American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Tarek Nafee (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Tarek Nafee (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|The diagnosis of AP is most often established by the presence of two of the three following criteria: (i) abdominal pain consistent with the disease, (ii) serum amylase and/or lipase greater than three times the upper limit of normal, and/or (iii) characteristic findings from abdominal imaging. | |The diagnosis of AP is most often established by the presence of two of the three following criteria: (i) abdominal pain consistent with the disease, (ii) serum amylase and/or lipase greater than three times the upper limit of normal, and/or (iii) characteristic findings from abdominal imaging. | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Contrast-enhanced computed tomographic (CECT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the pancreas should be reserved for patients in whom the diagnosis is unclear or who fail to improve clinically within the first 48-72h after hospital admission. | |Contrast-enhanced computed tomographic (CECT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the pancreas should be reserved for patients in whom the diagnosis is unclear or who fail to improve clinically within the first 48-72h after hospital admission. | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Transabdominal ultrasound should be performed in all patients with acute pancreatitis | |Transabdominal ultrasound should be performed in all patients with acute pancreatitis | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In the absence of gallstones and/or history of significant history of alcohol use, a serum triglyceride should be obtained and considered the etiology if >1,000 mg/dl | |In the absence of gallstones and/or history of significant history of alcohol use, a serum triglyceride should be obtained and considered the etiology if >1,000 mg/dl | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In a patient older than 40 years, a pancreatic tumor should be considered as a possible cause of acute pancreatitis | |In a patient older than 40 years, a pancreatic tumor should be considered as a possible cause of acute pancreatitis | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Endoscopic investigation in patients with acute idiopathic pancreatitis should be limited, as the risks and benefits of investigation in these patients are unclear | |Endoscopic investigation in patients with acute idiopathic pancreatitis should be limited, as the risks and benefits of investigation in these patients are unclear | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Patients with idiopathic pancreatitis should be referred to centers of expertise | |Patients with idiopathic pancreatitis should be referred to centers of expertise | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Genetic testing may be considered in young patients (<30 years old) if no cause is evident and a family history of pancreatic disease is present | |Genetic testing may be considered in young patients (<30 years old) if no cause is evident and a family history of pancreatic disease is present | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Hemodynamic status should be assessed immediately upon presentation and resuscitative measures begun as needed | |Hemodynamic status should be assessed immediately upon presentation and resuscitative measures begun as needed | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Risk assessment should be performed to stratify patients into higher- and lower-risk categories to assist triage, such as admission to an intensive care setting | |Risk assessment should be performed to stratify patients into higher- and lower-risk categories to assist triage, such as admission to an intensive care setting | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Patients with organ failure should be admitted to an intensive care unit or intermediary care setting whenever possible | |Patients with organ failure should be admitted to an intensive care unit or intermediary care setting whenever possible | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Aggressive hydration, defined as 250-500 ml per hour of isotonic crystalloid solution should be provided to all patients, unless cardiovascular and/or renal comorbidites exist. Early aggressive intravenous hydration is most beneficial the first 12–24 h, and may have little benefit beyond | |Aggressive hydration, defined as 250-500 ml per hour of isotonic crystalloid solution should be provided to all patients, unless cardiovascular and/or renal comorbidites exist. Early aggressive intravenous hydration is most beneficial the first 12–24 h, and may have little benefit beyond | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In a patient with severe volume depletion, manifest as hypotension and tachycardia, more rapid repletion (bolus) may be needed | |In a patient with severe volume depletion, manifest as hypotension and tachycardia, more rapid repletion (bolus) may be needed | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Lactated Ringer's solution may be the preferred isotonic crystalloid replacement fluid | |Lactated Ringer's solution may be the preferred isotonic crystalloid replacement fluid | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Fluid requirements should be reassessed at frequent intervals within 6 h of admission and for the next 24–48 h. The goal of aggressive hydration should be to decrease the blood urea nitrogen | |Fluid requirements should be reassessed at frequent intervals within 6 h of admission and for the next 24–48 h. The goal of aggressive hydration should be to decrease the blood urea nitrogen | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 98: | Line 98: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Patients with acute pancreatitis and concurrent acute cholangitis should undergo ERCP within 24 h of admission | |Patients with acute pancreatitis and concurrent acute cholangitis should undergo ERCP within 24 h of admission | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|ERCP is not needed in most patients with gallstone pancreatitis who lack laboratory or clinical evidence of ongoing biliary obstruction | |ERCP is not needed in most patients with gallstone pancreatitis who lack laboratory or clinical evidence of ongoing biliary obstruction | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In the absence of cholangitis and/or jaundice, MRCP or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) rather than diagnostic ERCP should be used to screen for choledocholithiasis if highly suspected | |In the absence of cholangitis and/or jaundice, MRCP or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) rather than diagnostic ERCP should be used to screen for choledocholithiasis if highly suspected | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Pancreatic duct stents and/or postprocedure rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) suppositories should be utilized to prevent severe post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients | |Pancreatic duct stents and/or postprocedure rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) suppositories should be utilized to prevent severe post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Antibiotics should be given for an extrapancreatic infection, such as cholangitis, catheter-acquired infections, bacteremia, urinary tract infections, pneumonia | |Antibiotics should be given for an extrapancreatic infection, such as cholangitis, catheter-acquired infections, bacteremia, urinary tract infections, pneumonia | ||
|High | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|High]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Routine use of prophylactic antibiotics in patients with severe acute pancreatitis is not recommended | |Routine use of prophylactic antibiotics in patients with severe acute pancreatitis is not recommended | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|The use of antibiotics in patients with sterile necrosis to prevent the development of infected necrosis is not recommended | |The use of antibiotics in patients with sterile necrosis to prevent the development of infected necrosis is not recommended | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Infected necrosis should be considered in patients with pancreatic or extrapancreatic necrosis who deteriorate or fail to improve after 7–10 days of hospitalization. In these patients, either (i) initial CT-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) for Gram stain and culture to guide use of appropriate antibiotics or (ii) empiric use of antibiotics without CT FNA should be given | |Infected necrosis should be considered in patients with pancreatic or extrapancreatic necrosis who deteriorate or fail to improve after 7–10 days of hospitalization. In these patients, either (i) initial CT-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) for Gram stain and culture to guide use of appropriate antibiotics or (ii) empiric use of antibiotics without CT FNA should be given | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In patients with infected necrosis, antibiotics known to penetrate pancreatic necrosis, such as carbapenems, quinolones, and metronidazole, may be useful in delaying or sometimes totally avoiding intervention, thus decreasing morbidity and mortality | |In patients with infected necrosis, antibiotics known to penetrate pancreatic necrosis, such as carbapenems, quinolones, and metronidazole, may be useful in delaying or sometimes totally avoiding intervention, thus decreasing morbidity and mortality | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Routine administration of antifungal agents along with prophylactic or therapeutic antibiotics is not recommended | |Routine administration of antifungal agents along with prophylactic or therapeutic antibiotics is not recommended | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 152: | Line 152: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In mild AP, oral feedings can be started immediately if there is no nausea and vomiting, and abdominal pain has resolved | |In mild AP, oral feedings can be started immediately if there is no nausea and vomiting, and abdominal pain has resolved | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In mild AP, initiation of feeding with a low-fat solid diet appears as safe as a clear liquid diet | |In mild AP, initiation of feeding with a low-fat solid diet appears as safe as a clear liquid diet | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Conditional | |Conditional | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In severe AP, enteral nutrition is recommended to prevent infectious complications. Parenteral nutrition should be avoided unless the enteral route is not available, not tolerated, or not meeting caloric requirements | |In severe AP, enteral nutrition is recommended to prevent infectious complications. Parenteral nutrition should be avoided unless the enteral route is not available, not tolerated, or not meeting caloric requirements | ||
|High | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|High]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Nasogastric delivery and nasojejunal delivery of enteral feeding appear comparable in efficacy and safety | |Nasogastric delivery and nasojejunal delivery of enteral feeding appear comparable in efficacy and safety | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 175: | Line 175: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In patients with mild AP, found to have gallstones in the gallbladder, a cholecystectomy should be performed before discharge to prevent a recurrence of AP | |In patients with mild AP, found to have gallstones in the gallbladder, a cholecystectomy should be performed before discharge to prevent a recurrence of AP | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In a patient with necrotizing biliary AP, in order to prevent infection, cholecystectomy is to be deferred until active inflammation subsides and fluid collections resolve or stabilize | |In a patient with necrotizing biliary AP, in order to prevent infection, cholecystectomy is to be deferred until active inflammation subsides and fluid collections resolve or stabilize | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|The presence of asymptomatic pseudocysts and pancreatic and/or extrapancreatic necrosis do not warrant intervention, regardless of size, location, and/or extension | |The presence of asymptomatic pseudocysts and pancreatic and/or extrapancreatic necrosis do not warrant intervention, regardless of size, location, and/or extension | ||
|Moderate | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Moderate]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In stable patients with infected necrosis, surgical, radiologic, and/or endoscopic drainage should be delayed preferably for more than 4 weeks to allow liquefication of the contents and the development of a fibrous wall around the necrosis (walled-off necrosis) | |In stable patients with infected necrosis, surgical, radiologic, and/or endoscopic drainage should be delayed preferably for more than 4 weeks to allow liquefication of the contents and the development of a fibrous wall around the necrosis (walled-off necrosis) | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In symptomatic patients with infected necrosis, minimally invasive methods of necrosectomy are preferred to open necrosectomy | |In symptomatic patients with infected necrosis, minimally invasive methods of necrosectomy are preferred to open necrosectomy | ||
|Low | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Low]] | ||
|Strong | |[[ACG guidelines classification scheme|Strong]] | ||
|} | |} | ||
Revision as of 22:00, 30 November 2016
|
Acute pancreatitis Microchapters |
|
Diagnosis |
|---|
|
Treatment |
|
Case Studies |
|
American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines On the Web |
|
American Roentgen Ray Society Images of American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines |
|
Risk calculators and risk factors for American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines |
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1] Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Tarek Nafee, M.D. [2]
2013 American College of Gastroenterology Guideline: Management of Acute Pancreatitis
Diagnosis
| Recommendation | Evidence Level | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| The diagnosis of AP is most often established by the presence of two of the three following criteria: (i) abdominal pain consistent with the disease, (ii) serum amylase and/or lipase greater than three times the upper limit of normal, and/or (iii) characteristic findings from abdominal imaging. | Moderate | Strong |
| Contrast-enhanced computed tomographic (CECT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the pancreas should be reserved for patients in whom the diagnosis is unclear or who fail to improve clinically within the first 48-72h after hospital admission. | Low | Strong |
Determining Etiology
| Recommendation | Evidence Level | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| Transabdominal ultrasound should be performed in all patients with acute pancreatitis | Low | Strong |
| In the absence of gallstones and/or history of significant history of alcohol use, a serum triglyceride should be obtained and considered the etiology if >1,000 mg/dl | Moderate | Conditional |
| In a patient older than 40 years, a pancreatic tumor should be considered as a possible cause of acute pancreatitis | Low | Conditional |
| Endoscopic investigation in patients with acute idiopathic pancreatitis should be limited, as the risks and benefits of investigation in these patients are unclear | Low | Conditional |
| Patients with idiopathic pancreatitis should be referred to centers of expertise | Low | Conditional |
| Genetic testing may be considered in young patients (<30 years old) if no cause is evident and a family history of pancreatic disease is present | Low | Conditional |
Initial Assessment and Risk Stratification
| Recommendation | Evidence Level | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| Hemodynamic status should be assessed immediately upon presentation and resuscitative measures begun as needed | Moderate | Strong |
| Risk assessment should be performed to stratify patients into higher- and lower-risk categories to assist triage, such as admission to an intensive care setting | Moderate | Conditional |
| Patients with organ failure should be admitted to an intensive care unit or intermediary care setting whenever possible | Low | Strong |
Initial Management
| Recommendation | Evidence Level | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| Aggressive hydration, defined as 250-500 ml per hour of isotonic crystalloid solution should be provided to all patients, unless cardiovascular and/or renal comorbidites exist. Early aggressive intravenous hydration is most beneficial the first 12–24 h, and may have little benefit beyond | Moderate | Strong |
| In a patient with severe volume depletion, manifest as hypotension and tachycardia, more rapid repletion (bolus) may be needed | Moderate | Conditional |
| Lactated Ringer's solution may be the preferred isotonic crystalloid replacement fluid | Moderate | Conditional |
| Fluid requirements should be reassessed at frequent intervals within 6 h of admission and for the next 24–48 h. The goal of aggressive hydration should be to decrease the blood urea nitrogen | Moderate | Strong |
Role of ERCP
| Recommendation | Evidence Level | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| Patients with acute pancreatitis and concurrent acute cholangitis should undergo ERCP within 24 h of admission | Moderate | Strong |
| ERCP is not needed in most patients with gallstone pancreatitis who lack laboratory or clinical evidence of ongoing biliary obstruction | Low | Strong |
| In the absence of cholangitis and/or jaundice, MRCP or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) rather than diagnostic ERCP should be used to screen for choledocholithiasis if highly suspected | Low | Conditional |
| Pancreatic duct stents and/or postprocedure rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) suppositories should be utilized to prevent severe post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients | Moderate | Conditional |
Role of Antibiotics
| Recommendation | Evidence Level | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| Antibiotics should be given for an extrapancreatic infection, such as cholangitis, catheter-acquired infections, bacteremia, urinary tract infections, pneumonia | High | Strong |
| Routine use of prophylactic antibiotics in patients with severe acute pancreatitis is not recommended | Moderate | Strong |
| The use of antibiotics in patients with sterile necrosis to prevent the development of infected necrosis is not recommended | Moderate | Strong |
| Infected necrosis should be considered in patients with pancreatic or extrapancreatic necrosis who deteriorate or fail to improve after 7–10 days of hospitalization. In these patients, either (i) initial CT-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) for Gram stain and culture to guide use of appropriate antibiotics or (ii) empiric use of antibiotics without CT FNA should be given | Low | Strong |
| In patients with infected necrosis, antibiotics known to penetrate pancreatic necrosis, such as carbapenems, quinolones, and metronidazole, may be useful in delaying or sometimes totally avoiding intervention, thus decreasing morbidity and mortality | Low | Conditional |
| Routine administration of antifungal agents along with prophylactic or therapeutic antibiotics is not recommended | Low | Conditional |
Nutrition in Acute Pancreatitis
| Recommendation | Evidence Level | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| In mild AP, oral feedings can be started immediately if there is no nausea and vomiting, and abdominal pain has resolved | Moderate | Conditional |
| In mild AP, initiation of feeding with a low-fat solid diet appears as safe as a clear liquid diet | Moderate | Conditional |
| In severe AP, enteral nutrition is recommended to prevent infectious complications. Parenteral nutrition should be avoided unless the enteral route is not available, not tolerated, or not meeting caloric requirements | High | Strong |
| Nasogastric delivery and nasojejunal delivery of enteral feeding appear comparable in efficacy and safety | Moderate | Strong |
Role of Surgery
| Recommendation | Evidence Level | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| In patients with mild AP, found to have gallstones in the gallbladder, a cholecystectomy should be performed before discharge to prevent a recurrence of AP | Moderate | Strong |
| In a patient with necrotizing biliary AP, in order to prevent infection, cholecystectomy is to be deferred until active inflammation subsides and fluid collections resolve or stabilize | Moderate | Strong |
| The presence of asymptomatic pseudocysts and pancreatic and/or extrapancreatic necrosis do not warrant intervention, regardless of size, location, and/or extension | Moderate | Strong |
| In stable patients with infected necrosis, surgical, radiologic, and/or endoscopic drainage should be delayed preferably for more than 4 weeks to allow liquefication of the contents and the development of a fibrous wall around the necrosis (walled-off necrosis) | Low | Strong |
| In symptomatic patients with infected necrosis, minimally invasive methods of necrosectomy are preferred to open necrosectomy | Low | Strong |