IMPORTANCE For patients with painful chronic pancreatitis, surgical treatment is postponed until medical and endoscopic treatment have failed. Observational studies have suggested that earlier... Show moreIMPORTANCE For patients with painful chronic pancreatitis, surgical treatment is postponed until medical and endoscopic treatment have failed. Observational studies have suggested that earlier surgery could mitigate disease progression, providing better pain control and preserving pancreatic function.OBJECTIVE To determine whether early surgery is more effective than the endoscopy-first approach in terms of clinical outcomes.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The ESCAPE trial was an unblinded, multicenter, randomized clinical superiority trial involving 30 Dutch hospitals participating in the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. From April 2011 until September 2016, a total of 88 patients with chronic pancreatitis, a dilated main pancreatic duct, and who only recently started using prescribed opioids for severe pain (strong opioids for <= 2 months or weak opioids for <= 6 months) were included. The 18-month follow-up period ended in March 2018.INTERVENTIONS There were 44 patients randomized to the early surgery group who underwent pancreatic drainage surgery within 6 weeks after randomization and 44 patients randomized to the endoscopy-first approach group who underwent medical treatment, endoscopy including lithotripsy if needed, and surgery if needed.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was pain, measured on the Izbicki pain score and integrated over 18 months (range, 0-100 [increasing score indicates more pain severity]). Secondary outcomes were pain relief at the end of follow-up; number of interventions, complications, hospital admissions; pancreatic function; quality of life (measured on the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36]); and mortality.RESULTS Among 88 patients who were randomized (mean age, 52 years; 21 (24%) women), 85 (97%) completed the trial. During 18 months of follow-up, patients in the early surgery group had a lower Izbicki pain score than patients in the group randomized to receive the endoscopy-first approach group (37 vs 49; between-group difference, -12 points [95% CI, -22 to -2]; P = .02). Complete or partial pain relief at end of follow-up was achieved in 23 of 40 patients (58%) in the early surgery vs 16 of 41 (39%)in the endoscopy-first approach group (P = .10). The total number of interventions was lower in the early surgery group (median, 1 vs 3; P < .001). Treatment complications (27% vs 25%), mortality (0% vs 0%), hospital admissions, pancreatic function, and quality of life were not significantly different between early surgery and the endoscopy-first approach.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with chronic pancreatitis, early surgery compared with an endoscopy-first approach resulted in lower pain scores when integrated over 18 months. However, further research is needed to assess persistence of differences over time and to replicate the study findings. Show less
Dijk, L.J.D. van; Noord, D. van; Geelkerken, R.H.; Harki, J.; Berendsen, S.A.; Vries, A.C. de; ... ; Dutch Mesenteric Ischemia Study Gr 2019
Background and objective: The objective of this article is to externally validate and update a recently published score chart for chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI). Methods: A multicenter... Show moreBackground and objective: The objective of this article is to externally validate and update a recently published score chart for chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI). Methods: A multicenter prospective cohort analysis was conducted of 666 CMI-suspected patients referred to two Dutch specialized CMI centers. Multidisciplinary consultation resulted in expert-based consensus diagnosis after which CMI consensus patients were treated. A definitive diagnosis of CMI was established if successful treatment resulted in durable symptom relief. The absolute CMI risk was calculated and discriminative ability of the original chart was assessed by the c-statistic in the validation cohort. Thereafter the original score chart was updated based on the performance in the combined original and validation cohort with inclusion of celiac artery (CA) stenosis cause. Results: In 8% of low-risk patients, 39% of intermediate-risk patients and 94% of high-risk patients of the validation cohort, CMI was diagnosed. Discriminative ability of the original model was acceptable (c-statistic 0.79). The total score of the updated chart ranged from 0 to 28 points (low risk 19% absolute CMI risk, intermediate risk 45%, and high risk 92%). The discriminative ability of the updated chart was slightly better (c-statistic 0.80). Conclusion: The CMI prediction model performs and discriminates well in the validation cohort. The updated score chart has excellent discriminative ability and is useful in clinical decision making. Show less
Dijk, L.J.D. van; Harki, J.; Noord, D. van; Verhagen, H.J.M.; Kolkman, J.J.; Geelkerken, R.H.; ... ; Dutch Mesenteric Ischemia Study Gr 2019
Background: Chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI) is the result of insufficient blood supply to the gastrointestinal tract and is caused by atherosclerotic stenosis of one or more mesenteric arteries... Show moreBackground: Chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI) is the result of insufficient blood supply to the gastrointestinal tract and is caused by atherosclerotic stenosis of one or more mesenteric arteries in > 90% of cases. Revascularization therapy is indicated in patients with a diagnosis of atherosclerotic CMI to relieve symptoms and to prevent acute-on-chronic mesenteric ischemia, which is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Endovascular therapy has rapidly evolved and has replaced surgery as the first choice of treatment in CMI. Bare-metal stents (BMS) are standard care currently, although retrospective studies suggested significantly higher patency rates for covered stents (CS). The Covered stents versus Bare-metal stents in chronic atherosclerotic Gastrointestinal Ischemia (CoBaGI) trial is designed to prospectively assess the patency of CS versus BMS in patients with atherosclerotic CMI.Methods/design: The CoBaGI trial is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-and investigator-blinded, superiority, multicenter trial conducted in six centers of the Dutch Mesenteric Ischemia Study group (DMIS). Eighty-four patients with a consensus diagnosis of atherosclerotic CMI are 1:1 randomized to either a balloon-expandable BMS (Palmaz Blue with rapid-exchange delivery system, Cordis Corporation, Bridgewater, NJ, USA) or a balloon-expandable CS (Advanta V12 over-the-wire, Atrium Maquet Getinge Group, Hudson, NH, USA). The primary endpoint is the primary stent-patency rate at 24 months assessed with CT angiography. Secondary endpoints are primary stent patency at 6 and 12 months and secondary patency rates, freedom from restenosis, freedom from symptom recurrence, freedom from re-intervention, quality of life according the EQ-5D-5 L and SF-36 and cost-effectiveness at 6, 12 and 24 months.Discussion: The CoBaGI trial is designed to assess the patency rates of CS versus BMS in patients treated for CMI caused by atherosclerotic mesenteric stenosis. Furthermore, the CoBaGI trial should provide insights in the quality of life of these patients before and after stenting and its cost-effectiveness. The CoBaGI trial is the first randomized controlled trial performed in CMI caused by atherosclerotic mesenteric artery stenosis. Show less
Dijk, L.J.D. van; Noord, D. van; Vries, A.C. de; Kolkman, J.J.; Geelkerken, R.H.; Verhagen, H.J.M.; ... ; Dutch Mesenteric Ischemia Study 2019
