CatL-selective inhibitors that block coronavirus entry into cultured host cells and provide a mechanism to block SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans. Given the rapid growth of the SARS-CoV-2-positive population worldwide, ready-to-use CatL inhibitors should be explored as a treatment option. We identify ten US FDA-approved drugs that have CatL inhibitory activity. We provide evidence that supports the combined use of serine protease and CatL inhibitors as a possibly safer and more effective therapy than other available therapeutics to block coronavirus host cell entry and intracellular replication, without compromising the immune system.

Nafamostat mesylate attenuates the pathophysiologic sequelae of neurovascular ischemia

Nafamostat mesylate, an apparent soi-disant panacea of sorts, is widely used to anticoagulate patients undergoing hemodialysis or cardiopulmonary bypass, mitigate the inflammatory response in patients diagnosed with acute pancreatitis, and reverse the coagulopathy of patients experiencing the commonly preterminal disseminated intravascular coagulation in the Far East. The serine protease inhibitor nafamostat mesylate exhibits significant neuroprotective effects in the setting of neurovascular ischemia. Nafamostat mesylate generates neuroprotective effects by attenuating the enzymatic activity of serine proteases, neuroinflammatory signaling cascades, and the endoplasmic reticulum stress responses, downregulating excitotoxic transient receptor membrane channel subfamily 7 cationic currents, modulating the activity of intracellular signal transduction pathways, and supporting neuronal survival (brain-derived neurotrophic factor/TrkB/ERK1/2/CREB, nuclear factor kappa B. The effects collectively reduce neuronal necrosis and apoptosis and prevent ischemia mediated disruption of blood-brain barrier microarchitecture. Investigational clinical applications of these compounds may mitigate ischemic reperfusion injury in patients undergoing cardiac, hepatic, renal, or intestinal transplant, preventing allograft rejection, and treating solid organ malignancies. Neuroprotective effects mediated by nafamostat mesylate support the wise conduct of randomized prospective controlled trials in Western countries to evaluate the clinical utility of this compound.

Comparative Efficacy of 9 Major Drugs for Postendoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis: A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is one of the most common complications after ERCP. The optimal drugs for reducing the risk of PEP are still unclear. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of 9 major drugs used worldwide for the prevention of PEP through a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the literature up to October 2018 on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing allopurinol, diclofenac, gabexate (GAB), glyceryl trinitrate (GTN), indomethacin, nafamostat, octreotide, somatostatin, and ulinastatin for protection against PEP were included.

RESULTS

Eighty-six randomized controlled trials involving 25,246 patients were included in this network meta-analysis. Results indicated that diclofenac, GAB, GTN, indomethacin, somatostatin, and ulinastatin were more effective than placebo with odds ratios ranging between 0.48 (95% credible interval, 0.26-0.86) for GAB and 0.61 (0.39-0.94) for somatostatin. However, allopurinol, nafamostat, and octreotide showed similar efficacy as placebo in reducing the risk of PEP. No significant differences were found in the efficacy between diclofenac, GAB, GTN, indomethacin, somatostatin, and ulinastatin. In terms of prognosis, GAB may be the most effective treatment (surface under the cumulative ranking curve=70.6%) and the least effective was octreotide (surface under the cumulative ranking curve=28%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although our analysis suggests that GAB may be the most effective drug in preventing PEP, the limitations of our study warrants more high-quality head-to-head trials of these clinical drugs in the future.

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: A systematic review for prevention and treatment

BACKGROUND

Post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is comparatively complex application. Researchers has been investigated prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), since it has been considered to be the most common complication of ERCP. Although ERCP can lead various complications, it can also be avoided.

AIM

To study the published evidence and systematically review the literature on the prevention and treatment for PEP.

METHODS

A systematic literature review on the prevention of PEP was conducted using the electronic databases of ISI Web of Science, PubMed and Cochrane Library for relevant articles. The electronic search for the review was performed by using the search terms “Post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis” AND “prevention” through different criteria. The search was restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed between January 2009 and February 2019. Duplicate studies were detected by using EndNote and deleted by the author. PRISMA checklist and flow diagram were adopted for evaluation and reporting. The reference lists of the selected papers were also scanned to find other relevant studies.

RESULTS

726 studies meeting the search criteria and 4 relevant articles found in the edited books about ERCP were identified. Duplicates and irrelevant studies were excluded by screening titles and abstracts and assessing full texts. 54 studies were evaluated for full text review. Prevention methods were categorized into three groups as (1) assessment of patient related factors; (2) pharmacoprevention; and (3) procedural techniques for prevention. Most of studies in the literature showed that young age, female gender, absence of chronic pancreatitis, suspected Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, recurrent pancreatitis and history of previous PEP played a crucial role in posing high risks for PEP. 37 studies designed to assess the impact of 24 different pharmacologic agents to reduce the development of PEP delivered through various administration methods were reviewed. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are widely used to reduce risks for PEP. Rectal administration of indomethacin immediately prior to or after ERCP in all patients is recommended by European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines to prevent the development of PEP. The majority of the studies reviewed revealed that rectally administered indomethacin had efficacy to prevent PEP. Results of the other studies on the other pharmacological interventions had both controversial and promising results. Thirteen studies conducted to evaluate the efficacy of 4 distinct procedural techniques to prevent the development of PEP were reviewed. Pancreatic Stent Placement has been frequently used in this sense and has potent and promising benefits in the prevention of PEP. Studies on the other procedural techniques have had inconsistent results.

CONCLUSION

Prevention of PEP involves multifactorial aspects, including assessment of patients with high risk factors for alternative therapeutic and diagnostic techniques, administration of pharmacological agents and procedural techniques with highly precise results in the literature.

Organ Failure Due to Systemic Injury in Acute Pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis may be associated with both local and systemic complications. Systemic injury manifests in the form of organ failure, which is seen in approximately 20% of all cases of acute pancreatitis and defines "severe acute pancreatitis." Organ failure typically develops early in the course of acute pancreatitis, but also may develop later due to infected pancreatic necrosis-induced sepsis. Organ failure is the most important determinant of outcome in acute pancreatitis. We review here the current understanding of the risk factors, pathophysiology, timing, impact on outcome, and therapy of organ failure in acute pancreatitis. As we discuss the pathophysiology of severe systemic injury, the distinctions between markers and mediators of severity are highlighted based on evidence supporting their causality in organ failure. Emphasis is placed on clinically relevant end points of organ failure and the mechanisms underlying the pathophysiological perturbations, which offer insight into potential therapeutic targets to treat.

Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has been a mainstay examination to clarify the biliary and pancreatic system. Not just diagnostic purpose, it could achieve therapeutic goal. Under the trend of more and more procedures about ERCP being interventional, the rate of adverse events after the procedure is increasing. Among them, post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common and sometimes tremendous complication. This mini-review will overview the PEP from definition, pathogenesis, and risk factors to prevention.

Multimodal Transgastric Local Pancreatic Hypothermia Reduces Severity of Acute Pancreatitis in Rats and Increases Survival

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Acute pancreatitis (AP) of different etiologies is associated with the activation of different signaling pathways in pancreatic cells, posing challenges to the development of targeted therapies. We investigated whether local pancreatic hypothermia, without systemic hypothermia, could lessen the severity of AP induced by different methods in rats.

METHODS

A urethane balloon with 2 polyurethane tubes was placed inside the stomach of rats. AP was induced in Wistar rats by the administration of cerulein or glyceryl tri-linoleate (GTL). Then, cold water was infused into the balloon to cool the pancreas. Pancreatic temperatures were selected based on those found to decrease acinar cell injury. An un-perfused balloon was used as a control. Pancreatic and rectal temperatures were monitored, and an infrared lamp or heating pad was used to avoid generalized hypothermia. We collected blood, pancreas, kidney, and lung tissues and analyzed them by histology, immunofluorescence, immunoblot, cytokine and chemokine magnetic bead, and DNA damage assays. The effect of hypothermia on signaling pathways initiated by cerulein and GTL was studied in acinar cells.

RESULTS

Rats with pancreatic cooling developed less severe GTL-induced AP compared with rats that received the control balloon. In acinar cells, cooling decreased the lipolysis induced by GTL, increased the micellar form of its fatty acid, lowered the increase in cytosolic calcium, prevented the loss of mitochondrial membrane potential (by 70%-80%), and resulted in a 40%-50% decrease in the uptake of a fatty acid tracer. In rats with AP, cooling decreased pancreatic necrosis by 48%, decreased serum levels of cytokines and markers of cell damage, and decreased markers of lung and renal damage. Pancreatic cooling increased the proportions of rats surviving 6 hours after induction of AP (to 90%, from <10% of rats that received the control balloon). In rats with cerulein-induced AP, pancreatic cooling decreased pancreatic markers of apoptosis and inflammation.

CONCLUSIONS

In rats with AP, transgastric local pancreatic hypothermia decreases pancreatic necrosis, apoptosis, inflammation, and markers of pancreatitis severity and increases survival.

The Effectiveness of the Rectal Administration of Low-dose Diclofenac for the Prevention of Post-endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis

Objective A 50-100-mg rectal dose of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs; diclofenac or indomethacin) has been shown to prevent post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). However, this is higher than the recommended 25-mg dose that is commonly administered to Japanese patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 25-mg rectal dose of diclofenac in preventing PEP. Methods Between January 2016 and March 2017, a total of 147 patients underwent ERCP with or without the rectal administration of diclofenac (25 mg) 20 min before the procedure. A retrospective analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this dose in preventing PEP. Results Thirteen patients (8.8%) developed PEP: 3 patients (4.1%) in the diclofenac group and 10 (13.7%) in the control group (p=0.0460). After ERCP, there were no cases of gastrointestinal hemorrhage, ulceration, acute renal failure, or death. A multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the non-administration of rectal diclofenac was a risk factor for PEP (odds ratio=3.530; 95% confidence interval=1.017-16.35; p=0.0468). Conclusions A 25-mg rectal dose of diclofenac might prevent PEP.

The "Scope" of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis

Pancreatitis is the most common adverse event of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, with the potential for clinically significant morbidity and mortality. Several patient and procedural risk factors have been identified that increase the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP). Considerable research efforts have identified several pharmacologic and procedural interventions that can drastically affect the incidence of PEP. This review article addresses the underlying mechanisms at play for the development of PEP, identifying patient and procedural risk factors and meaningful use of risk-stratification information, and details current interventions aimed at reducing the risk of this complication.

Endoscopic and pharmacological treatment for prophylaxis against postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication following ERCP. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of the global literature on PEP prevention to provide clinical guidance and a framework for future research in this important field.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, Ovid, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched by two independent reviewers to identify full-length, prospective, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up until March 2016 investigating the use of pancreatic duct stents and pharmacological agents to prevent PEP.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs comparing the risk of PEP after pancreatic duct stent placement (1369 patients) and 30 RCTs comparing pharmacological agents over placebo (10251 patients) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were selected for final review and analysis. Meta-analysis showed that prophylactic pancreatic stents significantly decreased the odds of post-ERCP pancreatitis [odds ratio (OR), 0.28; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.18-0.42]. Significant OR reduction of PEP was also observed in relation to rectal administration of diclofenac (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.12-0.48) and rectal administration of indometacin (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.79) compared with placebo. Subgroup analysis showed a significant reduction with bolus-administered somatostatin (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.49). Subgroup analysis showed a significant reduction with bolus-administered somatostatin (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.49).

CONCLUSION

Pancreatic stent placement, rectal diclofenac, and bolus administration of somatostatin appear to be most effective in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Prevention of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis: Medications and Techniques

Over the past 2 decades, it increasingly has been recognized that endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the most predictable provocateur of acute pancreatitis, with an incidence of more than 15% in high-risk patients. For this reason, there has been considerable interest in the effect of periprocedural drug administration as well as different ERCP techniques on both the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Although many agents and techniques have shown promise in small clinical studies, the majority of these have failed to yield consistent benefit in larger randomized patient groups. This review summarizes the data on medications and ERCP techniques that have been studied for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

A Randomized Comparative Study of 24- and 6-Hour Infusion of Nafamostat Mesilate for the Prevention of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis: A Prospective Randomized Comparison Trial

OBJECTIVES

Although prolonged intravenous infusion (24 hours) of nafamostat mesilate is effective for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis, it requires hospitalization and is expensive. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of 24- versus 6-hour intravenous infusion of 20 mg nafamostat mesilate for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP).

METHODS

A total of 382 patients who underwent ERCP were randomly assigned into 2 groups: 24 hours or 6 hours. In both groups, nafamostat mesilate (20 mg) infusion was initiated up to an hour before ERCP and continued for either 24 or 6 hours.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of pancreatitis was 2.4% (9/371). The rates of PEP following 24- and 6-hour infusion were 2.8% (5/179) and 2.1% (4/192), respectively (P = 0.744). No significant difference was observed in the severity of pancreatitis between the groups. On multivariate analysis, increasing pancreatic duct cannulations (odds ratio, 1.685; 95% confidence interval, 1.036-2.741; P = 0.036) was identified as a statistically significant risk factor of PEP.

CONCLUSIONS

No difference was found in the incidence of PEP regardless of the duration of nafamostat mesilate infusion. Therefore, 6-hour infusion of 20 mg nafamostat mesilate may be useful for the prevention of PEP in an outpatient setting.

Nafamostat mesilate protects against acute cerebral ischemia via blood-brain barrier protection

Serine proteases, such as thrombin, are contributors to the disruption of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and exacerbate brain damage during ischemic stroke, for which the current clinical therapy remains unsatisfactory. However, the effect of nafamostat mesilate (NM), a synthetic serine protease inhibitor, on BBB disruption following cerebral ischemia is unknown. Here, we investigated the in vivo effect of NM on BBB integrity in rats subjected to transient middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) and explored the possible mechanism in an in vitro BBB model comprising rat brain microvascular endothelial cells and astrocytes after oxygen and glucose deprivation (OGD) in the presence of thrombin. The results showed that NM treatment remarkably attenuated transient MCAO-induced brain infarcts, brain oedema and motor dysfunction in addition to BBB disruption, which might be related to changes in tight junction protein expression and localization. Meanwhile, NM preserved BBB integrity and alleviated the changes in tight junction protein expression and localization and cytoskeleton rearrangement in rat brain microvascular endothelial cells via thrombin inhibition. Our findings suggest that NM treatment can preserve BBB integrity through the inhibition of thrombin, which might be correlated with the regulation of PKCα/RhoA/MLC2 pathway components.

Peripancreatic fat necrosis worsens acute pancreatitis independent of pancreatic necrosis via unsaturated fatty acids increased in human pancreatic necrosis collections

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Peripancreatic fat necrosis occurs frequently in necrotising pancreatitis. Distinguishing markers from mediators of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is important since targeting mediators may improve outcomes. We evaluated potential agents in human pancreatic necrotic collections (NCs), pseudocysts (PCs) and pancreatic cystic neoplasms and used pancreatic acini, peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and an acute pancreatitis (AP) model to determine SAP mediators.

METHODS

We measured acinar and PBMC injury induced by agents increased in NCs and PCs. Outcomes of caerulein pancreatitis were studied in lean rats coadministered interleukin (IL)-1β and keratinocyte chemoattractant/growth-regulated oncogene, triolein alone or with the lipase inhibitor orlistat.

RESULTS

NCs had higher fatty acids, IL-8 and IL-1β versus other fluids. Lipolysis of unsaturated triglyceride and resulting unsaturated fatty acids (UFA) oleic and linoleic acids induced necro-apoptosis at less than half the concentration in NCs but other agents did not do so at more than two times these concentrations. Cytokine coadministration resulted in higher pancreatic and lung inflammation than caerulein alone, but only triolein coadministration caused peripancreatic fat stranding, higher cytokines, UFAs, multisystem organ failure (MSOF) and mortality in 97% animals, which were prevented by orlistat.

CONCLUSIONS

UFAs, IL-1β and IL-8 are elevated in NCs. However, UFAs generated via peripancreatic fat lipolysis causes worse inflammation and MSOF, converting mild AP to SAP.

Evaluation of Pharmacologic Prevention of Pancreatitis After Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There is controversy over the efficacy of pharmacologic agents for preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (PEP). We performed a systematic review of PEP pharmacoprevention to evaluate safety and efficacy.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the literature for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of PEP pharmacoprevention through February 2014. After identifying relevant studies, 2 reviewers each extracted information on study characteristics, clinical outcomes, and risk of bias. A research classification scale was developed to identify pharmacologic agents ready for clinical use, agents for which a confirmatory RCT should be considered a high priority, agents for which exploratory studies are still necessary, and agents for which additional research should be of low priority. Clinical and research recommendations for each agent were made by consensus after considering research classification results and other important factors such as magnitude of benefit, safety, availability, and cost.

RESULTS

After screening 851 citations and 263 potentially relevant articles, 2 reviewers identified 85 RCTs and 28 meta-analyses that were eligible. On the basis of these studies, rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were found to be appropriate for clinical use, especially for high-risk cases. Sublingual nitroglycerin, bolus-administered somatostatin, and nafamostat were found to be promising agents for which confirmatory research is warranted. Additional research was found to be required to justify confirmatory RCTs for topical epinephrine, aggressive intravenous fluids, gabexate, ulinastatin, secretin, and antibiotics.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of a systematic review, NSAIDs are appropriate for use in prevention of PEP, especially for high-risk cases. Additional research is necessary to clarify the role of other pharmacologic agents. These findings could inform future research and guide clinical decision-making and policy.

Incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review by using randomized, controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Data regarding the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) are primarily from nonrandomized studies.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP from a systematic review of the placebo or no-stent arms of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs).

DESIGN

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify RCTs evaluating the efficacy of drugs and/or pancreatic stents to prevent PEP.

SETTING

Systematic review of patients enrolled in RCTs evaluating agents for PEP prophylaxis.

PATIENTS

Patients in the placebo or no-stent arms of the RCTs

INTERVENTION

ERCP.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP.

RESULTS

There were 108 RCTs with 13,296 patients in the placebo or no-stent arms. Overall, the PEP incidence was 9.7% and the mortality rate was 0.7%. Severity of PEP was reported for 8857 patients: 5.7%, 2.6%, and 0.5% of cases were mild, moderate, and severe, respectively. The incidence of PEP in 2345 high-risk patients was 14.7% and the severity of PEP was mild, moderate, and severe in 8.6%, 3.9%, and 0.8%, respectively, with a 0.2% mortality rate. The incidence of PEP was 13% in North American RCTs compared with 8.4% in European and 9.9% in Asian RCTs. ERCPs conducted before and after 2000 had a PEP incidence of 7.7% and 10%, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

Difference in PEP risk among patients in the included RCTs.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of PEP and severe PEP is similar in high-risk patients and the overall cohort. Discrepancies in the incidence of PEP across geographic regions require further study.

Acute lipotoxicity regulates severity of biliary acute pancreatitis without affecting its initiation

Obese patients have worse outcomes during acute pancreatitis (AP). Previous animal models of AP have found worse outcomes in obese rodents who may have a baseline proinflammatory state. Our aim was to study the role of acute lipolytic generation of fatty acids on local severity and systemic complications of AP. Human postpancreatitis necrotic collections were analyzed for unsaturated fatty acids (UFAs) and saturated fatty acids. A model of biliary AP was designed to replicate the human variables by intraductal injection of the triglyceride glyceryl trilinoleate alone or with the chemically distinct lipase inhibitors orlistat or cetilistat. Parameters of AP etiology and outcomes of local and systemic severity were measured. Patients with postpancreatitis necrotic collections were obese, and 13 of 15 had biliary AP. Postpancreatitis necrotic collections were enriched in UFAs. Intraductal glyceryl trilinoleate with or without the lipase inhibitors resulted in oil red O-positive areas, resembling intrapancreatic fat. Both lipase inhibitors reduced the glyceryl trilinoleate-induced increase in serum lipase, UFAs, pancreatic necrosis, serum inflammatory markers, systemic injury, and mortality but not serum alanine aminotransferase, bilirubin, or amylase. We conclude that UFAs are enriched in human necrotic collections and acute UFA generation via lipolysis worsens pancreatic necrosis, systemic inflammation, and injury associated with severe AP. Inhibition of lipolysis reduces UFA generation and improves these outcomes of AP without interfering with its induction.

Hypothermia slows sequential and parallel steps initiated during caerulein pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Multiple deleterious signaling cascades are simultaneously activated in acute pancreatitis (AP), which may limit the success of pharmacologic approaches targeting a single step. We explored whether cooling acinar cells slows distinct steps initiated from a stimulus causing pancreatitis simultaneously, and the temperature range over which inhibition of such deleterious signaling occurs.

METHODS

Caerulein (100 nM) induced trypsinogen activation (TGA), CXCL1, CXCL2 mRNA levels, cell injury were studied at 37 °C, 34 °C, 31 °C, 29 °C and 25 °C in acinar cells. Trypsin, cathepsin B activities and cathepsin B mediated TGA were studied at 37 °C, 23 °C and 4 °C.

RESULTS

There was >80% reduction in TGA, CXCL1 and CXCL2 mRNA levels at 29 °C, and in cell injury at 34 °C, compared to those at 37 °C. Trypsin activity, cathepsin B activity and cathepsin B mediated TGA at 23 °C were respectively, 53%, 64% and 26% of that at 37 °C. Acinar cooling to 31 °C reduced LDH leakage even when cooling was initiated an hour after caerulein stimulation at 37 °C.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypothermia synergistically and simultaneously slows parallel and distinct signaling steps initiated by caerulein, thereby reducing TGA, upregulation of inflammatory mediators and acinar injury.

Comparison between ulinastatin and nafamostat for prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography complications: a prospective, randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

Pancreatitis is the most common complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this prospective trial was to compare the effect of ulinastatin and nafamostat on the prophylaxis of post-ERCP complications.

METHODS

A total of 159 patients who underwent ERCP were divided into ulinastatin (n = 53), nafamostat (n = 53) and control (n = 53) groups. Each patient received ulinastatin (150,000 units), nafamostat (20 mg), or placebo from 2-4 h before ERCP to 6-8 h after ERCP. The primary endpoint was the incidence of PEP, and the secondary endpoints were the incidence of post-ERCP hyperamylasemia, hyperlipasemia and abdominal pain.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of PEP was 6.3% (10/159) and no significant differences were observed between ulinastatin and nafamostat groups in terms of the incidences of PEP (1.9% and 3.8%, P = 0.560), hyperamylasemia, hyperlipasemia, and abdominal pain, although these were significantly lower than those of the control group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference for preventing PEP between ulinastatin and nafamostat and both drugs were efficacious for preventing post-ERCP complications.

Pharmacologic prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: protease inhibitors and NSAIDs in a meta-analysis

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis is the most frequent complication of ERCP. Several meta-analyses have examined the effects of protease inhibitors (gabexate mesilate, ulinastatin, and nafamostat mesilate) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on post-ERCP pancreatitis, but the results have been confusing. Since the previous meta-analysis, several new studies have been published on this topic. To provide an updated quantitative assessment of the effectiveness of protease inhibitors and NSAIDs in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials for patients at risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis. Twenty-six articles were included in this meta-analysis. Nafamostat mesilate (summary RR = 0.41; 95 %CI 0.28-0.59; n = 4 studies) and NSAIDs (summary RR = 0.58; 95 %CI = 0.44-0.76; n = 7 studies) were associated with decreased risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis in the high-quality studies. However, gabexate mesilate (summary RR = 0.64; 95 %CI = 0.36-1.13; n = 6 studies) and ulinastatin (summary RR = 0.65; 95 %CI = 0.33-1.30; n = 2 studies) were not associated with decreased risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis in the high-quality studies. This is the first meta-analysis to compare the effects of three protease inhibitors. Solid evidence supports the use of nafamostat mesilate and NSAIDs for preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Systematic review with network meta-analysis: pharmacological prophylaxis against post-ERCP pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of many pharmacological agents for preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) has been evaluated in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), but it is unclear which agent(s) should be used in clinical practice. Network meta-analyses of RCTs are used to simultaneously compare several agents to determine their relative efficacy and identify priority agents for comparison in future RCTs.

AIM

To evaluate pharmacological agents for the prevention of PEP by conducting a network meta-analysis of RCTs.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases for RCTs that evaluated the efficacy of agents for preventing PEP. RCTs were simultaneously analysed using random-effects network meta-analysis under the Bayesian framework to identify the best agents. The efficacy of agents was ordered according to the probability of being ranked as any of the top three best performing agents.

RESULTS

The network meta-analysis included 99 RCTs evaluating 16 agents in 25 313 patients. Topical epinephrine (adrenaline) was the most efficacious agent with 85.9% probability of ranking among the top three agents, followed by nafamostat (51.4%), antibiotics (44.5%) and NSAIDs (42.8%). However, in a sensitivity analysis including only rectal NSAIDs, NSAIDs moved from fourth rank to second (58.1%). Patients receiving topical epinephrine, compared with placebo, had a 75% reduced risk of PEP (OR 0.25, 95% probability interval 0.06-0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

Topical epinephrine and rectal NSAIDs are the most efficacious agents for preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis, based on existing RCTs. Combinations of these agents, which act on different steps in the pathogenesis of post-ERCP pancreatitis, should be evaluated in future trials.

Prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis

Pancreatitis is one of the most common complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). A variety of patient-related and procedure-related factors have been identified to risk-stratify patients. Several measures can be undertaken in order to decrease the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk groups. These measures include pancreatic duct stenting and rectal indomethacin, amongst others.

Preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis is a common and potentially devastating complication of ERCP. Advances in risk stratification, patient selection, procedure technique, and prophylactic interventions have substantially improved the endoscopists' ability to prevent this complication. This article presents the evidence-based approaches to preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis and suggests timely research questions in this important area.

Is continuous venovenous hemofiltration effective against severe acute pancreatitis?

Our aim was to investigate the efficacy of continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) in treating severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). A literature search was performed using PubMed (1992-present), and all studies investigating the efficacy of CVVH in treating SAP were included. Four comparative studies and seven case series comprising a total of 354 patients were included. The overall mortality rate of patients receiving CVVH was 20% (55/275). A decreased mortality rate and decreased serum cytokine levels were reported in the CVVH groups in only two studies. The starting time point, substitution fluid flow rate, filter membrane type, hemofilter change interval, anticoagulation, and sustaining times of CVVH varied among the studies, and the impact of these parameters on the efficacy of CVVH was poorly reported. High-volume CVVH, when started early, was demonstrated to be more effective in eliminating cytokines in only one study. After the application of CVVH, the patient conditions started to improve between the 6th and 72nd hours. In conclusion, no solid clinical evidence has proven the efficacy of CVVH in treating SAP. High-volume CVVH that is started early and sustained for at least 72 h may be adopted to investigate the efficacy of CVVH for treating SAP.

Prophecy about post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: From divination to science

One unresolved issue of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), which occurs in up to 40% of patients. Identification of risk factors for PEP is especially important in the field of ERCP practice because it may assist physicians in taking protective measures in situations with high risk. A decade ago, Freeman et al meticulously evaluated a large number of potentially relevant risk factors for PEP, which can be divided into patient-related and procedure-related issues. In this commentary, we summarize this classic article and reevaluate the risk factors for PEP from the current point of view. This is followed by assessment of strategies for prevention of PEP that can be divided into mechanical and pharmacologic methods.

Post-ERCP pancreatitis: review of current preventive strategies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the most recent literature with significant findings pertaining to the prevention of postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite several promising reports of pharmacologic agents that have demonstrated the efficacy for prophylaxis against post-ERCP pancreatitis such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and secretin, there are currently no universally accepted agents for use in high-risk patients. The greatest reductions in the incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients have been demonstrated through advancements in endoscopic techniques such as pancreatic duct stenting and dye-free guidewire cannulation.

SUMMARY

Pancreatitis requiring hospitalization is the most common complication of ERCP. Numerous pharmaceutical and procedure related interventions have been studied in attempts to prevent this complication; however, morbidity associated with ERCP remains significant. The most effective methods for preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis are careful patient selection and identification of risk factors prior to procedure.