Mahmud Mahamid, Abdulla Watad, Nicola L. Bragazzi, Dov Wengrower, Julie Wolff, Dan Livovsky, Howard Amital, Mohammad Adawi, Eran Goldin
Abstract
Background and Aims: Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) is one of the major complications of ERCP. Thus, several non-invasive as well as invasive strategies have been investigated as preventative therapies for PEP with various efficacy. Methods: We enrolled any patients who underwent ERCP both at the Shaare Zedek Medical Center in Jerusalem and EMMS Nazareth hospital. Association between use of statins and different variables were assessed with univariate tests (chi-squared for categorical variables). Predictors of incidence of PEP and severity of pancreatitis were computed using conditional logistic regression, correcting for potential confounding factors. Results: 958 subjects were analyzed. Average age was 62.04 ± 21.18 years (median 68 years). Most of the patients were female (n = 558, 58.2%), Jewish (n = 827, 86.3%), and inpatients (n = 631, 65.9%). Only few ERCPs were performed emergently (n = 40, 4.2%). Twenty-Seven patients repeated the exam. Overall incidence of PEP/hyperamylasemia was 16.8% (n = 161); with a 5.6% (n = 54) incidence of hyperamylasemia and a 11.2% (n = 107) incidence of pancreatitis. Overall, 6 cases of severe pancreatitis were identified. The logistic regression analysis demonstrated that chronic use of statins is a protective factor in preventing development of PEP/hyperamylasemia [OR 0.436 [95%CI 0.303-0.627], p < 0.001]; Particularly, the PEP OR was of 0.318 [95%CI 0.169-0.597], p < 0.001 and the hyperamylasemia OR was of 0.565 [95%CI 0.372-0.859], p = 0.008. No significant predictor could be found for the risk of developing severe PEP. Conclusions: Our data support the possibility of exploiting statins as preventive agents for PEP. However, further studies, mainly RCTs, are warranted in order to replicate our findings.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 July 2018.
All research outputs
#7,502,830
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#3,251
of 17,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,923
of 330,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#83
of 407 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,181 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,190 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 407 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
