Chapter 340: Approach to the Patient with Pancreatic Disease

As emphasized in Chap. 341, the etiologies as well as clinical manifestations of pancreatitis are quite varied. Although it is well-appreciated that pancreatitis is frequently secondary to biliary tract disease and alcohol abuse, it can also be caused by drugs, genetic mutations, trauma, and viral infections and is associated with metabolic and connective tissue disorders. In ~30% of patients with acute pancreatitis and 25–40% of patients with chronic pancreatitis, the etiology initially can be obscure.

The incidence of acute pancreatitis is about 5–35 per 100,000 new cases per year worldwide, with a mortality rate of about 3%. The incidence of chronic pancreatitis is about 4–8 per 100,000 persons with a prevalence of 26–42 cases per 100,000. The number of patients admitted to the hospital who suffer with both acute and chronic pancreatitis in the United States is largely increasing and is now estimated to be 274,119 for acute pancreatitis and 19,724 for chronic pancreatitis. Acute pancreatitis is the most common gastrointestinal diagnosis requiring hospitalization in the United States. Acute and chronic pancreatic disease costs an estimated $3 billion annually in health care expenditures. These numbers may underestimate the true incidence and prevalence, because non–alcohol-induced pancreatitis has been largely ignored. At autopsy, the prevalence of chronic pancreatitis ranges from 0.04 to 5%.

The diagnosis of acute pancreatitis is generally clearly defined based on a combination of laboratory, imaging, and clinical symptoms. The diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis, especially in mild disease, is hampered by the relative inaccessibility of the pancreas to direct examination and the nonspecificity of the abdominal pain associated with chronic pancreatitis. Many patients with chronic pancreatitis do not have elevated blood amylase or lipase levels. Some patients with chronic pancreatitis develop signs and symptoms of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI), and thus, objective evidence for pancreatic disease can be demonstrated. However, there is a very large reservoir of pancreatic exocrine function. More than 90% of the pancreas must be damaged before maldigestion of fat and protein is manifested. Noninvasive, indirect tests of pancreatic exocrine function (fecal elastase) are much more likely to give abnormal results in patients with obvious advanced pancreatic disease (i.e., pancreatic calcification, steatorrhea, or diabetes mellitus) than in patients with occult disease. Invasive, direct tests of pancreatic secretory function (secretin tests) are the most sensitive and specific tests to detect early chronic pancreatic disease when imaging is equivocal or normal.

Several tests have proved of value in the evaluation of pancreatic disease. Examples of specific tests and their usefulness in the diagnosis of acute and chronic pancreatitis are summarized in Table 340-1 and Fig. 340-1. At some institutions, pancreatic function tests are available and performed if the diagnosis of chronic pancreatic disease remains a possibility after noninvasive tests (ultrasound, computed tomography [CT], magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography [MRCP]) or invasive tests (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP], endoscopic ultrasonography [EUS]) have given normal or inconclusive results. In this regard, tests using direct stimulation of the pancreas with secretin are the most sensitive.

Pancreatic Enzymes in Body Fluids

The serum amylase and lipase levels are widely used as screening tests for acute pancreatitis in the patient with acute abdominal pain or back pain. Values greater than three times the upper limit of normal (3× ULN) in combination with epigastric pain strongly suggest the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. In acute pancreatitis, the serum amylase and lipase are usually elevated within 24 h of onset and remain so for 3–7 days. Levels usually return to normal within 7 days unless there is pancreatic ductal disruption, ductal obstruction, or pseudocyst formation. Approximately 85% of patients with acute pancreatitis have a threefold or greater elevated serum lipase and amylase levels. The values may be normal if (1) there is a delay (2–5 days) before blood samples are obtained, (2) the underlying disorder is chronic pancreatitis rather than acute pancreatitis, or (3) hypertriglyceridemia is present. Patients with hypertriglyceridemia and pancreatitis have been found to have spuriously low levels of amylase and perhaps lipase activity. In the absence of objective evidence of pancreatitis by abdominal ultrasound, CT scan, MRCP, or EUS, mild to moderate elevations of amylase and/or lipase are not helpful in making a diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis.

The serum amylase can be elevated in other conditions (Table 340-2), in part because the enzyme is found in many organs. In addition to the pancreas and salivary glands, small quantities of amylase are found in the tissues of the fallopian tubes, lung, thyroid, and tonsils and can be produced by various tumors (carcinomas of the lung, esophagus, breast, and ovary). Isoamylase determinations do not accurately distinguish elevated blood amylase levels from pancreatic or nonpancreatic sources. In patients with unexplained hyperamylasemia, measurement of macroamylase can avoid numerous tests in patients with this rare disorder.

Elevation of ascitic fluid amylase occurs in acute pancreatitis as well as in (1) ascites due to disruption of the main pancreatic duct or a leaking pseudocyst and (2) other abdominal disorders that simulate pancreatitis (e.g., intestinal obstruction, intestinal infarction, or perforated peptic ulcer). Elevation of pleural fluid amylase can occur in acute pancreatitis, chronic pancreatitis, carcinoma of the lung, and esophageal perforation. Lipase is the single best enzyme to measure for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. No single blood test is reliable for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis in patients with renal failure. Pancreatic enzyme elevations are usually less than three times the upper limit of normal. Determining whether a patient with renal failure and abdominal pain has pancreatitis remains a difficult clinical problem. One study found that serum amylase levels were elevated in patients with renal dysfunction only when creatinine clearance was <0.8 mL/s (<50 mL/min). In such patients, the serum amylase level was invariably <500 IU/L in the absence of objective evidence of acute pancreatitis. In that study, serum lipase and trypsin levels paralleled serum amylase values. With these limitations in mind, the recommended screening test for acute pancreatitis in renal disease is serum lipase.

Studies Pertaining to Pancreatic Structure

RADIOLOGIC TESTS

Plain films of the abdomen, which once provided useful information in patients with acute and chronic pancreatitis, have been superseded by other more detailed imaging procedures (ultrasound, EUS, CT, MRCP).

Ultrasonography can provide important information in patients with acute pancreatitis, chronic pancreatitis, pseudocysts, and pancreatic carcinoma. Sonographic changes can indicate the presence of edema, inflammation, and calcification (not obvious on plain films of the abdomen), as well as pseudocysts, mass lesions, and gallstones. In acute pancreatitis, the pancreas is characteristically enlarged. In pancreatic pseudocyst, the usual appearance is primarily that of a smooth, round fluid collection. Pancreatic carcinoma distorts the usual landmarks, and mass lesions >3.0 cm are usually detected as localized, solid lesions. US is often the initial investigation for most patients with suspected pancreatic disease. However, obesity and excess intestinal bowel gas can interfere with pancreatic imaging by US studies.

Computed tomography is the best imaging study for initial evaluation of a suspected pancreatic disorder and for the assessment of complications of acute and chronic pancreatitis. It is especially useful in the detection of pancreatic and peripancreatic acute fluid collections, fluid-containing lesions such as pseudocysts, walled-off necrosis, calcium deposits (see Chap. 341, Figs. 341-1, 341-2, and 341-4), and pancreatic neoplasms. Acute pancreatitis is characterized by (1) enlargement of the pancreatic outline, (2) distortion of the pancreatic contour, and/or (3) a pancreatic fluid that has a different attenuation coefficient than normal pancreas. Oral, water-soluble contrast agents are used to opacify the stomach and duodenum during CT scans; this strategy permits more precise delineation of various organs as well as mass lesions. Dynamic CT (using rapid IV administration of contrast) is useful in estimating the extent of pancreatic necrosis and in predicting morbidity and mortality. CT provides clear images much more rapidly and essentially negates artifact caused by patient movement. If acute pancreatitis is confirmed with serology and physical examination findings, CT scan in the first 3 days is not recommended to avoid overuse and minimize costs. The major benefit of CT in acute pancreatitis is the diagnosis of pancreatic necrosis in patients not responding to conservative management within 72 h.

Endoscopic ultrasonography produces high-resolution images of the pancreatic parenchyma and pancreatic duct with a transducer fixed to an endoscope that can be directed onto the surface of the pancreas through the stomach or duodenum. EUS and MRCP have replaced ERCP for diagnostic purposes. EUS allows one to obtain information about the pancreatic duct as well as the parenchyma and has few procedure-related complications associated with it, in contrast to the 5–10% of post-ERCP pancreatitis observed. EUS is also helpful in detecting common bile duct stones in acute pancreatitis. Pancreatic masses can also be biopsied via EUS in cases with suspected pancreas cancer, and one can deliver nerve-blocking agents through EUS fine-needle injection in patients suffering from pancreatic pain from chronic pancreatitis or cancer. EUS has been studied as a diagnostic modality for chronic pancreatitis. Criteria for abnormalities on EUS in severe chronic pancreatic disease have been developed. There is general agreement that the presence of five or more of the nine criteria listed in Table 340-3 is highly predictive of chronic pancreatitis. Recent studies comparing EUS and ERCP to the secretin test in patients with unexplained abdominal pain suspected of having chronic pancreatitis show similar diagnostic accuracy in detecting early changes of chronic pancreatitis. The exact role of EUS versus CT, ERCP, or function testing in the early diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis has yet to be clearly defined.

MRI and MRCP are now being used to view the bile ducts, pancreatic duct, and the pancreas parenchyma in both acute pancreatitis and chronic pancreatitis. For diagnostic imaging in chronic pancreatitis, non-breath-holding and three-dimensional turbo spin-echo techniques are being used to produce superb MRCP images. The main pancreatic duct and common bile duct can be seen well, but there is still a question as to whether changes can be detected consistently in the secondary ducts. The secondary ducts are not visualized in a normal pancreas. Secretin-enhanced MRCP is emerging as a method to better evaluate ductal changes. In anteroposterior imaging, T2 imaging of fluid collections can differentiate necrotic debris from fluid in suspected walled-off necrosis, and T1 imaging can diagnose hemorrhage in suspected pseudoaneurysm rupture.

As mentioned, EUS and MRCP have largely replaced ERCP in the diagnostic evaluation of pancreatic disease. As these techniques become more refined, especially with the administration of secretin, they may well be the diagnostic tests of choice to evaluate the pancreatic duct. ERCP is primarily of therapeutic value after CT, EUS, or MRCP has detected abnormalities requiring invasive endoscopic treatment. ERCP can also be helpful at clarification of equivocal findings discovered with other imaging techniques (see Chap. 341, Fig. 341-1). Pancreatic carcinoma is characterized by stenosis or obstruction of either the pancreatic duct or the common bile duct; both ductal systems are often abnormal (double-duct sign). In chronic pancreatitis, ERCP abnormalities in the main pancreatic duct and side branches have been outlined by the Cambridge classification. The presence of ductal stenosis and irregularity can make it difficult to distinguish chronic pancreatitis from carcinoma. It is important to be aware that ERCP changes interpreted as indicating chronic pancreatitis actually may be due to the effects of aging on the pancreatic duct or sequelae of a recent attack of acute pancreatitis. Although aging may cause impressive ductal alterations, it does not affect the results of pancreatic function tests (i.e., the secretin test). Elevated serum amylase levels after ERCP have been reported in the majority of patients, and clinical pancreatitis in 5–10% of patients. Recent data suggest that pancreatic duct stenting and rectal indomethacin can decrease the incidence of ERCP-induced pancreatitis. ERCP should not be done for diagnostic purposes and should especially be avoided in high-risk patients.

PANCREATIC BIOPSY WITH RADIOLOGIC GUIDANCE

Percutaneous aspiration biopsy or a trucut biopsy of a pancreatic mass often distinguishes a pancreatic inflammatory mass from a pancreatic neoplasm.

Pancreatic function tests (Table 340-1) can be divided into the following:

1. Direct stimulation of the pancreas by IV infusion of secretin followed by collection and measurement of duodenal contents

   The secretin test, used to detect diffuse pancreatic disease, is based on the physiologic principle that the pancreatic secretory response is directly related to the functional mass of pancreatic tissue. In the standard assay, secretin is given IV in a dose of 0.2 μg/kg of synthetic human secretin as a bolus. Normal values for the standard secretin test are (1) volume output >2 mL/kg per hour, (2) bicarbonate (HCO₃^–) concentration >80 mmol/L, and (3) HCO₃^– output >10 mmol/L in 1 h. The most reproducible measurement, giving the highest level of discrimination between normal subjects and patients with chronic PEI, appears to be the maximal bicarbonate concentration. A cutoff point below 80 mmol/L is considered abnormal and suggestive of abnormal secretory function that is most commonly observed in early chronic pancreatitis.

   There may be a dissociation between the results of the secretin test and other tests of absorptive function. For example, patients with chronic pancreatitis often have abnormally low outputs of HCO₃^– after secretin but have normal fecal fat excretion. Thus the secretin test measures the secretory capacity of ductular epithelium, whereas fecal fat excretion indirectly reflects intraluminal lipolytic activity. Steatorrhea does not occur until intraluminal levels of lipase are markedly reduced, underscoring the fact that only small amounts of enzymes are necessary for intraluminal digestive activities. It must be emphasized that an abnormal secretin test result suggests that pancreatic ductal secretory function is abnormal. This is commonly observed in chronic pancreatitis.

2. Measurement of fecal pancreatic enzymes such as elastase

   Measurement of intraluminal digestion products (i.e., undigested muscle fibers, stool fat, and fecal nitrogen) is discussed in Chap. 318. The amount of human elastase in stool reflects the pancreatic output of this proteolytic enzyme. Decreased elastase-1 activity (FE-1) in stool is an excellent test to detect severe PEI in patients with chronic pancreatitis and cystic fibrosis. FE-1 levels >200 μg/g are normal, levels of 100–200 μg/g are considered mild, and levels <100 μg/g are severe for PEI. Although the test is simple and noninvasive, it can give false-positive results and has a low sensitivity. Fecal levels <50 μg/g are definitive for PEI provided that the stool specimen is solid.

Tests useful in the diagnosis of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency and the differential diagnosis of malabsorption are also discussed in Chaps. 318 and 341.