View clinical trials related to Acute Pancreatitis.
Filter by:Acute pancreatitis is a painful and potentially life-threatening condition that affects the pancreas, a glandular organ responsible for producing digestive enzymes and hormones. The condition is typically characterized by sudden inflammation of the pancreas that can cause severe abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. Treatment for acute pancreatitis usually involves supportive care, pain management, and sometimes, hospitalization. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids are two of the most commonly used classes of pain medication for the management of acute pancreatitis. While both drugs are effective in reducing pain, they have different mechanisms of action and potential side effects. NSAIDs work by reducing inflammation and pain by inhibiting the activity of cyclooxygenase (COX) enzymes, whereas opioids work by binding to specific receptors in the brain and spinal cord to block the transmission of pain signals. Despite their widespread use, there is a lack of consensus regarding which medication is more effective for the management of acute pancreatitis, particularly in mild to moderate cases. Some studies have suggested that NSAIDs may be more effective for reducing pain in acute pancreatitis, while others have suggested that opioids may be more effective in providing pain relief. Moreover, there is a concern regarding the potential for adverse events associated with the use of opioids, such as respiratory depression, addiction, and constipation. Therefore, this study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of NSAIDs and opioids in the management of mild to moderate acute pancreatitis. This will be a randomized clinical trial, which will involve the recruitment of patients with mild to moderate acute pancreatitis who will be randomized to receive either an NSAID or an opioid for pain management. The primary outcome of this study will be the reduction in pain score measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS) over a 72-hour period. The secondary outcomes will include adverse events associated with each medication, length of hospital stay, and the need for further interventions. This study has the potential to provide important insights into the optimal management of pain in mild to moderate acute pancreatitis, which can ultimately improve patient outcomes and reduce the burden of this condition on the healthcare system.
This study aims to compare NS and LR in terms of outcomes in patients with acute pancreatitis while addressing the current methodological issues with available meta-analyses on the topic. Such comparison combined with bias adjustment will assist with identifying the optimal fluid rehydration therapy in acute pancreatitis, since most of the available data is conflicted around the topic. A database search will be conducted to identify studies comparing normal saline and ringer's lactate. Existing meta-analyses will be assessed. The results will be discussed in the light of their strengths and limitations and then any deficiencies will be addressed through a new synthesis as a final step of this umbrella review. The primary outcome will be SIRS at 24 hours. OR and 95% confidence intervals will be generated using the quality effects model. Heterogeneity will be evaluated using the I2 statistic. Publication bias will be assessed using the Doi Plot.
Acute pancreatitis is a common critical disease of the digestive system. Accumulated data showed that overexpression of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) in acute pancreatitis and experimental pancreatitis could be attenuated with COX-2 inhibitors. In recent years, it has been found that timely administration of indomethacin or diclofenac sodium to anus after ERCP can significantly reduce the incidence of AP after ERCP in patients at high risk of AP. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of rectal indomethacin in reducing the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) score in AP patients.
The goal of this observational study is to compare the prognostic value of different nutritional screening tools to predict the course of acute pancreatitis. The main questions it aims to answer are: - Which nutritional screening tool performs best to predict length of hospital stay? - Which nutritional screening tool performs best to predict clinical outcome (disease severity, length of hospital stay, mortality, need for rehospitalization)? Participants will answer questions regarding their nutritional status and undergo basic anthropometric assessments (e.g. measurement of waist circumference) to evaluate their risk of malnutrition.
Acute pancreatitis represents an acute inflammatory process of the pancreas, which undergoes local and systemic complications, associated with non-negligible morbidity and mortality, and significant economic and quality of life impact. Even after the recovery phase, the development and persistence of sequelae from the inflammatory/necrotic process, including exocrine and endocrine pancreatic insufficiencies, are frequent. Although well documented as consequence of other pancreatic conditions, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) after acute pancreatitis is poorly studied and probably underdiagnosed. The prevalence, diagnosis, independent risk factors and therapeutic approaches for EPI after acute pancreatitis need further investigation. Recent evidence suggests the involvement of the pancreas-intestinal axis and immunological dysfunction in several pancreatic pathologies, although their role in the development of EPI after acute pancreatitis is still scarce. Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) is the only treatment currently available in EPI, but the timing for start and duration of this therapy in acute pancreatitis remain to be established. This study have the following objectives: to determine the prevalence, clinical, analytical and nutritional biomarkers and duration of EPI after acute pancreatitis, as well as changes in gut microbiota and immunologic response, and quality of life in EPI and response to PERT after acute pancreatitis; and to determine the prevalence and biomarkers associated with endocrine pancreatic insufficiency following acute pancreatitis and the presence of gut dysbiosis and immunologic changes in acute pancreatitis according to its severity.
Acute pancreatitis accounts for a large number of hospital admissions every year. Some studies have shown that early oral feeding protocols are safe, and one previous study suggests the possibility of home care for mild acute pancreatitis.
Acute pancreatitis is a complex gastrointestinal disease with a variable course that is often difficult to predict early in its development. The majority of cases are mild, self-limited, and follow an uncomplicated course. However, 10-20% of cases can be associated with pancreatic or peripancreatic fluid collections, or both. Infected necrosis complicates 10% of all acute pancreatitis episodes and is associated with a mortality of 15-20%. Current guidelines for necrotizing pancreatitis recommend to postpone drainage until 4 or more weeks after initial presentation to allow collections to "walled-off". However, evidence of infection with clinical deterioration despite maximum support may mandate earlier intervention. It is unclear whether such delay is needed for drainage or whether earlier endoscopic intervention could actually be beneficial in the current approach. The aims of this randomized, controlled, multicenter study is to evaluate whether early endoscopic drainage in patients with peripancreatic fluid collection is superior to postponed intervention in the current practice.
The overriding objective of DREAM is to conduct a prospective longitudinal (36 months) observational clinical study to investigate the incidence, etiology, and pathophysiology of diabetes mellitus (DM) following acute pancreatitis (AP).
Acute pancreatitis (AP) represents a critical health concern nationwide, with estimated 274,000 admissions annually and at a cost of 2.6 billion dollars. Current treatment strategies for AP are limited to supportive care with fluid resuscitation, analgesia, nutrition and prevention of end organ damage. Abdominal pain is often the predominant symptom in patients with AP and is treated with analgesics. As there is currently no disease-specific medical treatment to change the natural history of pancreatitis, pain control remains central to the treatment of AP. Among the analgesics, opioids have been shown to be provide safe and effective pain control in patients with AP. Current literature shows that there is no difference in the risk of pancreatitis complications or clinically serious adverse events between opioids and other analgesia options. Among hospitalized AP patients, adequate pain control often requires the use of intravenous (IV) opiates in the first 24-48 hours, which can later be transitioned to oral (PO) opioids. While there are various methods of delivering opioid medications such as IV, PO, and transdermal to name a few, IV opioids are commonly administered, either on a scheduled and/or on an as needed (PRN) basis as directed by the attending physician. In contrast to the conventional, method of physician directed IV opioid delivery, patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) is a form of IV opioid medication delivery in which the patient can rapidly titrate the opioid dose to manage variable levels of pain. This modality of opioid administration is often preferred by patients and has been widely used in postsurgical and obstetric patients to effectively treat their pain. PCA allows for faster intervention on pain limiting time to treatment and peak pain levels and has also been shown to decrease total opioid dose. However, there is limited evidence in published literature assessing the feasibility of using PCA to treat the pain of AP or comparing its efficacy and safety profile compared to the more traditional physician directed analgesia. One retrospective study has shown that use of PCA was surprisingly associated with longer hospital stays and higher rates of outpatient opioid use when compared to routine physician-directed analgesia (PDA), however there are no prospective trials to study this comparison. Hence, in this study, the investigators will compare the effects of using PCA among patients with AP to that of conventional PDA.
In acute pancreatitis, approximately 20% of the cases result in severe necrotizing pancreatitis which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Necrotizing pancreatitis is characterized by the development of an acute necrotic collection and as this collection persists beyond 4 weeks, walled off necrosis (WON) encapsulates the collection. To date, this is treated by the step-up approach, which contains percutaneous drainage and minimally invasive video assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD) or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided drainage followed by direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN). Different DEN techniques are available for the treatment of WON, however, there is a lack of effective endoscopic instruments to perform DEN. Recently, the first dedicated alternative to conventional DEN has been cleared for use, namely the EndoRotor® Resection System. This device is a powered mechanical debridement device intended for use in endoscopic procedures to resect and remove necrotic debris during DEN for WON. Previous (pilot and feasibility) studies showed promising results in terms of the amount of procedures, adverse events and length of hospital stay. Therefore, aim of this study is to assess the performance of the EndoRotor, as compared to conventional endoscopic techniques, for direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) of walled off necrosis (WON) in a randomized controlled trial.