Prospective multicentre study of indications for surgery in patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis following endoscopic ultrasonography (PICUS)

Background:Cholecystectomy in patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) is controversial. A randomized trial found cholecystectomy to reduce the recurrence rate of IAP but did not include preoperative endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). As EUS is effective in detecting gallstone disease, cholecystectomy may be indicated only in patients with gallstone disease. This study aimed to determine the diagnostic value of EUS in patients with IAP, and the rate of recurrent pancreatitis in patients in whom EUS could not determine the aetiology (EUS-negative IAP).Methods:This prospective multicentre cohort study included patients with a first episode of IAP who underwent outpatient EUS. The primary outcome was detection of aetiology by EUS. Secondary outcomes included adverse events after EUS, recurrence of pancreatitis, and quality of life during 1-year follow-up.Results:After screening 957 consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis from 24 centres, 105 patients with IAP were included and underwent EUS. In 34 patients (32 per cent), EUS detected an aetiology: (micro)lithiasis and biliary sludge (23.8 per cent), chronic pancreatitis (6.7 per cent), and neoplasms (2.9 per cent); 2 of the latter patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy. During 1-year follow-up, the pancreatitis recurrence rate was 17 per cent (12 of 71) among patients with EUS-negative IAP versus 6 per cent (2 of 34) among those with positive EUS. Recurrent pancreatitis was associated with poorer quality of life.Conclusion:EUS detected an aetiology in a one-third of patients with a first episode of IAP, requiring mostly cholecystectomy or pancreatoduodenectomy. The role of cholecystectomy in patients with EUS-negative IAP remains uncertain and warrants further study

Hyper-IgG4 disease: report and characterisation of a new disease

BACKGROUND: We highlight a chronic inflammatory disease we call 'hyper-IgG4 disease', which has many synonyms depending on the organ involved, the country of origin and the year of the report. It is characterized histologically by a lymphoplasmacytic inflammation with IgG4-positive cells and exuberant fibrosis, which leaves dense fibrosis on resolution. A typical example is idiopathic retroperitoneal fibrosis, but the initial report in 2001 was of sclerosing pancreatitis. METHODS: We report an index case with fever and severe systemic disease. We have also reviewed the histology of 11 further patients with idiopathic retroperitoneal fibrosis for evidence of IgG4-expressing plasma cells, and examined a wide range of other inflammatory conditions and fibrotic diseases as organ-specific controls. We have reviewed the published literature for disease associations with idiopathic, systemic fibrosing conditions and the synonyms: pseudotumour, myofibroblastic tumour, plasma cell granuloma, systemic fibrosis, xanthofibrogranulomatosis, and multifocal fibrosclerosis. RESULTS: Histology from all 12 patients showed, to varying degrees, fibrosis, intense inflammatory cell infiltration with lymphocytes, plasma cells, scattered neutrophils, and sometimes eosinophilic aggregates, with venulitis and obliterative arteritis. The majority of lymphocytes were T cells that expressed CD8 and CD4, with scattered B-cell-rich small lymphoid follicles. In all cases, there was a significant increase in IgG4-positive plasma cells compared with controls. In two cases, biopsies before and after steroid treatment were available, and only scattered plasma cells were seen after treatment, none of them expressing IgG4. Review of the literature shows that although pathology commonly appears confined to one organ, patients can have systemic symptoms and fever. In the active period, there is an acute phase response with a high serum concentration of IgG, and during this phase, there is a rapid clinical response to glucocorticoid steroid treatment. CONCLUSION: We believe that hyper-IgG4 disease is an important condition to recognise, as the diagnosis can be readily verified and the outcome with treatment is very good

Transluminal endoscopic step-up approach versus minimally invasive surgical step-up approach in patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis (TENSION trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN09186711]

Contains fulltext : 126176.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Infected necrotising pancreatitis is a potentially lethal disease that nearly always requires intervention. Traditionally, primary open necrosectomy has been the treatment of choice. In recent years, the surgical step-up approach, consisting of percutaneous catheter drainage followed, if necessary, by (minimally invasive) surgical necrosectomy has become the standard of care. A promising minimally invasive alternative is the endoscopic transluminal step-up approach. This approach consists of endoscopic transluminal drainage followed, if necessary, by endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy. We hypothesise that the less invasive endoscopic step-up approach is superior to the surgical step-up approach in terms of clinical and economic outcomes. METHODS/DESIGN: The TENSION trial is a randomised controlled, parallel-group superiority multicenter trial. Patients with (suspected) infected necrotising pancreatitis with an indication for intervention and in whom both treatment modalities are deemed possible, will be randomised to either an endoscopic transluminal or a surgical step-up approach. During a 4 year study period, 98 patients will be enrolled from 24 hospitals of the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. The primary endpoint is a composite of death and major complications within 6 months following randomisation. Secondary endpoints include complications such as pancreaticocutaneous fistula, exocrine or endocrine pancreatic insufficiency, need for additional radiological, endoscopic or surgical intervention, the need for necrosectomy after drainage, the number of (re-)interventions, quality of life, and total direct and indirect costs. DISCUSSION: The TENSION trial will answer the question whether an endoscopic step-up approach reduces the combined primary endpoint of death and major complications, as well as hospital stay and related costs compared with a surgical step-up approach in patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis