Subscribe to RSS

DOI: 10.1055/a-1217-3112
Defining the endoscopic ultrasound features of chronic pancreatitis in Asians: a multicenter validation study

Abstract
Background Although endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) features and criteria have been described in chronic pancreatitis, challenges remain with interoperator variability and ease of adoption. The aim of this study was to define and validate the EUS features of chronic pancreatitis in a multicenter prospective study in Asia.
Method The study was divided into two parts: the first part was conducted to derive the EUS features of chronic pancreatitis with adequate interoperator agreement; the second was to prospectively evaluate these features in a multicenter cross-sectional study and determine the optimal combination of features for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. Prospectively enrolled cases had standard internationally validated radiologic or histologic features of chronic pancreatitis, and controls were patients without chronic pancreatitis who underwent EUS examination.
Results The top six EUS features that had good interobserver agreement (mean kappa 0.73, range 0.60 – 0.90) were selected to be further evaluated in part II of the study. These included: hyperechoic foci with shadowing, lobularity with honeycombing, cysts, dilated main pancreatic duct, dilated side branches, and calculi in the main pancreatic duct. A total of 284 subjects (132 cases, 152 controls) were enrolled from 12 centers in Asia. All six features had high accuracy ranging from 63.3 % to 89.1 %. Two or more of these six EUS features accurately defined chronic pancreatitis (sensitivity 94.7 %, specificity 98.0 %), with an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.986.
Conclusion This multicenter Asian study characterized and defined the EUS features of chronic pancreatitis. This provides a useful tool in clinical practice and further research in pancreatic cancer surveillance.
Publication History
Received: 19 February 2020
Accepted: 10 July 2020
Accepted Manuscript online:
10 July 2020
Article published online:
06 August 2020
© 2020. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 Conwell DL, Lee LS, Yadav D. et al. American Pancreatic Association Practice Guidelines in chronic pancreatitis: evidence-based report on diagnostic guidelines. Pancreas 2014; 43: 1143
- 2 Etemad B, Whitcomb DC. Chronic pancreatitis: diagnosis, classification, and new genetic developments. Gastroenterology 2001; 120: 682-707
- 3 Frøkjær J, Akisik F, Farooq A. et al. Guidelines for the diagnostic cross sectional imaging and severity scoring of chronic pancreatitis. Pancreatology 2018; 18: 764-773
- 4 Dominguez-Munoz EJ, Drewes AM, Lindkvist B. et al. From the United European Gastroenterology evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and therapy of chronic pancreatitis. Pancreatology 2018; 18: 847-854
- 5 Gardner TB, Levy MJ. EUS diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 1280-1289
- 6 Petrone M, Arcidiacono P, Perri F. et al. Chronic pancreatitis-like changes detected by endoscopic ultrasound in subjects without signs of pancreatic disease: do these indicate age-related changes, effects of xenobiotics, or early chronic pancreatitis?. Pancreatology 2010; 10: 597-602
- 7 Rajan E, Clain JE, Levy MJ. et al. Age-related changes in the pancreas identified by EUS: a prospective evaluation. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 401-406
- 8 Catalano MF, Sahai A, Levy M. et al. EUS-based criteria for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis: the Rosemont classification. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 1251-1261
- 9 Trikudanathan G, Munigala S, Barlass U. et al. Evaluation of Rosemont criteria for non-calcific chronic pancreatitis (NCCP) based on histopathology – A retrospective study. Pancreatology 2017; 17: 63-69
- 10 Pozo DD, Poves E, Tabernero S. et al. Conventional versus Rosemont endoscopic ultrasound criteria for chronic pancreatitis: Interobserver agreement in same day back-to-back procedures. Pancreatology 2012; 12: 284-287
- 11 Stevens T, Lopez R, Adler DG. et al. Multicenter comparison of the interobserver agreement of standard EUS scoring and Rosemont classification scoring for diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 519-526
- 12 Löhr JM, Dominguez-Munoz E, Rosendahl J. et al. United European Gastroenterology evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and therapy of chronic pancreatitis (HaPanEU). United European Gastroenterol J 2017; 5: 153-199
- 13 Zhong Y, Cao J, Zou R. et al. Genetic polymorphisms in alcohol dehydrogenase, aldehyde dehydrogenase and alcoholic chronic pancreatitis susceptibility: A meta-analysis. Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 38: 417-425
- 14 Shyam V, Isam E, Ashutosh T. et al. Histopathologic correlates of noncalcific chronic pancreatitis by EUS: a prospective tissue characterization study. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 66: 501-509
- 15 Wallace MB, Hawes RH, Durkalski V. et al. The reliability of EUS for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. interobserver Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 53: 294-299
- 16 Wiersema MJ, Hawes RH, Lehman GA. et al. Prospective evaluation of endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with chronic abdominal pain of suspected pancreatic origin. Endoscopy 1993; 25: 555-564
- 17 Shimosegawa T, Kataoka K, Kamisawa T. et al. The revised Japanese clinical diagnostic criteria for chronic pancreatitis. J Gastroenterol 2010; 45: 584-591
- 18 Darwin LC, Linda SL, Dhiraj Y. et al. American Pancreatic Association Practice Guidelines in Chronic Pancreatitis: Evidence-Based Report on Diagnostic Guidelines. Pancreas 2014; 43: 1143
- 19 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-174
- 20 Kicielinski KP, Dupepe EB, Gordon AS. et al. What isn't a case-control study?. Neurosurgery 2019; 84: 993-999
- 21 Walter SD, Eliasziw M, Donner A. Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. Stat Med 1998; 17: 101-110
- 22 Dhir V, Ang TL, Seo DW. et al. Patterns of utilization of endosonography for early chronic pancreatitis: an International survey of the Asian EUS consortium. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 26 (Suppl. 05) 243
- 23 Tyler S, Rocio L, Douglas GA. et al. Multicenter comparison of the interobserver agreement of standard EUS scoring and Rosemont classification scoring for diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 519-526
- 24 Wallace MB, Hawes RH, Durkalski V. et al. The reliability of EUS for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis: interobserver agreement among experienced endosonographers. Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 53: 294-299
- 25 Varadarajulu S, Eltoum I, Tamhane A. et al. Histopathologic correlates of noncalcific chronic pancreatitis by EUS: a prospective tissue characterization study. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 66: 501-509
- 26 Zou W-B, Boulling A, Masamune A. et al. No association between CEL–HYB hybrid allele and chronic pancreatitis in Asian populations. Gastroenterology 2016; 150: 1558-1560.e5
- 27 Zou W-B, Tang X-Y, Zhou D-Z. et al. SPINK1, PRSS1, CTRC, and CFTR genotypes influence disease onset and clinical outcomes in chronic pancreatitis. Clin Transl Gastroenterol 2018; 9: 204
- 28 Koziel D, Gluszek S, Kowalik A. et al. Genetic mutations in SPINK1, CFTR, CTRC genes in acute pancreatitis. BMC Gastroenterology 2015; 15: 70