Acute cholecystitis affects ∼200,000 individuals annually in the United States, with laparoscopic cholecystectomy as the gold standard treatment. However, in high-risk surgical candidates, alternative drainage methods are necessary. Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) has traditionally served as the primary alternative intervention, offering rapid decompression, but is limited by a negative impact on the patient’s quality of life, the risk of long-term or even permanent tube placement, adverse events, and high recurrence rates. Endoscopic approaches, such as endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ET-GBD) and, more recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), have emerged as viable alternatives to PT-GBD. EUS-GBD, first introduced in 2007, offers technical and clinical outcomes comparable to PT-GBD with fewer adverse events, shorter hospital stays, and lower rates of recurrence. The introduction of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) has revolutionized EUS-GBD, simplifying deployment and enabling subsequent internal gallbladder access, which allows additional interventions such as cholecystoscopy and stone removal. EUS-GBD is now supported by international guidelines, and 1 device has achieved FDA approval for the management of acute cholecystitis in nonsurgical candidates. Proper patient selection is essential, guided by multidisciplinary evaluation, with EUS-GBD contraindicated in specific scenarios such as gallbladder perforation, coagulopathy, and large-volume ascites. Technical considerations include choice of access site (transgastric versus transduodenal), stent type, and procedural route [direct (freehand) or wire-guided]. Postprocedural care and stent management remain variable and nonstandardized. Emerging data suggest that interval cholecystectomy can still be performed safely after EUS-GBD. As adoption of EUS-GBD with LAMS expands, structured training and standardization of practice are crucial to optimizing outcomes.
Genetic Risk Score in Diabetes Associated With Chronic Pancreatitis Versus Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Introduction: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a complication of chronic pancreatitis (CP). Whether pancreatogenic diabetes associated with CP-DM represents a discrete pathophysiologic entity from type 2 DM (T2DM) remains uncertain. Addressing this question is needed for development of specific measures to manage CP-DM. We approached this question from a unique standpoint, hypothesizing that if CP-DM and T2DM are separate disorders, they should be genetically distinct. To test this hypothesis, we sought to determine whether a genetic risk score (GRS) based on validated single nucleotide polymorphisms for T2DM could distinguish between groups with CP-DM and T2DM. Methods: We used 60 T2DM single nucleotide polymorphisms to construct a weighted GRS in 1,613 subjects from the North American Pancreatitis Study 2 and 2,685 subjects from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, all of European origin. Results: The mean GRS was identical between 321 subjects with CP-DM and 423 subjects with T2DM (66.53 vs 66.42, P = 0.95), and the GRS of both diabetic groups was significantly higher than that of nondiabetic controls (n = 3,554, P < 0.0001). Exploratory analyses attempting to enrich the CP-DM group for pancreatogenic diabetes, such as eliminating diabetes diagnosed before CP, requiring pancreas-specific comorbidities, or removing those with a family history of diabetes, did not improve the ability of the GRS to distinguish between CP-DM and T2DM. Discussion: Recognizing that we lacked a gold standard to define CP-DM, our study suggests that CP-DM may be a subtype of T2DM, a notion that should be tested in future, large prospective studies.
ABSTRACTObjectives:The aim of the present study was to investigate the natural history of chronic pancreatitis (CP); patients in the North American Pancreatitis Study2 (NAPS2, adults) and INternational Study group of Pediatric Pancreatitis: In search for a cuRE (INSPPIRE, pediatric) were compared.Methods:Demographics, risk factors, disease duration, management and outcomes of 224 children and 1063 adults were compared using appropriate statistical tests for categorical and continuous variables.Results:Alcohol was a risk in 53% of adults and 1% of children (P < 0.0001); tobacco in 50% of adults and 7% of children (P < 0.0001). Obstructive factors were more common in children (29% vs 19% in adults, P = 0.001). Genetic risk factors were found more often in children. Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency was similar (children 26% vs adult 33%, P = 0.107). Diabetes was more common in adults than children (36% vs 4% respectively, P < 0.0001). Median emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and missed days of work/school were similar across the cohorts. As a secondary analysis, NAPS2 subjects with childhood onset (NAPS2‐CO) were compared with INSPPIRE subjects. These 2 cohorts were more similar than the total INSPPIRE and NAPS2 cohorts, including for genetic risk factors. The only risk factor significantly more common in the NAPS2‐CO cohort compared with the INSPPIRE cohort was alcohol (9% NAPS2‐CO vs 1% INSPPIRE cohorts, P = 0.011).Conclusions:Despite disparity in age of onset, children and adults with CP exhibit similarity in demographics, CP treatment, and pain. Differences between groups in radiographic findings and diabetes prevalence may be related to differences in risk factors associated with disease and length of time of CP.
Nutrition and Inflammatory Biomarkers in Chronic Pancreatitis Patients
Abstract Background Chronic pancreatitis (CP) patients frequently experience malabsorption and maldigestion, leading to micronutrient and macronutrient deficiencies. Comorbid diabetes and lifestyle habits, such as alcohol consumption, may impact nutrition status. Methods We compared micronutrient antioxidant, bone metabolism, serum protein, and inflammatory marker levels in 301 CP patients and 266 controls with no known pancreatic disease. We analyzed serum prealbumin and retinol binding protein; vitamins A, D, E, and B12; osteocalcin; tumor necrosis factor‐α; and C‐reactive protein (CRP). We also evaluated biomarkers among subsets of patients, examining factors including time since diagnosis, body mass index, alcohol as primary etiology, diabetes mellitus, vitamin supplementation, and pancreatic enzyme replacement. Results After correcting for multiple comparisons, CP patients had significantly lower levels than controls of the following: vitamin A (40.9 vs 45.4 μg/dL) and vitamin E (α‐tocopherol [8.7 vs 10.3 mg/L] and γ‐tocopherol [1.8 vs 2.2 mg/L]), as well as osteocalcin (7.9 vs 10 ng/mL) and serum prealbumin (23 vs 27 mg/dL). Both patients and controls who took vitamin supplements had higher serum levels of vitamins than those not taking supplements. Compared with controls, in controlled analyses, CP patients had significantly lower levels of vitamins A, D, and E (both α‐tocopherol and γ‐tocopherol). CP patients also had significantly lower levels of osteocalcin, serum prealbumin, and retinol binding protein, and higher CRP. Conclusions CP patients demonstrated lower levels of selected nutrition and bone metabolism biomarkers than controls. Diabetes and alcohol did not impact biomarkers. Vitamin supplements and pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy improved nutrition biomarkers in CP patients.