Clain, Jonathan E.

Objective Idiopathic duct-centric chronic pancreatitis (IDCP), also known as type 2 autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP), is an uncommon subtype of AIP. International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for IDCP propose that the diagnosis requires pancreatic histology and/or concurrent IBD. We examined our experience with IDCP (type 2 AIP) to assess the appropriateness of these criteria, and identify unique characteristics in patients presenting with acute pancreatitis. Design We reviewed the Mayo Clinic AIP database through May 2014 to identify subjects with either definitive (n=31) or probable (n=12) IDCP. We compared demographic and clinical factors based on strength of diagnostic confidence (definitive versus probable), presence of IBD, and acute pancreatitis as the presenting manifestation. Relapse-free survival was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results The clinical profiles were similar irrespective of the diagnostic criteria fulfilled. Common clinical presentations included acute pancreatitis (n=25, 58.1%, 12 of whom (27.9%) had recurrent pancreatitis) and pancreatic mass/obstructive jaundice (n=15, 34.9%). The cumulative relapse rate was 10.6% at 3 years (median follow-up 2.9 years). Relapse-free survival was similar for the different diagnostic categories, but was decreased in those initially presenting with acute pancreatitis (p=0.047) or treated with steroids (vs surgery, p=0.049). Conclusions The current diagnostic classification of probable IDCP and the inclusion of IBD as a supportive criterion appear valid, because patients have similar clinical profiles and disease-related outcomes to those with definitive IDCP. Concurrent IBD, especially in young patients, may suggest when IDCP is the underlying cause of recurrent acute pancreatitis, but additional studies are needed for validation.

Pelvic lymph node dissection is the gold standard for assessing nodal disease in prostate or bladder cancer and is superior to CT, MRI and PET staging. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) provides an alternative, less invasive method of cytohistologic material acquisition, but its performance in pelvic urologic malignancy is unknown. Therefore, our aim was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS guided tissue sampling for these malignancies when compared to a composite cytohistologic and surgical gold standard. A median of 3 FNA passes were performed (n=19 patients) revealing a sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 94.4% (72–99), 100% (2–100), 100% (80–100) and 50% (1–98) respectively. The perirectal space was the most frequently sampled location irrespective of the primary urological cancer origin. Final diagnosis established by EUS tissue sampling included bladder cancer (n=1), bladder cancer local recurrence (n=8), bladder cancer extra pelvic metastases (n=1), prostate cancer (n=2), prostate cancer local recurrence (n=4), prostate cancer extra pelvic metastases (n=1), testicular cancer extra pelvic metastases (n=1) and a benign seminal vesicle (n=1). EUS guided sampling of the gut wall, lymph nodes, or perirectal space yields suitable diagnostic material to establish the presence of primary, local recurrence or extra pelvic metastases of pelvic urologic malignancy.