Browsing by Author "Tarnasky, Paul"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Effect of Covered Metallic Stents Compared With Plastic Stents on Benign Biliary Stricture Resolution A Randomized Clinical Trial
    (JAMA, 2016-03) Coté, Gregory A.; Slivka, Adam; Tarnasky, Paul; Mullady, Daniel K.; Elmunzer, B. Joseph; Elta, Grace; Fogel, Evan; Lehman, Glen; McHenry, Lee; Romagnuolo, Joseph; Menon, Shyam; Siddiqui, Uzma D.; Watkins, James; Lynch, Sheryl; Denski, Cheryl; Xu, Huiping; Sherman, Stuart; Department of Biostatistics, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health
    Importance Endoscopic placement of multiple plastic stents in parallel is the first-line treatment for most benign biliary strictures; it is possible that fully covered, self-expandable metallic stents (cSEMS) may require fewer endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures (ERCPs) to achieve resolution. Objective To assess whether use of cSEMS is noninferior to plastic stents with respect to stricture resolution. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter (8 endoscopic referral centers), open-label, parallel, randomized clinical trial involving patients with treatment-naive, benign biliary strictures (N = 112) due to orthotopic liver transplant (n = 73), chronic pancreatitis (n = 35), or postoperative injury (n = 4), who were enrolled between April 2011 and September 2014 (with follow-up ending October 2015). Patients with a bile duct diameter less than 6 mm and those with an intact gallbladder in whom the cystic duct would be overlapped by a cSEMS were excluded. Interventions Patients (N = 112) were randomized to receive multiple plastic stents or a single cSEMS, stratified by stricture etiology and with endoscopic reassessment for resolution every 3 months (plastic stents) or every 6 months (cSEMS). Patients were followed up for 12 months after stricture resolution to assess for recurrence. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was stricture resolution after no more than 12 months of endoscopic therapy. The sample size was estimated based on the noninferiority of cSEMS to plastic stents, with a noninferiority margin of −15%. Results There were 55 patients in the plastic stent group (mean [SD] age, 57 [11] years; 17 women [31%]) and 57 patients in the cSEMS group (mean [SD] age, 55 [10] years; 19 women [33%]). Compared with plastic stents (41/48, 85.4%), the cSEMS resolution rate was 50 of 54 patients (92.6%), with a rate difference of 7.2% (1-sided 95% CI, −3.0% to ∞; P < .001). Given the prespecified noninferiority margin of −15%, the null hypothesis that cSEMS is less effective than plastic stents was rejected. The mean number of ERCPs to achieve resolution was lower for cSEMS (2.14) vs plastic (3.24; mean difference, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.46; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with benign biliary strictures and a bile duct diameter 6 mm or more in whom the covered metallic stent would not overlap the cystic duct, cSEMS were not inferior to multiple plastic stents after 12 months in achieving stricture resolution. Metallic stents should be considered an appropriate option in patients such as these.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Multicenter evaluation of the clinical utility of laparoscopy-assisted ERCP in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass
    (Elsevier, 2017) Abbas, Ali M.; Strong, Andrew T.; Diehl, David L.; Brauer, Brian C.; Lee, Iris H.; Burbridge, Rebecca; Zivny, Jaroslav; Higa, Jennifer T.; Falcão, Marcelo; El Hajj, Ihab I.; Tarnasky, Paul; Enestvedt, Brintha K.; Ende, Alexander R.; Thaker, Adarsh M.; Pawa, Rishi; Jamidar, Priya; Sampath, Kartik; de Moura, Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux; Kwon, Richard S.; Suarez, Alejandro L.; Aburajab, Murad; Wang, Andrew Y.; Shakhatreh, Mohammad H.; Kaul, Vivek; Kang, Lorna; Kowalski, Thomas E.; Pannala, Rahul; Tokar, Jeffrey; Aadam, A. Aziz; Tzimas, Demetrios; Wagh, Mihir S.; Draganov, Peter V.; Ponsky, Jeffrey; Greenwald, Bruce D.; Uradomo, Lance T.; McGhan, Alyson A.; Hakimian, Shahrad; Ross, Andrew; Sherman, Stuart; Bick, Benjamin L.; Forsmark, Christopher E.; Yang, Dennis; Gupte, Anand; Chauhan, Shailendra; Hughes, Steven J.; Saks, Karen; Bakis, Gennadiy; Templeton, Adam W.; Saunders, Michael; Sedarat, Alireza; Evans, John A.; Muniraj, Thiruvengadam; Gardner, Timothy B.; Ramos, Almino C.; Santo, Marco Aurelio; Nett, Andrew; Coté, Gregory A.; Elmunzer, Joseph; Dua, Kulwinder S.; Nosler, Michael J.; Strand, Daniel S.; Yeaton, Paul; Kothari, Shivangi; Ullah, Asad; Taunk, Pushpak; Brady, Patrick; Pinkas, Haim; Faulx, Ashley L.; Shahid, Haroon; Holmes, Jordan; Pannu, Davinderbir; Komanduri, Srinadh; Bucobo, Juan Carlos; Dhaliwal, Harry; Rostom, Alaa; Acker, Brent W.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background and Aims The obesity epidemic has led to increased use of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). These patients have an increased incidence of pancreaticobiliary diseases yet standard ERCP is not possible due to surgically altered gastroduodenal anatomy. Laparoscopic-ERCP (LA-ERCP) has been proposed as an option but supporting data are derived from single center small case-series. Therefore, we conducted a large multicenter study to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and outcomes of LA-ERCP. Methods This is retrospective cohort study of adult patients with RYGB who underwent LA-ERCP in 34 centers. Data on demographics, indications, procedure success, and adverse events were collected. Procedure success was defined when all of the following were achieved: reaching the papilla, cannulating the desired duct and providing endoscopic therapy as clinically indicated. Results A total of 579 patients (median age 51, 84% women) were included. Indication for LA-ERCP was biliary in 89%, pancreatic in 8%, and both in 3%. Procedure success was achieved in 98%. Median total procedure time was 152 minutes (IQR 109-210) with median ERCP time 40 minutes (IQR 28-56). Median hospital stay was 2 days (IQR 1-3). Adverse events were 18% (laparoscopy-related 10%, ERCP-related 7%, both 1%) with the clear majority (92%) classified as mild/moderate whereas 8% were severe and 1 death occurred. Conclusion Our large multicenter study indicates that LA-ERCP in patients with RYGB is feasible with a high procedure success rate comparable with that of standard ERCP in patients with normal anatomy. ERCP-related adverse events rate is comparable with conventional ERCP, but the overall adverse event rate was higher due to the added laparoscopy-related events.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Rectal Indomethacin Dose Escalation (RIDE) for Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis in High-Risk Patients: a Randomized Trial
    (Elsevier, 2020-02) Fogel, Evan L.; Lehman, Glen A.; Tarnasky, Paul; Cote, Gregory A.; Schmidt, Suzette E.; Waljee, Akbar K.; Higgins, Peter D. R.; Watkins, James L.; Sherman, Stuart; Kwon, Richard S. Y.; Elta, Grace H.; Easler, Jeffrey J.; Pleskow, Douglas K.; Scheiman, James M.; El Hajj, Ihab I.; Guda, Nalini M.; Gromski, Mark A.; McHenry, Lee, Jr.; Arol, Seena; Korsnes, Sheryl; Suarez, Alejandro L.; Spitzer, Rebecca; Miller, Marilyn; Hofbauer, Maria; Elmunzer, Badih Joseph; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background Although rectal indometacin 100 mg is effective in reducing the frequency and severity of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk patients, the optimal dose is unknown, and pancreatitis incidence remains high. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two dose regimens of rectal indometacin on the frequency and severity of pancreatitis after ERCP in high-risk patients. Methods In this randomised, double-blind, comparative effectiveness trial, we enrolled patients from six tertiary medical centres in the USA. Eligible patients were those at high risk for the development of pancreatitis after ERCP. We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) immediately after ERCP to receive either two 50 mg indometacin suppositories and a placebo suppository (standard-dose group) or three 50 mg indometacin suppositories (high-dose group). 4 h after the procedure, patients assigned to the high-dose group received an additional 50 mg indometacin suppository, whereas patients in the standard-dose group received an additional placebo suppository. The randomisation schedule, stratified according to study centre and with no other restrictions, was computer generated by an investigator who was uninvolved in the clinical care of any participants, distributed to the sites, and kept by personnel not directly involved with the study. These same personnel were responsible for packaging the drug and placebo in opaque envelopes. Patients, study personnel, and treating physicians were masked to study group assignment. The primary outcome of the study was the development of pancreatitis after ERCP. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01912716, and enrolment is complete. Findings Between July 9, 2013, and March 22, 2018, 1037 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either standard-dose (n=515) or high-dose indometacin (n=522). Pancreatitis after ERCP occurred in 141 (14%) of 1037 patients—76 (15%) of 515 patients in the standard-dose indometacin group and 65 (12%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group (risk ratio [RR] 1·19, 95% CI 0·87–1·61; p=0·32). We observed 19 adverse events that were potentially attributable to study drug. Clinically significant bleeding occurred in 14 (1%) of 1037 patients—six (1%) of 515 patients in the standard-dose indometacin group and eight (2%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group (p=0·79). Three (1%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group developed acute kidney injury versus none in the standard-dose group (p=0·25). A non-ST elevation myocardial infarction occurred in the standard-dose indometacin group 2 days after ERCP. A transient ischaemic attack occurred in the high-dose indometacin group 5 days after ERCP. All 19 adverse events, in addition to the 141 patients who developed pancreatitis after ERCP, were considered serious as all required admission to hospital. We observed no allergic reactions or deaths at 30 day follow-up. Interpretation Dose escalation to rectal indometacin 200 mg did not confer any advantage compared with the standard 100 mg regimen, with pancreatitis incidence remaining high in high-risk patients. Current practice should continue unchanged. Further research should consider the pharmacokinetics of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs to determine the optimal timing of their administration to prevent pancreatitis after ERCP.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Rectal Indomethacin Dose Escalation (RIDE) for Prevention of Post-ERCP Pancreatitis in High-Risk Patients: a Randomized Trial
    (Elsevier, 2020) Fogel, Evan L.; Lehman, Glen A.; Tarnasky, Paul; Cote, Gregory A.; Schmidt, Suzette E.; Waljee, Akbar K.; Higgins, Peter D. R.; Watkins, James L.; Sherman, Stuart; Kwon, Richard S. Y.; Elta, Grace H.; Easler, Jeffrey J.; Pleskow, Douglas K.; Scheiman, James M.; El Hajj, Ihab I.; Guda, Nalini M.; Gromski, Mark A.; McHenry, Lee, Jr.; Arol, Seena; Korsnes, Sheryl; Suarez, Alejandro L.; Spitzer, Rebecca; Miller, Marilyn; Hofbauer, Maria; Elmunzer, B. Joseph; US Cooperative for Outcomes Research in Endoscopy (USCORE); Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: Although rectal indometacin 100 mg is effective in reducing the frequency and severity of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk patients, the optimal dose is unknown, and pancreatitis incidence remains high. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two dose regimens of rectal indometacin on the frequency and severity of pancreatitis after ERCP in high-risk patients. Methods: In this randomised, double-blind, comparative effectiveness trial, we enrolled patients from six tertiary medical centres in the USA. Eligible patients were those at high risk for the development of pancreatitis after ERCP. We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) immediately after ERCP to receive either two 50 mg indometacin suppositories and a placebo suppository (standard-dose group) or three 50 mg indometacin suppositories (high-dose group). 4 h after the procedure, patients assigned to the high-dose group received an additional 50 mg indometacin suppository, whereas patients in the standard-dose group received an additional placebo suppository. The randomisation schedule, stratified according to study centre and with no other restrictions, was computer generated by an investigator who was uninvolved in the clinical care of any participants, distributed to the sites, and kept by personnel not directly involved with the study. These same personnel were responsible for packaging the drug and placebo in opaque envelopes. Patients, study personnel, and treating physicians were masked to study group assignment. The primary outcome of the study was the development of pancreatitis after ERCP. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01912716, and enrolment is complete. Findings: Between July 9, 2013, and March 22, 2018, 1037 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either standard-dose (n=515) or high-dose indometacin (n=522). Pancreatitis after ERCP occurred in 141 (14%) of 1037 patients-76 (15%) of 515 patients in the standard-dose indometacin group and 65 (12%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group (risk ratio [RR] 1·19, 95% CI 0·87-1·61; p=0·32). We observed 19 adverse events that were potentially attributable to study drug. Clinically significant bleeding occurred in 14 (1%) of 1037 patients-six (1%) of 515 patients in the standard-dose indometacin group and eight (2%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group (p=0·79). Three (1%) of 522 patients in the high-dose indometacin group developed acute kidney injury versus none in the standard-dose group (p=0·25). A non-ST elevation myocardial infarction occurred in the standard-dose indometacin group 2 days after ERCP. A transient ischaemic attack occurred in the high-dose indometacin group 5 days after ERCP. All 19 adverse events, in addition to the 141 patients who developed pancreatitis after ERCP, were considered serious as all required admission to hospital. We observed no allergic reactions or deaths at 30 day follow-up. Interpretation: Dose escalation to rectal indometacin 200 mg did not confer any advantage compared with the standard 100 mg regimen, with pancreatitis incidence remaining high in high-risk patients. Current practice should continue unchanged. Further research should consider the pharmacokinetics of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs to determine the optimal timing of their administration to prevent pancreatitis after ERCP.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Soft self-expandable metal stent to treat painful pancreatic duct strictures secondary to chronic pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter trial
    (Elsevier, 2023) Sherman, Stuart; Kozarek, Richard A.; Costamagna, Guido; Reddy, Nageshwar; Tarnasky, Paul; Shah, Raj J.; Slivka, Adam; Fogel, Evan; Watkins, James; Delhaye, Myriam; Irani, Shayan S.; Tringali, Andrea; Lakhtakia, Sundeep; Kedia, Prashant; Edmundowicz, Steven; Peetermans, Joyce A.; Rousseau, Matthew J.; Devière, Jacques; Pancreatic SEMS in Chronic Pancreatitis Study Group; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background and aims: Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMSs) may offer a treatment option for pain associated with a dilated pancreatic duct (PD) in chronic pancreatitis (CP), but optimal patient selection and FCSEMS design, efficacy, and safety remain uncertain. We studied an investigational pancreatic FCSEMS for treatment of CP-associated pain. Methods: Patients with painful CP, a dominant distal PD stricture, and PD dilation upstream were enrolled in a prospective, multicenter, single-arm trial studying 6-month indwell of a 4- to 6-cm-long soft pancreatic FCSEMS. Primary efficacy and safety endpoints were pain reduction 6 months after FCSEMS indwell (performance goal ≥53%) and PD stenting-related serious adverse events (SAEs), respectively (performance goal <32%). The primary efficacy endpoint was assessed in patients with sufficiently severe and frequent pain at FCSEMS placement as a first stent or in exchange of a plastic stent. Results: Among 67 patients (mean age, 52.7 ± 12.5 years; mean time since CP diagnosis, 6.4 ± 6.4 years), 34 (50.7%) had plastic stent placement within 90 days of FCSEMS placement, and 46 patients were eligible for the primary efficacy endpoint analysis. Technical success was 97.0% (65/67). The observed primary efficacy (26.1%, 12/46) and safety endpoints (31.3%, 21/67) failed to meet the a priori study hypotheses. Study stent migration occurred in 47.7% of patients (31/65). Conclusions: Six-month treatment with an FCSEMS did not lead to an expected degree of pain reduction, and migrations and SAEs were common. Further study is needed to clarify optimal decompressive strategy, FCSEMS design, and patient selection.