ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) can be difficult to diagnose and causes maldigestion symptoms and malabsorption. There has been a number of studies that have identified PEI associated micronutrient deficiencies (PEI-MD), however there is variation in both the frequency and type of PEI-MD reported, with the majority of studies including patients with PEI due to chronic pancreatitis (CP) or CP without PEI. There is a paucity of information regarding the prevalence of PEI-MD in patients with PEI without CP and the yield of testing for PEI-MD in a clinical setting in patients with suspected benign pancreatic diseases. AIM: To prospectively assess the yield and type of PEI-MD in patients with and without PEI secondary to benign pancreatic disease. METHODS: Patients investigated for maldigestion symptoms with Faecal Elastase-1 (FEL-1) and suspected or proven benign pancreatic disease were prospectively identified. At the time of FEL-1 testing, serum samples were taken for micronutrients identified by previous studies as PEI-MD: prealbumin, retinol binding protein, copper, zinc, selenium, magnesium and later in the study lipid adjusted vitamin E. FEL-1 was recorded, with a result < 200 µg/g considered diagnostic of PEI. Patients underwent computed tomography (CT) imaging when there was a clinical suspicion of CP, a new diagnosis of PEI recurrent, pancreatic type pain (epigastric abdominal pain radiating to back with or without previous acute pancreatitis attacks) or weight loss. RESULTS: After exclusions, 112 patients were recruited that underwent testing for FEL-1 and PEI-MD. PEI was identified in 41/112 (36.6%) patients and a pancreatic CT was performed in 82 patients. Overall a PEI-MD was identified in 21/112 (18.8%) patients. The yield of PEI-MD was 17/41 (41.5%) if PEI was present which was significantly higher than those without 4/71 (5.6%) (P = 0.0001). The yield of PEI-MD was significantly higher when PEI and CP were seen together 13/22 (59.1%) compared to CP without PEI and PEI without CP (P < 0.03). Individual micronutrient assessment showed a more frequent occurrence of prealbumin 8/41 (19.5%), selenium 6/41 (14.6%) and magnesium 5/41 (12.2%) deficiency when PEI was present (< 0.02). The accuracy of using the significant micronutrients identified in our cohort as a predictor of PEI showed a positive predictive value of 80%-85.7% [95% confidence interval (CI): 38%-100%] and a low sensitivity of 9.8%-19.5% [95% CI: 3.3%-34.9%]. CONCLUSION: Testing for PEI-MD in patients with suspected pancreatic disease has a high yield, specifically when PEI and CP are found together. PEI-MD testing should include selenium, magnesium and prealbumin.
ABSTRACT
There is compelling evidence to support the quality, cost effectiveness and safety profile of non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). However in the United Kingdom, it is recommended that the administration and monitoring of propofol sedation for endoscopic procedures should be the responsibility of a dedicated and appropriately trained anaesthetist only. The majority of United Kingdom EUS procedures are performed with opiate and benzodiazepine sedation rather than anaesthetist led propofol lists due to anaesthetist resource availability. We sought to prospectively determine the tolerability and safety of EUS with benzodiazepine and opiate sedation in single United Kingdom centre. Two hundred consecutive patients undergoing either EUS or oesophago-gastroduodenoscopy (OGD) with conscious sedation were prospectively recruited with a 1:1 enrolment ratio. Patients completed questionnaires pre and post procedure detailing anticipated and actual pain experienced on a 1-10 visual analogue scale. Demographics, procedure duration, sedation doses and willingness to repeat the procedure were also recorded. EUS procedures lasted significantly longer than OGDs (15 min vs 6 min, P < 0.0001), however, there was no difference in anticipated pain scores between the groups (EUS 3.37/10 vs OGD 3.47/10, P = 0.46). Pain scores indicated EUS was better tolerated than OGD (1.16/10 vs 1.88/10, P = 0.03) although higher doses of sedation were used for EUS procedures. There were no complications identified in either group. We feel our study demonstrates that the tolerability of EUS with opiate and benzodiazepine sedation is acceptable.
