Importance In the United States, acute pancreatitis is one of the leading causes of hospital admission from gastrointestinal diseases, with approximately 300 000 emergency department visits each year. Outcomes from acute pancreatitis are influenced by risk stratification, fluid and nutritional management, and follow-up care and risk-reduction strategies, which are the subject of this review. Observations MEDLINE was searched via PubMed as was the Cochrane databases for English-language studies published between January 2009 and August 2020 for current recommendations for predictive scoring tools, fluid management and nutrition, and follow-up and risk-reduction strategies for acute pancreatitis. Several scoring systems, such as the Bedside Index of Severity in Acute Pancreatitis (BISAP) and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II tools, have good predictive capabilities for disease severity (mild, moderately severe, and severe per the revised Atlanta classification) and mortality, but no one tool works well for all forms of acute pancreatitis. Early and aggressive fluid resuscitation and early enteral nutrition are associated with lower rates of mortality and infectious complications, yet the optimal type and rate of fluid resuscitation have yet to be determined. The underlying etiology of acute pancreatitis should be sought in all patients, and risk-reduction strategies, such as cholecystectomy and alcohol cessation counseling, should be used during and after hospitalization for acute pancreatitis. Conclusions and relevance Acute pancreatitis is a complex disease that varies in severity and course. Prompt diagnosis and stratification of severity influence proper management. Scoring systems are useful adjuncts but should not supersede clinical judgment. Fluid management and nutrition are very important aspects of care for acute pancreatitis.

Acute Pancreatitis: A Review.

Perioperative nutrition: Recommendations from the ESPEN expert group

BACKGROUND
There is substantial uncertainty regarding the optimal surgical treatment for chronic pancreatitis. Short-term outcomes have been found to be better after duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR) than after partial pancreatoduodenectomy. Therefore, we designed the multicentre ChroPac trial to investigate the long-term outcomes of patients with chronic pancreatitis within 24 months after surgery.


METHODS
This randomised, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, superiority trial was done in 18 hospitals across Europe. Patients with chronic pancreatitis who were planned for elective surgical treatment were randomly assigned to DPPHR or partial pancreatoduodenectomy with a central web-based randomisation tool. The primary endpoint was mean quality of life within 24 months after surgery, measured with the physical functioning scale of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Primary analysis included all patients who underwent one of the assigned procedures; safety analysis included all patients who underwent surgical intervention (categorised into groups as treated). Patients and outcome assessors were masked to group assignment. The trial was registered, ISRCTN38973832. Recruitment was completed on Sept 3, 2013.


FINDINGS
Between Sept 10, 2009, and Sept 3, 2013, 250 patients were randomly assigned to DPPHR (n=125) or partial pancreatoduodenectomy (n=125), of whom 226 patients (115 in the DPPHR group and 111 in the partial pancreatoduodenectomy group) were analysed. No difference in quality of life was seen between the groups within 24 months after surgery (75·3 [SD 16·4] for partial pancreatoduodenectomy vs 73·0 [16·4] for DPPHR; mean difference -2·3, 95% CI -6·6 to 2·0; p=0·284). The incidence and severity of serious adverse events did not differ between the groups. 70 (64%) of 109 patients in the DPPHR group and 61 (52%) of 117 patients in the partial pancreatoduodenectomy group had at least one serious adverse event, with the most common being reoperations (for reasons other than chronic pancreatitis), gastrointestinal problems, and other surgical morbidity.


INTERPRETATION
No differences in quality of life after surgery for chronic pancreatitis were seen between the interventions. Results from single-centre trials showing superiority for DPPHR were not confirmed in the multicentre setting.


FUNDING
German Research Foundation (DFG).

Partial pancreatoduodenectomy versus duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection in chronic pancreatitis

Introduction Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency is a finding in many conditions, predominantly affecting those with chronic pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer and acute necrotising pancreatitis. Patients with pancreatic exocrine insufficiency can experience gastrointestinal symptoms, maldigestion, malnutrition and adverse effects on quality of life and even survival. There is a need for readily accessible, pragmatic advice for healthcare professionals on the management of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency. Methods and analysis A review of the literature was conducted by a multidisciplinary panel of experts in pancreatology, and recommendations for clinical practice were produced and the strength of the evidence graded. Consensus voting by 48 pancreatic specialists from across the UK took place at the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Pancreatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland annual scientific meeting. Results Recommendations for clinical practice in the diagnosis, initial management, patient education and long term follow up were developed. All recommendations achieved over 85% consensus and are included within these comprehensive guidelines.

https://bmjopengastro.bmj.com/content/bmjgast/8/1/e000643.full.pdf

Consensus for the management of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency: UK practical guidelines.

ESPEN guideline on hospital nutrition.

https://vbn.aau.dk/ws/files/331169470/1_s2.0_S0261561420300091_main.pdf

Christian Löser

Papers

ESPEN guideline on clinical nutrition in acute and chronic pancreatitis