Nasruddin Sabrie, Gurjot Minhas, Marcus Vaska, Zhao Wu Meng, Darren R Brenner, Nauzer Forbes
{"title":"Performance of Clinical Risk Prediction Models for Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Nasruddin Sabrie, Gurjot Minhas, Marcus Vaska, Zhao Wu Meng, Darren R Brenner, Nauzer Forbes","doi":"10.1097/MPA.0000000000002476","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Pancreatitis is common following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Despite increased vigilance of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), both its incidence and associated mortality are rising. Risk prediction models may provide more accurate stratification of patient risk and proactive mitigation of PEP incidence and/or severe associated outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an electronic search of MEDLINE, PubMEd, Cochrane, and CINAHL from inception through April 9, 2024 for studies evaluating the details and performances of available PEP prediction models. Studies were eligible if they used statistical measures to quantify their model's predictive ability. Risk of bias was determined using the PROBAST tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen studies met eligibility criteria and were included. Logistic regression models were used in 15 studies, with machine learning models representing the second most commonly employed approach. Ten studies reported the performance of their risk prediction models using derivation data, with areas under the receiver operating curve (AUC) ranging from 0.68 to 0.86. Fifteen studies reported the performance of their risk prediction models on internally validated data, with AUCs ranging from 0.66 to 0.97. Eight studies reported on the performance of their risk prediction models on external validation data, with AUCs ranging from 0.67 to 0.98.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Numerous PEP clinical prediction models exist with variable performances. The use of PEP prediction tools can support the management of patients following ERCP. Implementation studies assessing the optimal usability of these tools, followed by prospective evaluations, are needed to evaluate their potential impacts on reducing PEP in real-world practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":19733,"journal":{"name":"Pancreas","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pancreas","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MPA.0000000000002476","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Pancreatitis is common following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Despite increased vigilance of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), both its incidence and associated mortality are rising. Risk prediction models may provide more accurate stratification of patient risk and proactive mitigation of PEP incidence and/or severe associated outcomes.
Methods: We conducted an electronic search of MEDLINE, PubMEd, Cochrane, and CINAHL from inception through April 9, 2024 for studies evaluating the details and performances of available PEP prediction models. Studies were eligible if they used statistical measures to quantify their model's predictive ability. Risk of bias was determined using the PROBAST tool.
Results: Nineteen studies met eligibility criteria and were included. Logistic regression models were used in 15 studies, with machine learning models representing the second most commonly employed approach. Ten studies reported the performance of their risk prediction models using derivation data, with areas under the receiver operating curve (AUC) ranging from 0.68 to 0.86. Fifteen studies reported the performance of their risk prediction models on internally validated data, with AUCs ranging from 0.66 to 0.97. Eight studies reported on the performance of their risk prediction models on external validation data, with AUCs ranging from 0.67 to 0.98.
Discussion: Numerous PEP clinical prediction models exist with variable performances. The use of PEP prediction tools can support the management of patients following ERCP. Implementation studies assessing the optimal usability of these tools, followed by prospective evaluations, are needed to evaluate their potential impacts on reducing PEP in real-world practice.
期刊介绍:
Pancreas provides a central forum for communication of original works involving both basic and clinical research on the exocrine and endocrine pancreas and their interrelationships and consequences in disease states. This multidisciplinary, international journal covers the whole spectrum of basic sciences, etiology, prevention, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and surgical and medical management of pancreatic diseases, including cancer.