TY - JOUR
T1 - Endoscopic ultrasound in idiopathic acute pancreatitis
AU - Tandon, Manish
AU - Topazian, Mark
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2007 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2001
Y1 - 2001
N2 - OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the utility of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in patients with unexplained acute pancreatitis, and whether endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is subsequently needed. METHODS: Subjects who underwent EUS for assessment of idiopathic acute pancreatitis were identified, their medical records were reviewed, and they were contacted for a follow-up telephone interview. EUS diagnosis was compared with the final diagnosis and outcome. RESULTS: EUS revealed a cause of pancreatitis in 21 of the 31 subjects (68%), including microlithiasis in five (16%), chronic pancreatitis in 14 (45%), pancreas divisum in two (6.5%), pancreatic cancer in one (3.2%), and was not diagnostic in 10 (32%). During a mean follow-up period of 16 months, diagnosis changed in four subjects (13%), and nine subjects (29%) had ERCP because of persistent symptoms or recurrent pancreatitis. CONCLUSION: EUS, a less invasive test than ERCP, demonstrated an etiology in two-thirds of patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis. Most patients did not require ERCP during the follow-up period. EUS can be an alternative to ERCP in patients with unexplained acute pancreatitis.
AB - OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the utility of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in patients with unexplained acute pancreatitis, and whether endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is subsequently needed. METHODS: Subjects who underwent EUS for assessment of idiopathic acute pancreatitis were identified, their medical records were reviewed, and they were contacted for a follow-up telephone interview. EUS diagnosis was compared with the final diagnosis and outcome. RESULTS: EUS revealed a cause of pancreatitis in 21 of the 31 subjects (68%), including microlithiasis in five (16%), chronic pancreatitis in 14 (45%), pancreas divisum in two (6.5%), pancreatic cancer in one (3.2%), and was not diagnostic in 10 (32%). During a mean follow-up period of 16 months, diagnosis changed in four subjects (13%), and nine subjects (29%) had ERCP because of persistent symptoms or recurrent pancreatitis. CONCLUSION: EUS, a less invasive test than ERCP, demonstrated an etiology in two-thirds of patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis. Most patients did not require ERCP during the follow-up period. EUS can be an alternative to ERCP in patients with unexplained acute pancreatitis.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035071916&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035071916&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0002-9270(00)02402-3
DO - 10.1016/S0002-9270(00)02402-3
M3 - Article
C2 - 11280538
AN - SCOPUS:0035071916
SN - 0002-9270
VL - 96
SP - 705
EP - 709
JO - American Journal of Gastroenterology
JF - American Journal of Gastroenterology
IS - 3
ER -