Post-ERCP Acute Pancreatitis

This study is a randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of rectal indomethacin in preventing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis in patients undergoing biliary ERCP who have a history of prior biliary sphincterotomy. While rectal indomethacin has demonstrated benefits in preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients, its utility in this specific patient subgroup remains unclear. This trial aims to determine whether prophylactic administration of indomethacin offers a measurable benefit over no intervention in this lower-risk population. Eligible patients will be identified prior to their scheduled biliary ERCP and screened for inclusion criteria. Following informed consent, participants will be randomized to receive either rectal indomethacin or no indomethacin prior to the procedure.

This study will explore the efficacies of several practical short-term (peri-procedural) intravenous fluid regimens in the prevention of post- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). PEP is the most common serious ERCP-related adverse event (AE), occurring in 5-15% of patients, and associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and healthcare utilization. Given the current lack of data on effectiveness of short-term fluid regimens in PEP prevention to inform practice, the results of the proposed study have the strong potential to impact ERCP practices worldwide, whether positive or negative.

This research is being done to see if using oral tacrolimus before endoscopy, can prevent pancreatitis that may occur after ERCP (a type of gastrointestinal endoscopy).

Pancreatitis is the most common and serious complication following post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and is associated with occasional mortality, extended hospital stays, and increased healthcare expenses. Rectal non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and pancreatic duct stent (PDS) placement were demonstrated to be effective strategyies to reduce PEP incidences, particlularly in high-risk patients for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). Rectal NSAIDs were easy-to-use and safe, while PDS placement were technically complex and carried higher risks of adverse events. A previous network meta-analysis suggested rectal NSAIDs in combination with PDS placement did not differ from rectal NSAIDs alone in PEP prevention. To invesigate if rectal NSAIDs alone could obivate the need of PDS placement, a recent trial from Elmunzer et al. conducted a randomized trial to investigate if rectal NSAIDs alone was non-inferior to the combination of NSAIDs with PDS in high-risk patients. The trial found that the PEP incidence rate in combination group was significantly lower than that in NSAIDs alone group. However, post-hoc analysis of the study suggested that the combination strategy conferred significant benefits only in high-risk patients with pancreatic duct (PD) wire passage, but not in those with other risk factors. Therefore, we hypothesized that rectal NSAIDs alone may obivate the need of PDS in high-risk patients without PD wire passages. Here, we conducted a multicenter, randomized and non-inferiority trial to investigate whether rectal NSAIDs alone is non-inferior to NSAIDs plus PDS placement in high-risk patients without PD wire passages.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) comes with a risk for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), which accounts for considerable morbidity, high healthcare expenditure, and death. The pathophysiology of PEP and the underpinnings of the preventive effect of rectal NSAID (RN) is poorly understood. Guidelines advise to take preventive measures with a single dose of 100mg RN, peri-ERCP. While NSAID administration reduces the risk with 40%, PEP still occurs after ERCP. In addition, patients with a PEP history have a higher risk to develop recurrence after a subsequent ERCP. This might suggest that an underlying genetic risk may contribute to increasing the incidence of PEP in some patients.

This is a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial. This study is a head to head comparison of normal saline (NS) infusion versus Lactated Ringer's (LR) infusion in patients, with the primary outcome of post-ERCP pancreatitis occurrence. Patients will be randomized to either the NS infusion group or the LR infusion group. IVF will be started pre-procedurally and will be continued throughout the procedure. A IVF bolus will be given at the end of the procedure and then continued as a continuous infusion. Our null hypothesis is that there will be no significant difference in the rate of occurrence of post-ERCP pancreatitis between the infusion of LR and NS solutions. Our alternative hypothesis is that patients receiving LR solution infusion will experience a decreased rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis compared to patients receiving NS solution infusion.