Direct Endoscopic Necrosectomy With and Without Hydrogen Peroxide for Walled-off Pancreatic Necrosis: A Multicenter Comparative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic necrosectomy has emerged as the preferred treatment modality for walled-off pancreatic necrosis. This study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of direct endoscopic necrosectomy with and without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) lavage. METHODS: Retrospective chart reviews were performed for all patients undergoing endoscopic transmural management of walled-off pancreatic necrosis at 9 major medical centers from November 2011 to August 2018. Clinical success was defined as the resolution of the collection by imaging within 6 months, without requiring non-endoscopic procedures or surgery. RESULTS: Of 293 patients, 204 met the inclusion criteria. Technical and clinical success rates were 100% (204/204) and 81% (166/189), respectively. For patients, 122 (59.8%) patients had at least one H2O2 necrosectomy (H2O2 group) and 82 (40.2%) patients had standard endoscopic necrosectomy. Clinical success was higher in the H2O2 group: 106/113 (93.8%) vs 60/76 (78.9%), P = 0.002. On a multivariate analysis, the use of H2O2 was associated with higher clinical success rate (odds ratio 3.30, P = 0.033) and earlier resolution (odds ratio 2.27, P < 0.001). During a mean follow-up of 274 days, 27 complications occurred. Comparing procedures performed with and without H2O2 (n = 250 vs 183), there was no difference in post-procedure bleeding (7 vs 9, P = 0.25), perforation (2 vs 3, P = 0.66), infection (1 vs 2, P = 0.58), or overall complication rate (n = 13 [5.2%] vs 14 [7.7%], P = 0.30). DISCUSSION: H2O2-assisted endoscopic necrosectomy had a higher clinical success rate and a shorter time to resolution with equivalent complication rates relative to standard necrosectomy.See the visual abstract at http://links.lww.com/AJG/B714.(Equation is included in full-text article.).

Islet autotransplantation improves glycemic control in patients undergoing elective distal pancreatectomy for benign inflammatory disease.

Islet autotransplantation (IAT) is increasingly being performed to mitigate against the diabetic complications of pancreatic resection in patients with benign inflammatory pancreatic disorders; however, the glycemic benefit of IAT in patients undergoing partial pancreatic resection is not known. We aimed to determine whether IAT improved glycemic outcomes in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy for benign inflammatory disease. We performed a multicenter, retrospective case-control study of patients who underwent distal pancreatic resection with IAT at two U S tertiary care centers. The primary outcome was the mean change in pre- vs post-operative HgA1c following transplant as well as the development of new post-operative diabetes. Nine patients requiring distal pancreatectomy for benign disease underwent IAT and were compared to 13 historical controls without IAT. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. With a median follow-up of 22 months, those who received an IAT had a smaller increase in their pre- vs post-operative HgA1c (0.42 vs 2.83, P = .004), and one case patient (14.3%) vs three control patients (23.1%) developed new post-operative diabetes (P = .581). We conclude that patients undergoing distal pancreatic resection for benign inflammatory disease should be considered for IAT, as long-term glycemic outcomes appear to be improved in those undergoing transplant.

The Impact of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography on Islet Cell Yield During Total Pancreatectomy With Islet Autotransplantation.

OBJECTIVES: Many patients with recurrent acute and chronic pancreatitis who are candidates for total pancreatectomy and islet cell autotransplantation (TPIAT) undergo endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, little is known on the impact of ERCP on TPIAT outcomes. We aimed to explore the effect of antecedent ERCP on islet yield and postoperative insulin requirement after TPIAT. METHODS: Through a prospectively maintained database, we identified patients who underwent TPIAT at our institution between 2009 and 2016. After adjusting for confounders, islet cell yield and postoperative insulin requirement were compared between subjects who did and did not undergo ERCP within 2 years prior to TPIAT. RESULTS: Data were available on 167 TPIAT patients during the study period; 105 (62.9%) had undergone ERCP within 2 years prior. Prior ERCP was not associated with a reduction in islet equivalents per patient kilogram (odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-2.5; P = 0.31). Antecedent ERCP was not associated with increased postoperative insulin requirement among patients with no diabetes undergoing TPIAT (odds ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-1.83; P = 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Antecedent ERCP does not appear to have a deleterious impact on islet cell yield during TPIAT. Additional multicenter data are needed to more clearly determine the impact of ERCP in this context.

An assessment of existing risk stratification guidelines for the evaluation of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated that existing risk stratification guidelines for the evaluation of suspected choledocholithiasis lack accuracy, leading to the overutilization of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of our study was to evaluate the performance characteristics of published guidelines in predicting choledocholithiasis and to determine the impact of laboratory trends on diagnostic accuracy. METHODS: We identified patients with suspected choledocholithiasis hospitalized over a 5-year period (2009-2014) at a tertiary care academic medical center. Among eligible patients, we assessed the performance characteristics of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines predicting the presence of choledocholithiasis, confirmed by endoscopic ultrasound, magnetic resonance cholangiography, ERCP, or intra-operative cholangiography. We also evaluated whether a second set of liver function tests improved the accuracy of the guidelines. RESULTS: On presentation, 71 of the 173 eligible patients (41.4 %) met ASGE high-probability criteria for choledocholithiasis. Of these, only 39 (54.9 %) were found to have a choledocholithiasis on confirmatory testing. Conversely, of the 102 patients (58.6 %) who were classified as low or intermediate probability, 32 (31.4 %) had choledocholithiasis. Overall, the accuracy of the guidelines was 63 % (sensitivity 54.9 %; specificity 68.6 %). Incorporating a second set of laboratory tests did not improve accuracy (62.7 %), and a significant decline in liver function tests did not reliably predict spontaneous stone passage. CONCLUSIONS: Existing guidelines performed suboptimally for predicting choledocholithiasis in our patient population, similar to other validation studies. These findings further underscore the importance of developing alternate risk stratification tools for choledocholithiasis, aiming to minimize unnecessary diagnostic ERCP.