Buxbaum, James

INTRODUCTION: Immunoglobulin G4-related sclerosing cholangitis (IgG4-SC) and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) are cholestatic disorders, which may be difficult to differentiate. Importantly, PSC is an untreatable progressive fibroinflammatory disease, whereas IgG4-SC responds to immunosuppression if recognized in a timely manner. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify and define the performance of clinical, biochemical, radiographic, and histologic features to differentiate between these 2 diseases. METHODS: A systematic search for comparative studies of IgG4-SC and PSC through November 2023 (with repeat evaluation for interval literature in December 2024) was performed and data extraction performed in duplicate. Pooled proportions, odds ratios, means, and standardized mean differences of pertinent diagnostic features were calculated using random-effects inverse-variance models. RESULTS: We identified 38 studies comparing patients with IgG4-SC and PSC. IgG4-SC patients were more likely to have pancreatic disease ( P < 0.001) but less likely to have inflammatory bowel disease ( P < 0.001) than those with PSC. Serum IgG4 was significantly higher in IgG4-SC ( P < 0.001), as anticipated. Radiographically, IgG4-SC demonstrated long distal strictures ( P = 0.02) and symmetric ductal thickening ( P < 0.001), whereas PSC showed a beaded appearance ( P = 0.038). With the exception of IgG4 staining, histologic features including periductal fibrosis were similar between these entities, although sample size was limited for these features. DISCUSSION: Our meta-analysis shows that IgG4-SC and PSC present with similar clinical and radiographic features and possibly comparable histology. A history of unusual pancreatitis and elevated IgG4 (serum or tissue) prompts assessment for more specific radiographic features which if present warrant a therapeutic treatment trial.

INTRODUCTION: Prophylactic pancreatic stent placement (PSP) is effective for preventing pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk cases, but the optimal technical approach to this intervention remains uncertain. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of 787 clinical trial patients who underwent successful stent placement, we studied the impact of (i) whether pancreatic wire access was achieved for the sole purpose of PSP or naturally during the conduct of the case, (ii) the amount of effort expended on PSP, (iii) stent length, (iv) stent diameter, and (v) guidewire caliber. We used logistic regression models to examine the adjusted association between each technical factor and post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). RESULTS: Ninety-one of the 787 patients experienced PEP. There was no clear association between PEP and whether pancreatic wire access was achieved for the sole purpose of PSP (vs occurring naturally; odds ratio [OR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37–1.84), whether substantial effort expended on stent placement (vs nonsubstantial effort; OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.73–3.45), stent length (>5 vs ≤5 cm; OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.63–1.61), stent diameter (≥5 vs <5 Fr; OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.65–1.96), or guidewire caliber (0.035 vs 0.025 in; 0.83, 95% CI 0.49–1.41). DISCUSSION: The 5 modifiable technical factors studied in this secondary analysis of large-scale randomized trial data did not appear to have a strong impact on the benefit of prophylactic PSP in preventing PEP after high-risk ERCP. Within the limitations of post hoc subgroup analysis, these findings may have important implications in procedural decision making and suggest that the benefit of PSP is robust to variations in technical approach.

Abstract Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a disease characterized by an acute inflammatory phase followed by a convalescent phase. Diabetes mellitus (DM) was historically felt to be a transient phenomenon related to acute inflammation; however, it is increasingly recognized as an important late and chronic complication. There are several challenges that have prevented precisely determining the incidence rate of DM after AP and understanding the underlying mechanisms. The DREAM (Diabetes RElated to Acute Pancreatitis and its Mechanisms) Study is a prospective cohort study designed to address these and other knowledge gaps to provide the evidence needed to screen for, prevent, and treat DM after AP. In the following article, we summarize literature regarding the epidemiology of DM after AP and provide the rationale and an overview of the DREAM study.

AbstractBackground and AimThe primary aim was to validate the Pancreatitis Activity Scoring System (PASS) in a multicenter prospectively ascertained acute pancreatitis (AP) cohort. Second, we investigated the association of early PASS trajectories with disease severity and length of hospital stay (LOS).MethodsData were prospectively collected through the APPRENTICE consortium (2015–2018). AP severity was categorized based on revised Atlanta classification. Delta PASS (ΔPASS) was calculated by subtracting activity score from baseline value. PASS trajectories were compared between severity subsets. Subsequently, the cohort was subdivided into three LOS subgroups as short (S‐LOS): 2–3 days; intermediate (I‐LOS): 3–7 days; and long (L‐LOS): ≥7 days. The generalized estimating equations model was implemented to compare PASS trajectories.ResultsThere were 434 subjects analyzed including 322 (74%) mild, 86 (20%) moderately severe, and 26 (6%) severe AP. Severe AP subjects had the highest activity levels and the slowest rate of decline in activity (P = 0.039). Focusing on mild AP, L‐LOS subjects (34%) had 28 points per day slower decline; whereas, S‐LOS group (13%) showed 34 points per day sharper decrease compared with I‐LOS (53%; P < 0.001). We noticed an outlier subset with a median admission‐PASS of 466 compared with 140 in the rest. Morphine equivalent dose constituted 80% of the total PASS in the outliers (median morphine equivalent dose score = 392), compared with only 25% in normal‐range subjects (score = 33, P value < 0.001).ConclusionsThis study highlighted that PASS can quantify AP activity. Significant differences in PASS trajectories were found both in revised Atlanta classification severity and LOS groups, which can be harnessed in AP monitoring/management (ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT03075618).