A110 INCIDENCE AND PREDICTORS OF ASYMPTOMATIC ABNORMALITIES IN BIOCHEMICAL AND RADIOLOGIC PANCREATIC MARKERS FOLLOWING UNCOMPLICATED ERCP
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is common. Its diagnosis relies on characteristic abdominal pain in addition to biochemical and/or radiographic evidence of pancreatic inflammation. Purpose Little is known regarding the frequency with which asymptomatic alterations in biochemical and/or imaging parameters occur following uncomplicated ERCP. We sought to assess the incidence and predictors of such alterations following uncomplicated ERCP. Method This study was an analysis of a prospectively maintained ERCP registry. All inpatients ³ 18 years old who underwent ERCP between 2018/09/01 and 2022/02/28 were identified. Patients with acute pancreatitis or abdominal pain following ERCP were excluded, as were patients with lipase levels ≥3x the upper limit of normal (ULN) within 7 days preceding ERCP. Primary outcomes were (1) asymptomatic lipase elevation within 48 hours of uncomplicated ERCP or (2) asymptomatic cross-sectional imaging findings of pancreatic inflammation within 14 days of ERCP.Descriptive statistics were presented as means with accompanying standard deviations (SD) and percentages by lipase categories and PEP, or by imaging categories. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine the associations of exposure variables with PEP or imaging findings. Result(s) A total of 646 patients were analyzed in the biochemical cohort, and 187 patients were analyzed in the radiologic cohort. In the biochemical cohort, 478 patients (74.0%) had no elevations in pancreatic enzymes, while 81 (12.5%) had elevations up to 2x ULN, 26 (4.0%) had elevations between 2-3x ULN, and 61 (9.4%) had elevations >3x ULN. In the radiologic cohort, 148 (79.1%) had no abnormalities on cross-sectional imaging within 14 days of ERCP, while 39 (20.9%) had one or more imaging finding typically associated with acute pancreatitis. Among these, 22 (11.8%) had peri-pancreatic fluid collections and 2.1-9.6% of patients had pancreatic findings that included edema, enlargement, inflammation, or fat-stranding. On multivariable analysis, predictors of lipasemia >3x ULN included balloon sphincteroplasty (odds ratio, OR, 2.29, 95% confidence intervals, CI, 1.08 to 4.85) and the placement of a common bile duct stent (OR 4.19, 95% CI 1.37 to 12.77), whereas cannulation of the pancreatic duct or performance of a pancreatogram were not significantly associated (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.35 and OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.18 to 6.26, respectively). Conclusion(s) Over 25% of patients will have asymptomatic elevations in pancreatic enzymes following ERCP, while over 20% will have asymptomatic cross-sectional imaging findings suggestive of pancreatic inflammation. Clinical symptoms should guide post-ERCP care rather than biochemical or imaging parameters. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below None Disclosure of Interest None Declared
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».