Literature DB >> 28902793

The Risk Factors for Moderately Severe and Severe Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis According to the Revised Atlanta Classification.

Eui Joo Kim1, Jae Hee Cho, Kyong Yong Oh, Su Young Kim, Yeon Suk Kim.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to confirm the value of the revised Atlanta classification for predicting the severity of post-endoscopic retrograde choloangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) and to validate the risk factors for moderately severe and severe PEP.
METHODS: Among 2672 patients, 86 with PEP and 172 randomly selected control patients were included in this study. Post-endoscopic retrograde choloangiopancreatography pancreatitis was evaluated according to Cotton criteria and the revised Atlanta classification. The agreements between the 2 sets of criteria were compared, and the risk factors for moderately severe and severe PEP were identified.
RESULTS: According to the revised Atlanta classification, 72 patients (83.7%) had mild, 11 (12.8%) had moderately severe, and 3 (3.5%) had severe disease. The agreement between the revised Atlanta classification and Cotton criteria was fair (κ = 0.285). Statistically significant risk factors for PEP were difficult cannulation and dye injection in the pancreatic duct, including acinarization. For moderately severe or severe PEP, obesity (hazard ratio, 3.384 [95% confidence interval, 1.023-11.191]) was the only statistically significant risk factor.
CONCLUSIONS: The revised Atlanta classification of acute pancreatitis is an effective and feasible classification system for predicting PEP severity. Obesity was identified as an important risk factor predicting moderately severe and severe PEP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28902793     DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000000912

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pancreas        ISSN: 0885-3177            Impact factor:   3.327


  5 in total

1.  The revised Atlanta criteria more accurately reflect severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis compared to the consensus criteria.

Authors:  Xjnm Smeets; N Bouhouch; J Buxbaum; H Zhang; J Cho; R C Verdonk; Teh Römkens; N G Venneman; I Kats; J M Vrolijk; Gjm Hemmink; A Otten; Acitl Tan; B J Elmunzer; P B Cotton; Jph Drenth; Ejm van Geenen
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2019-02-27       Impact factor: 4.623

Review 2.  Update on the Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis.

Authors:  Han Zhang; Jaehoon Cho; James Buxbaum
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-12

3.  Can Endoscopic Ultrasonography Prevent Unnecessary Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Patients with High and Intermediate Likelihood of Choledocholithiasis?

Authors:  Eui Joo Kim; Jae Hee Cho
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2017-11-30

4.  Length of stay overestimates severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis: Is it time to revise the consensus definition?

Authors:  Mahya Faghih; Amitasha Sinha; Robert A Moran; Elham Afghani; Yuval A Patel; Andrew C Storm; Ayesha Kamal; Venkata S Akshintala; Atif Zaheer; Anthony N Kalloo; Vivek Kumbhari; Mouen A Khashab; Vikesh K Singh
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2018-07-04

5.  Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis assessed using criteria for acute pancreatitis.

Authors:  Azumi Suzuki; Koji Uno; Kojiro Nakase; Koichiro Mandai; Bunji Endoh; Koki Chikugo; Takumi Kawakami; Takahiro Suzuki; Yoshitaka Nakai; Kiyonori Kusumoto; Yoshio Itokawa; Osamu Inatomi; Shigeki Bamba; Yoshinori Mizumoto; Kiyohito Tanaka
Journal:  JGH Open       Date:  2021-12-06
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.