Soft self-expandable metal stent to treat painful pancreatic duct strictures secondary to chronic pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter trial

Role of advanced endoscopy in the management of inflammatory digestive diseases (pancreas and biliary tract)

The progress of endoscopic diagnosis and treatment for inflammatory diseases of the biliary tract and pancreas have been remarkable. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and EUS-elastography are used for the diagnosis of early chronic pancreatitis and evaluation of endocrine and exocrine function in chronic pancreatitis. Notably, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and electrohydraulic shock wave lithotripsy have improved the endoscopic stone removal rate in patients for whom pancreatic stone removal is difficult. Studies have reported the use of self-expanding metal stents for stent placement for pancreatic duct stenosis and EUS-guided pancreatic drainage for refractory pancreatic duct strictures. Furthermore, EUS-guided drainage using a double-pigtailed plastic stent has been performed for the management of symptomatic pancreatic fluid collection after acute pancreatitis. Recently, lumen-apposing metal stents have led to advances in the treatment of walled-off necrosis after acute pancreatitis. EUS-guided biliary drainage is an alternative to refractory endoscopic biliary drainage and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage for the treatment of acute cholangitis. The placement of an inside stent followed by switching to uncovered self-expanding metal stents in difficult-to-treat cases has been proposed for acute cholangitis by malignant biliary obstruction. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage is an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage for severe and some cases of moderate acute cholecystitis. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage has been reported as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage and endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage. However, it is important to understand the advantages and disadvantages of each drainage method and select the optimal drainage method for each case.

Interventions for Pancreatitis-New Approaches, Knowledge Gaps, and Research Opportunities: Summary of a National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Workshop

ABSTRACT

There exists no cure for acute, recurrent acute or chronic pancreatitis and treatments to date have been focused on managing symptoms. A recent workshop held by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) focused on interventions that might disrupt or perhaps even reverse the natural course of this heterogenous disease, aiming to identify knowledge gaps and research opportunities that might inform future funding initiatives for NIDDK. The breadth and variety of identified active or planned clinical trials traverses the spectrum of the disease and was conceptually grouped for the workshop into behavioral, nutritional, pharmacologic and biologic, and mechanical interventions. Cognitive and other behavioral therapies are proven interventions for pain and addiction, but barriers exist to their use. Whilst a disease specific instrument quantifying pain is now validated, an equivalent is lacking for nutrition - and both face challenges in ease and frequency of administration. Multiple pharmacologic agents hold promise. Ongoing development of Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) measurements can satisfy Investigative New Drug (IND) regulatory assessments. Despite multiple randomized clinical trials demonstrating benefit, great uncertainty remains regarding patient selection, timing of intervention, and type of mechanical intervention (endoscopic versus surgery). Challenges and opportunities to establish beneficial interventions for patients were identified.

Management of chronic pancreatitis: recent advances and future prospects

As a progressive fibroinflammatory disease, chronic pancreatitis (CP) often manifests as recurrent bouts of abdominal pain with or without complications, causing a heavy burden of health care. In recent years, some meaningful insights into the management of CP have been obtained from randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, which were of great importance. Based on this research, it is shown that there are various treatments for CP. Therefore, it is of great importance to choose a suitable strategy for patients with CP individually. Relevant evidence on the management of CP was summarized in this review, including nutrition supplements, medication, endoscopy, surgery, exploration of novel therapies as well as evaluation and prediction of treatment response.

Quality of life after endoscopic procedures for chronic pancreatitis: A multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Chronic Pancreatitis (CP) causes morphological changes in the pancreatic tissue, leading to complications and pain, which may require endoscopic interventions.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to determine the frequency of endoscopic procedures (EP) in CP patients and to analyse pain and quality of life (QoL) in these patients after their EP.

METHODS

This study included 1327 CP patients from the Scandinavian Baltic Pancreatic Club (SBPC) database including four countries and eight centres. We analysed patients undergoing EPs and gathered information on the EP, pancreatic function, pain, disease and duration. The EORTC C-30 QoL questionnaire was gathered prospectively and multivariable analysis was conducted on independent parameters between the groups. The reference population had no interventions (n = 870).

RESULTS

260 CP patients (22%) underwent EPs, median one year (range 0-39 years) after CP diagnosis. 68% were males. The median age was 59 (20-90) years. Most common aetiological factors were alcohol in 65% and smoking in 71%. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was used in 6% of the CP population and in 21% of the EP group. Biliary duct stenting was performed on 37% and pancreatic stenting was performed on 56% of the patients. There was no difference in pain patterns between patients who had pancreatic stenting and the reference population. The EP group had slightly better QoL (p = 0.047), functioning and fewer symptoms than the reference population, in the multivariable analysis there was no interaction effect analysis between the groups. The pancreatic stent group had better QoL and the same amount of pain than the reference group. The patients who needed later surgery (23%) had more pain (p = 0.043) and fatigue (p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

One in five of the CP patients underwent EP. These patients scored higher on QoL responses and had better symptom scores. CP patients who had pancreatic stenting performed had the same pain patterns as the reference population. Randomised prospective trials are needed to determine the effect of endoscopy procedures on CP patients.