P A Testoni1, A Mariani, E Masci, S Curioni. 1. Division of Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Via Olgettina 60, 20132 Milan, Italy. testoni.pieralberto@hsr.it
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Several drugs have been used for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis with conflicting results and no data referring to the routine use of a pharmacological prophylaxis have been published up to now. Aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis and costs in a series of consecutive patients who have undergone ERCP procedures before and after the introduction of a routine prophylaxis with gabexate in all cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 1312 patients who underwent ERCP procedures without gabexate prophylaxis and from 1149 consecutive patients with 1g i.v. gabexate, were retrospectively evaluated during a 6-year period. Patients were also subdivided in standard- and high-risk subjects, on the basis of patient- and technique-related risk factors: 984 subjects (39.9%) had one or more conditions that placed them at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis. RESULTS: Post-ERCP pancreatitis was reported in 76 out of 2461 patients (3.1%). The frequency of pancreatitis appeared significantly reduced in the gabexate period in comparison with before gabexate in overall cases (2.2% versus 3.9%; p=0.019); however, the reduction was significant only for high-risk patients (3.8% versus 7.3%; p=0.001). Severe hyperamylasaemia at 4-6h and 24h after the procedure was also significantly reduced only in high-risk patients (p=0.001). Routine prophylaxis with gabexate appeared cost-effective in high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Routine gabexate prophylaxis was associated with a significant reduction of post-ERCP pancreatitis rate, severe hyperamylasaemia and hospitalisation-related costs only in high-risk patients. However, gabexate appeared unable to reduce the incidence of severe pancreatitis.
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Several drugs have been used for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis with conflicting results and no data referring to the routine use of a pharmacological prophylaxis have been published up to now. Aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency of post-ERCP pancreatitis and costs in a series of consecutive patients who have undergone ERCP procedures before and after the introduction of a routine prophylaxis with gabexate in all cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 1312 patients who underwent ERCP procedures without gabexate prophylaxis and from 1149 consecutive patients with 1g i.v. gabexate, were retrospectively evaluated during a 6-year period. Patients were also subdivided in standard- and high-risk subjects, on the basis of patient- and technique-related risk factors: 984 subjects (39.9%) had one or more conditions that placed them at high risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis. RESULTS: Post-ERCP pancreatitis was reported in 76 out of 2461 patients (3.1%). The frequency of pancreatitis appeared significantly reduced in the gabexate period in comparison with before gabexate in overall cases (2.2% versus 3.9%; p=0.019); however, the reduction was significant only for high-risk patients (3.8% versus 7.3%; p=0.001). Severe hyperamylasaemia at 4-6h and 24h after the procedure was also significantly reduced only in high-risk patients (p=0.001). Routine prophylaxis with gabexate appeared cost-effective in high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Routine gabexate prophylaxis was associated with a significant reduction of post-ERCP pancreatitis rate, severe hyperamylasaemia and hospitalisation-related costs only in high-risk patients. However, gabexate appeared unable to reduce the incidence of severe pancreatitis.
Authors: Alberto Mariani; Milena Di Leo; Maria Chiara Petrone; Paolo Giorgio Arcidiacono; Antonella Giussani; Raffaella Alessia Zuppardo; Giulia Martina Cavestro; Pier Alberto Testoni Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-12-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Joo Seong Kim; Sang Hyub Lee; Namyoung Park; Gunn Huh; Jung Won Chun; Jin Ho Choi; In Rae Cho; Woo Hyun Paik; Ji Kon Ryu; Yong-Tae Kim Journal: BMC Gastroenterol Date: 2022-05-31 Impact factor: 2.847