Introduction

Despite EUS-guided drainage (EUS-FCD) is the preferred modality for management of peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs), factors predicting the need for step-up to additional procedures (including radiology, surgery or additional endoscopies) are retrospectively explored in studies restricted to Lumen Apposing Metal Stents (LAMS) or excluding pseudocysts and post-surgical collections, which might require a step-up as well.

Aims & Methods

All consecutive candidates to EUS-FCD with either LAMS or Double-pigtail Plastic Stents (DPPS) between 2020-2023 were included in a Prospective Registry of Therapeutic EUS (PROTECT). The role of baseline clinical and morphological factors, including the Quadrant / Necrosis / Infection (QNI) score, in predicting the need for any step-up to additional procedures was evaluated by stepwise logistic regression.

Results

Twenty-three post-surgical PFCs, 19 pseudocysts and 18 walled-off necrosis [WOPN]) were included, 42% treated with LAMS and 58% with DPPS based on morphology. Clinical success was 92.9%, but 38% of patients required a step-up to necrosectomy (26.7%) or additional procedures. Patients requiring step-up versus those sufficing drainage had a higher number of quadrants involved (OR=3.6 [1.5-8.4]), a more frequent paracolic extension (OR=6 [1.4-26]), a higher necrosis content (>30%, OR=7.2 [1.8-28.4] ; >60% OR=25.2 [4.2-153]) and were in the high-risk group according to the QNI score, with no difference in the diameter and rate of superinfection. At multivariate analysis, being in the high-risk QNI group was the only independent predictor of step-up (OR=9.8 [2.9-32.9]). The score however was not able to stratify in analyses restricted to WOPN only or LAMS only. High-risk QNI patients presented also a longer hospital stay (17.5 [8-45] vs 4 [2-6.5], p=0,001), without any difference in ICU stay and nutritional support.

Conclusion

In this prospective series of consecutive non-selective PFCs undergoing EUS-FCD, QNI score was the only independent predictor of any need for step-up to additional procedures, and strongly correlated to the EUS-FCD allocation to LAMS versus DPPS, unravelling a potential additional utility.

Disclosure

GV reports travel grants from Pentax Medical, Boston Scientific and Euromedical, and lecture fees by Boston Scientific.
All the other authors ​declare no conflict of interest.

Introduction

In patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP), pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) and poor nutritional intake may cause nutritional deficiencies. Guidelines advise monitoring key nutrients and supplementing is case of deficiency to prevent malnutrition-related complications. However, adherence remains low, possibly due to limited evidence on the clinical relevance of single nutrient deficiencies and the benefit of targeted supplementation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of nutritional deficiencies in patients with CP and to identify predictors of those at highest risk. Secondary, we seek to explore association between nutritional deficiencies and malnutrition-related complications, and to provide insight into the natural course of nutritional deficiencies.

Aims & Methods

We analyzed data from the COMBO-trial, a nationwide stepped-wedged cluster randomized trial to evaluate the effect of an evidence-based algorithm for the management of CP. Measurements of fat-soluble vitamins, minerals, and albumin conducted in the outpatient clinic during the 35-month study period were included. PEI was defined as fecal elastase-1 concentration <200 µg/g or the use of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT). The Pancreatic Exocrine Insufficiency Questionnaire (PEI-Q), designed to evaluate the severity of PEI symptoms, was administered at four distinct time points throughout the study. Supplement use was collected from health records and patient questionnaires. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed for the presence of multiple deficiencies. Potential predictors included patient and disease characteristics at baseline and the mean score of the PEI-Q during follow-up.

Results

In total 409 patients were included in this study. At baseline 327 (80.0%) had PEI and PERT was used by 297 (72.6%). Nutritional deficiencies were present in 195 patients (47.7%) of which 81 (19.8%) had multiple deficiencies. The prevalence of deficiencies included vitamin A in 13/172 (7.6%) patients, vitamin D 111/289 (38.4%), vitamin E 15/168 (8.9%), vitamin K 52/88 (59.1%), iron 44/137 (32.1%) calcium 4/198 (2.0%), magnesium 24/132 (18.2%) zinc 13/67 (19.4%), selenium 4/42 (9.5%), and albumin in 41/288 (14.2%) patients. No abnormal coagulation was observed in the 20 patients with vitamin K deficiency and available INR measurements. Osteopenia was diagnosed in 110/236 (46.6%) and osteoporosis in 56/236 (23.7%). Deficiencies in vitamin K and vitamin D, micronutrients critical to bone metabolism, were not associated with osteopenia or osteoporosis. Of 44 patients with an iron deficiency, 22 (50%) were anemic. Deficiency resolved without single nutrient supplementation in 71.4% (vitamin A), 75.0% (vitamin D), 50.0% (vitamin E) , 33.3% (vitamin K), 63.6% (iron), 100% (magnesium), 80.0% (zinc) of cases. Independent predictors for multiple deficiencies were more severe PEI symptoms (OR 1.86, 1.09 – 3.17) and daily alcohol consumption (OR 2.80, 1.27 – 6.18).

Conclusion

Nutritional deficiencies are present in approximately half of the patients with CP. Most nutritional deficiencies resolve without single nutrient supplementation. Predictors for multiple nutritional deficiencies were severity of PEI symptoms and daily alcohol consumption. Therefore, nutritional deficiencies should be considered a marker of malnutrition, with treatment focused on addressing the underlying cause rather than isolated correction through single nutrient supplementation.

Introduction

Pain in acute pancreatitis is the symptom to be treated urgently. There are currently no recommendations for analgesic management. Intravenous lidocaine has both analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects. Its use has never been evaluated for analgesia in acute pancreatitis. The aim of our study was therefore to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine in the management of acute pancreatitis resistant to level I and II analgesics.

Aims & Methods

We conducted a retrospective, monocentric study between January 2015 and December 2021. Patients visiting the emergency department for proven acute pancreatitis and presenting with pain resistant to group I and II analgesics, hospitalized in the hepato-gastroenterology department and treated with intravenous lidocaine, were included. Pain was assessed by retrospective collection of numerical pain scales (NPS) at the emergency department, and at each analgesic re-evaluation. Treatment efficacy was defined as the absence of need for a Level III analgesic (opioids).

Results

154 patients, hospitalized in our gastroenterology unit for acute pancreatitis and presenting with pain refractory to level I and II analgesics treated with intravenous lidocaine were included. Patients were predominantly male, with a median age of 48.5 years [37.0; 58.0]. The main etiology of acute pancreatitis was ethylic in 36% of cases. Acute necrotizing pancreatitis was present in 69% of patients. 44/154 patients received a bolus of opioid morphine in the emergency department before the administration of lidocaine. Lidocaine was prescribed in a continuous way at the dose of 2g/24h (intravenous administration with electric syringe). The median NPS before prescription of lidocaine was 8.0 [7.00; 9.00]. Lidocaine treatment was effective in 88.7% of patients (136/154). 1.3% of patients experienced lidocaine-related adverse events such as skin rash and dysgeusia. In univariate analysis, patients requiring intensive care or developing an acute respiratory distress syndrome were significantly more likely to fail lidocaine (respectively OR = 5.83; CI [1.69; 20.06]; p=0.01 and OR = 4.23; CI [1.44; 12.43]; p=0.009).

Conclusion

Intravenous lidocaine administration appears to be effective and safe for pain control in 89% of patients failing to level I and II analgesia. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these results.
​

Introduction

While understanding the cause is pivotal for managing acute pancreatitis (AP), there is currently no established protocol for determining its aetiology. Ongoing research aims to validate diagnostic protocols and integrate advanced tests for cases of idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). This study evaluated current international opinion about diagnosis and follow-up of IAP.

Aims & Methods

An international survey was conducted through an online survey platform; the link was shared through social media, e-mails and conference presentations. Responses were collected anonymously. The 37 questions were developed by an international multidisciplinary team, part of a Pancreas2000 collaborative project.

Results

Respondents (n=247) were from over 35 countries; 39% of them had over 10 years of clinical experience; 73% were working in tertiary referral centres; 56% were gastroenterologists, 34% surgeons. An equal number of respondents (n=85, 34%) chose magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) as the first test ideally performed in case of no suspected aetiology for AP after basic tests. When both investigations were available in the respondents’ centre, 44% chose other tests, 30% MRCP and 27% EUS. If there is no evidence of biliary aetiology, 79% of respondents would not perform cholecystectomy; the rest would choose recurrent AP and a history of elevated liver enzymes as main indications. No correlation was found when comparing tertiary and non-tertiary centres in performing cholecystectomies, similarly when comparing centres with or without EUS availability. Most respondents (90%) followed up on moderate and severe AP cases without an aetiology at index admission; 53% of centres followed up on all the IAP cases after first discharge. The follow-up was mostly done by gastroenterologists (62%); 33% of specialists would conduct a follow-up visit every 6 months, while 17% wouldn’t recommend follow-up visits.

Conclusion

This international survey highlights the lack of standardisation for diagnosis and follow-up of IAP. Although MRCP and EUS were ideally chosen as first options in IAP diagnosis, respondents chose other investigations in their practice even when both were available. Only half of the centres schedule visits, showing a lack of consensus regarding follow-up. There is a need for international standardisation for diagnosis and follow-up of IAP.

Introduction

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a rare disease that can be diagnosed, according to the International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria (ICDC). Contrast-enhanced MRI with MRCP has now largely replaced other imaging techniques and ERCP for the assessment of ductal morphology in AIP. A number of MRI-criteria have been proposed, but due to the rarity of the disease the diagnostic imaging criteria have not yet been systematically validated. Aim of the study is to review and optimize the MR-morphologic diagnostic criteria for AIP in terms of specificity and sensitivity in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of the pancreaticobiliary system.

Aims & Methods

We analyzed retrospectively hundred-fiftysix (n=156) high-quality MRIs: AIP n=56, chronic pancreatitis (CP) n=25, pancreatic cancer (PDAC) n=25, primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) n=25, Non-HPB subjects n=25. The MRI reading was conducted in a blinded fashion, using defined criteria by at least two radiological experts. The statistical analysis was performed by means of Proportion test, Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test, One-way ANOVA and Cohen’s Kappa Statistic of the level of agreement.

Results

The level of agreement between two readers was moderate to substantial agreement (κ 0.23-0.85). Sausage-like enlargment (Reader 1: Sens 30.91%, Spec 98.98%, NPV 71.85%, accuracy 74.51%; Reader 2: Sens 26.79%, Spec 98.00%, NPV 70.50%, accuracy 72.43%), restricted diffusion (Reader 1: Sens 47.83%, Spec 89.29%, NPV 75.76%, accuracy 74.51%; Reader 2: Sens 56.86%, Spec 73.26%, NPV 74.12%, accuracy 72.30%), delayed enhancement in the venous phase (Reader 1: Sens 8.70%, Spec 83.15%, NPV 63.79%, accuracy 74.10%; Reader 2: Sens 32.61%, Spec 79.31%, NPV 69.00%, accuracy 75.19%), the icicle sign (Reader 1: Sens 10.91%, Spec 100%, NPV 66.67%, accuracy 65.30%; Reader 2: Sens 37.50%, Spec 91.00%, NPV 72.22%, accuracy 71.79%) and hyperenhancement of ductal wall (Reader 1: Sens 14.29%, Spec 96.67%, NPV 67.44%, accuracy 71.90%; Reader 2: Sens 8.51%, Spec 95.45%, NPV 66.14%, accuracy 74.10%) show a good accuracy distinguishing AIP from controls. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) was significantly different between AIP, PDAC and CP (ANOVA). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.85 (CI 0.73 – 0.97) and 0.68 (CI 0.51 – 0.85) respectively for CP and PDAC.

Conclusion

Our study showed that the Sausage-like enlargment, restricted diffusion, delayed enhancement in the venous phase, the icicle sign and hyperenhancement of ductal wall show a good accuracy distinguishing AIP from controls.

Clinical Case Summary

A 70-year-old patient with diabetes mellitus and cholecystectomy performed six months earlier was admitted to the emergency department for generalized abdominal pain, hyporexia and weight loss.
An abdominal CT scan showed a solid-cystic pancreatic lesion suggestive of mucinous neoplasia, together with peritoneal nodules in the right paracolic gout. In view of the suspicion of malignancy, an echoendoscopy with fine needle aspiration puncture (EUS-FNA) was performed, identifying an irregular lesion with heterogeneous and hypovascular ultrastructure in the pancreatic neck-body and a discrete dilatation of the main pancreatic duct. Finally, the histological study didn´t show neoplastic cells.
Suddenly the patient experienced a clinical worsening with severe pain and high fever. Laboratory tests showed a progressive increase in C-reactive protein and leukocytosis with left shift. In a control CT scan, a reduction in the size of the pancreatic lesion is observed, together with an increase in the peritoneal lesions which present a polyglobulated contour, hypercapillary margins and rarefaction of the surrounding fat. These finding suggesting the presence of peritoneal abscesses secondary to dropped gallstones. After broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy, the intra-abdominal abscesses improved radiologically, but the collection persisted in the right posterior pararenal space which was drained under ultrasound control with subsequent disappearance of fever and normalization of analytical parameters.
Dropped gallstones occur in approximately 7% of cholecystectomies. The secondary granulomatous reaction in paucisymptomatic patients can simulate peritoneal tumor processes in imaging tests, being one of the adverse effects described in relation to this pathology. In our case, the concomitant presence of peritoneal lesions together the pancreatic lesion oriented the initial case as a malignant process; however, the patient's evolution were key to the final diagnosis.