RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The prevalence and impact of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity noted on body composition analysis in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is unknown. This study investigates the prevalence of sarcopenia at different timepoints and its effect on post-pancreatitis complications and mortality. METHODS: A prospective database of SAP admissions with organ failure at a single institution from 2015 to 2019 were analysed. Sarcopenia was determined by IMAGE J software on CT. Database was further queried for post-pancreatitis complications and mortality. RESULTS: 141 patients with a median age of 59 (range 18-88) and M:F ratio 1.52:1 of were analysed. Sarcopenia was present in 111/141 (79%) patients at admission, 78/79 (99%) at 3 months and 26/36 (72%) at 12 months. 67/111 patients with sarcopenia on admission had sarcopenic obesity. The mortality at 30 days, 3 months and 12 months was 16/141 (11%), 30/141 (21%) and 42/141 (30%) respectively. Mortality was significantly higher in sarcopenic patients at admission (35.14%) compared to the non-sarcopenic group (10%), P = 0.008). Mortality in the sarcopenic obesity group was significantly higher (45%) compared to the sarcopenic non-obese group (20%), P = 0.009) at admission. Multivariate logistic regression identified sarcopenic obesity (OR: 2.880), age (OR: 1.048) and number of organ failures (OR: 3.225) as significant predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Sarcopenia and Sarcopenic obesity are highly prevalent in SAP patients on admission and during follow up. Furthermore, sarcopenic obesity was shown to be a significant predictor of mortality at admission, suggesting that body composition analysis could be a potential predictive marker of mortality in SAP patients.
Assuntos
Pancreatite , Sarcopenia , Humanos , Sarcopenia/complicações , Sarcopenia/epidemiologia , Doença Aguda , Pancreatite/complicações , Obesidade/epidemiologia , Composição CorporalRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Acute pancreatitis (AP) has variable clinical courses. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the safety, efficacy, and impact of epidural anaesthesia (EA) use in AP. METHODS: The PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched between 1980 and 2022 using the PRISMA guidelines, to identify observational and comparative studies reporting on EA in AP. The meta-analysis was performed in R Foundation for Statistical Computing using the meta R Package for Meta-Analysis. RESULTS: A total of 9 studies with 2006 patients of which 726 (36%) patients had EA were included. All studies demonstrated high safety and feasibility of EA in AP with no reported major local or neurological complications. One randomised controlled trial demonstrated an improvement in pain severity using a 0-10 visual analogue scale (VAS) at the outset (1.6 in EA vs 3.5 in non-EA, P = 0.02) and on day 10 (0.2 in EA vs 2.33 in non-EA, P = 0.034). There was also improvement in pancreatic perfusion with EA measured with computerised tomography 13 (43%) in EA vs 2 (7%) in non-EA, P = 0.003. The need for ventilatory support and overall mortality was lower in EA patients 40 (19%) vs 285 (24%) P = 0.025 (OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.28-0.84) and 16 (7%) vs 214 (20%), P = 0.050 (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.15-1.00), respectively. CONCLUSION: EA is infrequently used for pain management in AP and yet the available evidence suggests that it is safe and effective in reducing pain severity, improving pancreatic perfusion, and decreasing mortality.
