Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 329 - файл
.pdf
Inflammatory Response inChronic Pancreatitis 329
Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Universität Bern, Wiley Online Library on [22/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
https://t.me/medicina_free
does not induce pancreatitis [11]. However, animals
treated with VPA that are then subjected to an additional
injury- provoking stimulus, develop pancreatitis. Thus,
VPA predisposes the host to pancreatitis by altering the
epigenetic landscape and thereby inhibiting the recovery
mechanisms that allow regeneration to occur.
Environmental Exposures asModifying
Factors inChronic Pancreatitis
A mechanism thought to initiate pancreatic injury is
through environmental exposures. The exposures include
alcohol ingestion and byproducts of smoking [12]. The
exposures do not by themselves induce pancreatitis, but
they pathologically alter acinar cell responses to stressors.
The prototypic example is heavy and frequent alcohol
ingestion, which has long been known as a major risk factor for both acute and chronic pancreatitis [13,14].
However, only a minority of binge drinkers develop pancreatitis. Ethanol has been shown to affect pancreatic cell
types either through its direct effects or through its
metabolites. Ethanol or its metabolites can sensitize the
acinar cell to pathologic calcium signals[15] mitochondrial dysfunction [16,17], impairment of autophagic or
lysosomal responses [18], or the induction of the UPR
with increased expression of XBP1 (a key regulator of ER
function) [19,20]. Ethanol appears to increase ER stress
visualized by ER swelling and UPR induction, and there is
an impact on protein trafficking and on some of the structural components of zymogen granules[21]. Ethanol converts a physiological stimulus to the acinar cell into a
pathological stimulus, with adverse outcomes, including
premature intra- acinar activation of digestive enzymes
and acinar injury[22,23]. This effect could be due to the
increased expression of digestive enzymes such as
trypsinogen, chymotrypsinogen, or lysosomal cathepsin
B and to lysosomal fragility[24].
a prime case example of this mechanism. Hereditary
pancreatitis is caused by a mutation within the cationic
trypsinogen gene (PRSS1), the primary proteolytic
enzyme responsible for activating pancreatic digestive
enzymes or zymogens[25]. These gain of function mutations lead to premature trypsinogen activation. There
are several mutations identified but the most common
are R122H and N29I. The penetrance of the disease is
about 80%. Although these mutations place an individual
at a higher risk of developing CP and there is variable
expressivity, the disease course and ultimate outcome
are also dependent on additive risk factors, including
environmental and metabolic stressors. Environmental
exposures or other genetic modifiers are thought to alter
the disease course as individuals with the same genetic
mutation can have significantly different disease courses,
despite having similar histopathology[26]. Monozygotic
twin studies attest to this level of discordance, whereby
the same genetic mutation in the PRSS1 gene causes profound pancreatic disease in one twin, while the other has
no evidence of disease into adulthood [27]. In order to
study mechanisms underlying pancreatitis pathogenesis
by these genetic mutations, several groups developed
hereditary pancreatitis mouse models by manipulating
human or mouse trypsinogen genes[28–32]. In addition
to the PRSS1 mutations and hereditary pancreatitis,
there are other genetic mutations associated with
increased risk for CP[33]. They include mutations within
the CFTR (cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance
regulator) and SPINK1 (serine protease inhibitor Kazal
type 1) genes. As with PRSS1 mutations, identical mutations within these genes do not predict similar disease
course for affected individuals. Pathogenic variants in
the SPINK1, PRSS1, CTRC, and CFTR genes can lead to
earlier disease onset and worsened clinical outcomes in
CP patients with varying etiologies such as idiopathic,
alcoholic, and smoking- associated CP [34,35]. Overall,
these observations suggest a complex disease process
that will require careful analysis of multiple factors that
impact disease progression.
Genetic Influences inChronic
Pancreatitis
A second mechanism shown to mediate the pathologic
response in the pancreas is through repeated injury by
specific insults in a susceptible patient with genetic risk
factors. Genetic or epigenetic alterations may allow the
nonclinical or clinical repeated injury to occur which
over time results in the destruction of the pancreatic
parenchyma and replacement by fibrosis through
repeated activation of immune and fibrotic responses.
This replacement results in the loss of exocrine and
endocrine pancreatic function. Hereditary pancreatitis is
Inflammatory Response inChronic
Pancreatitis
The secondary phase of progression to CP involves the
inflammatory and fibrotic responses to chronic stress or
repeated injury (Fig. 39.3). Recently, progress has been
made in understanding this aspect of CP. Injury within
the pancreas results in damaged acinar cells that will
either repair or undergo cell death through necrosis or
apoptosis. The damaged cells promote a sterile inflammatory response to mediate the recovery and regeneration process[36]. The inflammatory response is signaled

Molecular Understanding ofChronic Pancreatitis
M1 M2
IL-13
PDGF
Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Universität Bern, Wiley Online Library on [22/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
https://t.me/medicina_free
330
IL-4
IL-13
Activation
Pancreatic injury
TGF-β
PDGF
Activation
Figure39.3 Pancreatic injury activates resident immune cells as well as pancreatic stellate cells to promote pancreatic recovery. However,
persistent injury or pathologic signaling between macrophages and stellate cells leads to persistent activation and fibrogenic
replacement of the pancreatic parenchyma.
by cytokines released from injured acinar cells and mediated by neutrophils, monocytes, lymphocytes, and macrophages which mediate the resolution of the damaged
cells and promote the regeneration of the pancreas[37].
During progression of CP, inflammation appears to be
mediated by different immune cells depending on the
experimental model used [38–40]. Those immune cells
including neutrophils, macrophages, and T- cell subsets
play multiple roles depending upon disease progression
in acute, severe acute, or chronic pancreatitis[38,39,41,42].
These cells will produce additional inflammatory mediators such as TNFα, IL-
1β, Il- 6, IL10, and MCP1. Initially
these signals are produced by damaged acinar cells but
with repeated injury and activation of other resident pancreatic cells such as macrophages and stellate cells, there
appears to be a shift towards cytokine production from
activated immune and stellate cells that promotes and
allows progression towards CP. Neutrophils are thought
to activate trypsinogen and allow progression towards
severe injury in acute pancreatitis; however, in CP, T cells
and macrophages are the predominant immune cell infiltrates[43,44]. Neutrophils and macrophages can play a
dual role during inflammation, either releasing cytokines
such as IFN- g leading to a proinflammatory phenotype
repressing regeneration but are also responsible for repair
signals necessary for regeneration to occur [45]. T cells
TGF-β
PDGF
ActivatedQuiescent
are thought to help control the immunedestruction initiated in CP demonstrated by the secretion
of IL- 10 by these T cells [46]. However, IL- 17 or IL- 22secreting T- cell subset (Th17 or Th22) promotes fibrogenesis by activating pancreatic stellate cells (PSC) and
contributes to the progression of CP[39,47]. Macrophages
can promote healing and regeneration, depending upon
macrophage polarity [48]. However, alternatively activated M2macrophages can play a pathogenic role in CP
in both rodents and humans[38]. Furthermore, pancreatic immune cell analyses using unbiased singleimmune analysis technologies reveal novel diseaserelevant immune subpopulations. Single-cell RNA/T-cell
receptor sequencing analysis of pancreatic immune cells
isolated from pancreatic tissues of CP patients who
underwent total pancreatectomy identified hereditary
versus idiopathic CP-specific novel T cell and myeloid
immune subsets and T cell receptor repertoire changes.
This study provides insights into human CP-specific
immunopathogenic mechanisms and etiology subtypespecific immunotherapeutic targets in CP [49].
Determining unique immune subsets and their signals to
neighbor cells during the disease course that can either
promote or suspend disease progression is critical to a
better understanding of immunopathogenic mechanisms
and identifying novel therapeutic targets for healing.
IL-4
TGF-β
mediated
cell

References 331
Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Universität Bern, Wiley Online Library on [22/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
https://t.me/medicina_free
Fibrogenesis inChronic Pancreatitis
The fibrogenic response during CP is influenced by mesenchymal cells known as the pancreatic stellate cells
(PSC), along with immune cell interactions. PSC have
emerged as a critical player in mediating pancreatic
recovery after injury[50]. PSC are localized to the periacinar region and, at baseline (i.e., the quiescent state),
they are characterized by vitamin A droplets [51]. In
response to injury, PSC undergo transient activation and
take on a fibroblast- like role to secrete extracellular
matrix (ECM), particularly collagen [52,53], which is a
necessary substrate scaffold for proper regeneration and
recovery. The hallmarks of pancreatic injury and recovery are regenerative structures called acinar to ductal
metaplasia (ADM) [54,55]. The stroma surrounding
ADM is composed of activated PSC (aPSC) that function
to remodel ECM and are thought to coax ADM to redifferentiate into new acinar cells. Aberrant regulation of
PSC has been implicated in the pathogenesis of CP and
pancreatic cancer[52,56–58]. PSC are not only activated
by acinar cell injury but can be activated by cellular stress
and ethanol byproducts. TGFβ appears to be a major
contributor to fibrotic properties of PSC by increasing
collagen and fibronectin expression but also by inhibiting metalloproteinases (MMP). Once activated, PSC initially help to remodel the parenchyma through the
removal of matrix proteins by MMP. PSC not only produce MMP but also the inhibitors of MMP called tissue
inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMP). A balance of
these two factors likely affects the progression toward
fibrosis. The destruction of the matrix releases growth
factors and cytokines that signal adjacent cells and stimulate parenchymal healing through interactions of the
immune and exocrine and endocrine pancreatic cells.
PSC not only orchestrate the destruction of matrix but
also help orchestrate the regeneration of the framework
to allow regenerating acinar and duct cells to proliferate
and repopulate the parenchyma. However, if PSC remain
activated through repeated injury to the pancreas or
aberrant cell signaling from adjacent cells such as macrophages, a pathogenic response can ensue. The response
perpetuates the remodeling of the ECM and replaces acinar tissue with fibrosis, leading to the loss of pancreatic
exocrine function. PSC in CP models have been shown
to respond to adjacent macrophages that produce higher
levels of TGFβ and PDGFβ suggesting that the
macrophage-
PSC interaction may be important in regulating pancreatic fibrogenesis [38]. PSC communicate
with cytokine- producing T cells (Th22 and Th17) by
expressing their receptors in order to promote fibrosis in
CP [39,47]. STAT3 activation is a prominent signaling
molecule found in activated PSC, and the inhibition of
the Jak/STAT pathway via ruxolitinib has been shown to
reduce the severity of experimental CP[59], suggesting a
potential therapeutic strategy for CP.
Conclusions
There are several risk factors and progressive steps that
lead to the histopathological disease known as CP. They
include a sentinel pancreatic event in a susceptible host
that perpetuates a progressive low- grade injury. The
injury results in pancreatic fibrosis and loss of physiologic
function. Alternatively, several repeated injury events of
acute pancreatitis may lead to chronic injury and fibrotic
replacement of the pancreatic parenchyma. Several animal models have been developed to help target specific
aspects of injury and disease progression for the study of
CP. Although healthy caution is indicated when using
animal models to mimic disease states in humans, with
careful attention to the limitations of the experimental
model, one may begin to understand aspects of this complex, multifaceted disease. The animal model systems
used most frequently are cost- effective rodent models of
pancreatic injury leading to inflammation and fibrosis
reminiscent of histologic changes in CP (e.g., duct ligation, chemical or biological exposures)[60–65]. However,
for certain etiologies such as CFTR disease, the rodent
models do not mimic the human condition, and other
models (such as the porcine or ferret model for CFTR)
must be used. Genetic models of CP exist and include
overexpression or reduced expression of genes that allow
the histopathologic appearance of CP. Beyond animal
models, our understanding of CP would be enhanced by
the characterization of heterogeneous human microenvironments using unbiased analysis techniques.
References
1 Etemad B, Whitcomb DC. Chronic pancreatitis: diagnosis,
classification, and new genetic developments.
Gastroenterology 2001;120(3):682–707.
2 Shrikhande SV, Martignoni ME, Shrikhande M etal.
Comparison of histological features and inflammatory cell
reaction in alcoholic, idiopathic and tropical chronic
pancreatitis. Br J Surg 2003;90(12):1565–1572.
3 Kubisch CH, Gukovsky I, Lugea A etal. Long- term ethanol
consumption alters pancreatic gene expression in rats: a
possible connection to pancreatic injury. Pancreas
2006;33(1):68–76.
4 Zeng Y, Wang X, Zhang W, Wu K, Ma J. Hypertriglyceridemia
aggravates ER stress and pathogenesis of acute pancreatitis.
Hepatogastroenterology 2012;59(119):2318–2326.

Molecular Understanding ofChronic Pancreatitis
Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Universität Bern, Wiley Online Library on [22/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
https://t.me/medicina_free
332
5 Alahari S, Mehmood R, Johnson CL, Pin CL. The absence
of MIST1leads to increased ethanol sensitivity and
decreased activity of the unfolded protein response in
mouse pancreatic acinar cells. PLoS ONE
2011;6(12):e28863.
6 Crews FT, Nixon K. Mechanisms of neurodegeneration
and regeneration in alcoholism. Alcohol Alcohol
2009;44(2):115–127.
7 Sakharkar AJ, Zhang H, Tang L, Shi G, Pandey SC. Histone
deacetylases (HDAC)-
induced histone modifications in
the amygdala: a role in rapid tolerance to the anxiolytic
effects of ethanol. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2012;36(1):61–71.
8 Eisses JF, Criscimanna A, Dionise ZR etal. Valproic acid
limits pancreatic recovery after pancreatitis by inhibiting
histone deacetylases and preventing acinar
redifferentiation programs. Am J Pathol
2015;185(12):3304–3315.
9 Gerstner T, Busing D, Bell N etal. Valproic acid- induced
pancreatitis: 16new cases and a review of the literature.
JGastroenterol 2007;42(1):39–48.
10 Park A, Latif SU, Shah AU etal. Changing referral trends
of acute pancreatitis in children: a 12-
year single- center
analysis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2009;49(3):316–322.
11 Walker RM, Smith GS, Barsoum NJ, Macallum GE.
Preclinical toxicology of the anticonvulsant calcium
valproate. Toxicology 1990;63(2):137–155.
12 Yadav D, Whitcomb DC. The role of alcohol and smoking
in pancreatitis. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol
2010;7(3):131–145.
13 Coté GA, Yadav D, Slivka A etal. Alcohol and smoking as
risk factors in an epidemiology study of patients with
chronic pancreatitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
2011;9(3):266–273; quiz e27.
14 Papachristou GI, Papachristou DJ, Morinville VD, Slivka
A, Whitcomb DC. Chronic alcohol consumption is a
major risk factor for pancreatic necrosis in acute
pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101(11):2605–2610.
15 Orabi AI, Shah AU, Muili K etal. Ethanol enhances
carbachol-
induced protease activation and accelerates
Ca2+ waves in isolated rat pancreatic acini. J Biol Chem
2011;286(16):14090–14097.
16 Mukherjee R, Criddle DN, Gukovskaya A, Pandol S,
Petersen OH, Sutton R. Mitochondrial injury in
pancreatitis. Cell Calcium 2008;44(1):14–23.
17 Odinokova IV, Sung KF, Mareninova OA etal.
Mechanisms regulating cytochrome c release in pancreatic
mitochondria. Gut 2009;58(3):431–442.
18 Gukovsky I, Gukovskaya AS. Impaired autophagy
underlies key pathological responses of acute pancreatitis.
Autophagy 2010;6(3):428–429.
19 Kubisch CH, Logsdon CD. Endoplasmic reticulum stress
and the pancreatic acinar cell. Expert Rev Gastroenterol
Hepatol 2008;2(2):249–260.
20 Lee AH, Chu GC, Iwakoshi NN, Glimcher LH. XBP- 1 is
required for biogenesis of cellular secretory machinery of
exocrine glands. EMBO J 2005;24(24):4368–4380.
21 Gukovskaya AS, Mouria M, Gukovsky I etal. Ethanol
metabolism and transcription factor activation in
pancreatic acinar cells in rats. Gastroenterology
2002;122(1):106–118.
22 Gorelick FS. Alcohol and zymogen activation in the
pancreatic acinar cell. Pancreas 2003;27(4):305–310.
23 Lu Z, Karne S, Kolodecik T, Gorelick FS. Alcohols enhance
caerulein-
induced zymogen activation in pancreatic acinar
cells. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol
2002;282(3):G501–507.
24 Apte MV, Wilson JS, McCaughan GW etal. Ethanol-
induced alterations in messenger RNA levels correlate
with glandular content of pancreatic enzymes. J Lab Clin
Med 1995;125(5):634–640.
25 Shelton C, Solomon S, LaRusch J, Whitcomb DC.
PRSS1-
related hereditary pancreatitis. In: Adam MP,
Ardinger HH, Pagon RA etal., eds. GeneReviews. Seattle:
University of Washington, 1993.
26 Singhi AD, Pai RK, Kant JA etal. The histopathology of
PRSS1 hereditary pancreatitis. Am J Surg Patho
2014;38(3):346–353.
27 Amann ST, Gates LK, Aston CE, Pandya A, Whitcomb
DC. Expression and penetrance of the hereditary
pancreatitis phenotype in monozygotic twins. Gut
2001;48(4):542–547.
28 Archer H, Jura N, Keller J, Jacobson M, Bar- Sagi D.
Amouse model of hereditary pancreatitis generated
bytransgenic expression of R122H trypsinogen.
Gastroenterology 2006;131(6):1844–1855.
29 Athwal T, Huang W, Mukherjee R etal. Expression of
human cationic trypsinogen (PRSS1) in murine acinar
cells promotes pancreatitis and apoptotic cell death. Cell
Death Dis 2014;5:e1165.
30 Gui F, Zhang Y, Wan J etal. Trypsin activity governs
increased susceptibility to pancreatitis in mice
expressing human PRSS1R122H. J Clin Invest
2020;130(1):189–202.
31 Jancso Z, Sahin- Toth M. Mutation that promotes
activation of trypsinogen increases severity of
secretagogue-
induced pancreatitis in mice.
Gastroenterology 2020;158(4):1083–1094.
32 Selig L, Sack U, Gaiser S etal. Characterisation of a
transgenic mouse expressing R122H human cationic
trypsinogen. BMC Gastroenterol 2006;6:30.
33 Ellison MA, Spagnolo DM, Shelton C etal. Complex
genetics in pancreatitis: insights gained from a new
candidate locus panel. Pancreas 2020;49(7):983–998.
34 Lewis MD, Talluri J, Wilcox CM etal. Differences in age at
onset of symptoms, and effects of genetic variants, in
patients with early vs late- onset idiopathic chronic
pancreatitis in a North American cohort. Clin
Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021;19(2):349–357.
35 Zou WB, Tang XY, Zhou DZ etal. SPINK1, PRSS1, CTRC,
and CFTR genotypes influence disease onset and clinical
outcomes in chronic pancreatitis. Clin Transl
Gastroenterol 2018;9(11):204.

References 333
Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Universität Bern, Wiley Online Library on [22/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
https://t.me/medicina_free
36 Hoque R, Malik AF, Gorelick F, Mehal WZ. Sterile
inflammatory response in acute pancreatitis. Pancreas
2012;41(3):353–357.
37 Bhatia M, Brady M, Shokuhi S, Christmas S, Neoptolemos
JP, Slavin J. Inflammatory mediators in acute pancreatitis.
JPathol 2000;190(2):117–125.
38 Xue J, Sharma V, Hsieh MH etal. Alternatively activated
macrophages promote pancreatic fibrosis in chronic
pancreatitis. Nat Commun 2015;6:7158.
39 Xue J, Zhao Q, Sharma V etal. Aryl hydrocarbon receptor
ligands in cigarette smoke induce production of
interleukin-
22 to promote pancreatic fibrosis in models of
chronic pancreatitis. Gastroenterology
2016;151(6):1206–1217.
40 Sendler M, Beyer G, Mahajan UM etal. Complement
component 5mediates development of fibrosis, via
activation of stellate cells, in 2mouse models of chronic
pancreatitis. Gastroenterology 2015;149(3):765–776.e10.
41 Merza M, Hartman H, Rahman M etal. Neutrophil
extracellular traps induce trypsin activation, inflammation,
and tissue damage in mice with severe acute pancreatitis.
Gastroenterology 2015;149(7):1920–1931.e8.
42 Sendler M, van den Brandt C, Glaubitz J etal.
NLRP3inflammasome regulates development of systemic
inflammatory response and compensatory antiinflammatory response syndromes in mice with acute
pancreatitis. Gastroenterology 2020;158(1):253–269.e14.
43 Goecke H, Forssmann U, Uguccioni M etal.
Macrophages infiltrating the tissue in chronic
pancreatitis express the chemokine receptor CCR5.
Surgery 2000;128(5):806–814.
44 Lee B, Adamska JZ, Namkoong H etal. Distinct immune
characteristics distinguish hereditary and idiopathic
chronic pancreatitis. J Clin Invest 2020;130(5):2705–2711.
45 Folias AE, Penaranda C, Su AL, Bluestone JA, Hebrok M.
Aberrant innate immune activation following tissue injury
impairs pancreatic regeneration. PLoS ONE
2014;9(7):e102125.
46 Schmitz- Winnenthal H, Pietsch DH, Schimmack S etal.
Chronic pancreatitis is associated with disease-
specific
regulatory T- cell responses. Gastroenterology
2010;138(3):1178–1188.
47 Zhao Q, Manohar M, Wei Y, Pandol SJ, Habtezion A.
STING signalling protects against chronic pancreatitis by
modulating Th17 response. Gut 2019;68(10):1827–1837.
48 Criscimanna A, Coudriet GM, Gittes GK, Piganelli JD,
Esni F. Activated macrophages create lineage-
specific
microenvironments for pancreatic acinar- and β- cell
regeneration in mice. Gastroenterology 2014;147(5):
1106–1118.e11.
49 Lee B, Namkoong H, Yang Y etal. Single- cell sequencing
unveils distinct immune microenvironments with
CCR6- CCL20 crosstalk in human chronic pancreatitis.
Gut 2022;71(9):1831–1842.
50 Apte MV, Pirola RC, Wilson JS. Pancreatic stellate cells: a
starring role in normal and diseased pancreas. Front
Physiol 2012;3:344.
51 Vonlaufen A, Phillips PA, Yang L etal. Isolation of
quiescent human pancreatic stellate cells: a promising
invitro tool for studies of human pancreatic stellate cell
biology. Pancreatology 2010;10(4):434–443.
52 Erkan M, Adler G, Apte MV etal. StellaTUM: current
consensus and discussion on pancreatic stellate cell
research. Gut 2012;61(2):172–178.
53 Masamune A, Shimosegawa T. Pancreatic stellate
- multi- functional cells in the pancreas. Pancreatology
cells2013;13(2):102–105.
54 Pin CL, Ryan JF, Mehmood R. Acinar cell reprogramming:
a clinically important target in pancreatic disease.
Epigenomics 2015;7(2):267–281.
55 Reichert M, Rustgi AK. Pancreatic ductal cells in
development, regeneration, and neoplasia. J Clin Invest
2011;121(12):4572–4578.
56 Algul H, Treiber M, Lesina M, Schmid RM. Mechanisms
of disease: chronic inflammation and cancer in the
pancreas- - a potential role for pancreatic stellate cells? Nat
Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007;4(8):454–462.
57 Apte M, Pirola R, Wilson J. The fibrosis of chronic
pancreatitis: new insights into the role of pancreatic stellate
cells. Antioxid Redox Signal 2011;15(10):2711–2722.
58 Omary MB, Lugea A, Lowe AW, Pandol SJ. The pancreatic
stellate cell: a star on the rise in pancreatic diseases. J Clin
Invest 2007;117(1):50–59.
59 Komar HM, Serpa G, Kerscher C etal. Inhibition of Jak/
STAT signaling reduces the activation of pancreatic
stellate cells invitro and limits caerulein- induced chronic
pancreatitis invivo. Sci Rep 2017;7(1):1787.
60 Lombardi B, Estes LW, Longnecker DS. Acute
hemorrhagic pancreatitis (massive necrosis) with fat
necrosis induced in mice by DL- ethionine fed with a
choline-
61 Sah RP, Dudeja V, Dawra RK, Saluja AK. Cerulein- induced
chronic pancreatitis does not require intra-
deficient diet. Am J Pathol 1975;79(3):465–480.
acinar
activation of trypsinogen in mice. Gastroenterology
2013;144(5):107–185.e2.
62 Sparmann G, Merkord J, Jaschke A etal. Pancreatic
fibrosis in experimental pancreatitis induced by dibutyltin
dichloride. Gastroenterology 1997;112(5):1664–1672.
63 Vonlaufen A, Phillips PA, Xu Z etal. Withdrawal of
alcohol promotes regression while continued alcohol
intake promotes persistence of LPS-
induced pancreatic
injury in alcohol- fed rats. Gut 2011;60(2):238–246.
64 Yamamoto M, Otani M, Otsuki M. A new model of
chronic pancreatitis in rats. Am J Physiol Gastrointest
Liver Physiol 2006;291(4):G700–708.
65 Zhang YF, Deng HL, Fu J, Zhang Y, Wei JQ. Pancreatitis in
hand- foot- and- mouth disease caused by enterovirus 71.
World J Gastroenterol 2016;22(6):2149–2152.

334
Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Universität Bern, Wiley Online Library on [22/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
https://t.me/medicina_free
40
Natural History ofRecurrent Acute andChronic Pancreatitis
Rohit Das1, Jorge D. Machicado2, and Dhiraj Yadav
1
Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
2
Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
1
Introduction
Pancreatitis, especially chronic, is a low prevalence disease. Consequently, the focus of epidemiologic studies of
pancreatitis has primarily been to define the disease at the
level of individual patients. In the past two decades, the
importance of understanding the distribution of risk factors and disease at the population level has been recognized. This has enabled determination of disease estimates
and understand the relationship between acute pancreatitis (AP) and chronic pancreatitis (CP) at the population
level. Demonstration that subsets of patients with AP
develop recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP) and/or progress to CP provides empiric evidence that these conditions represent stages of a disease continuum. Knowledge
of the risks and factors associated with disease progression will help in risk stratification, prediction, and developing strategies for altering the natural history of disease.
This chapter will focus on the burden of disease, natural course and survival of AP, RAP, and CP. For AP, the
emphasis will not be on the severity and outcome of the
initial attack, but rather the risk of readmissions, recurrences, and progression to CP. In CP, the prevalence and
natural history of clinical features, i.e., pain, endocrine
and exocrine insufficiency, bone health, and the risk of
pancreatic cancer will be discussed. Finally, we will summarize available data on the quality of life.
Natural History After First Attack ofAP
Disease Burden, Etiology, andSeverity
AP is one of the leading gastrointestinal causes of hospitalization in the United States [1]. The estimated incidence of AP in recent studies is 30–50 per 100,000
population. AP affects all age groups, but is most frequent
in middle-
aged and older individuals[2]. Gallstones and
excessive alcohol consumption account for about 60–70%
of all cases, the latter being more common in men when
compared to women. Other etiologies include metabolic
factors (hypertriglyceridemia, hypercalcemia), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP),
medications, genetic mutations (PRSS1, SPINK1, CFTR,
CTRC), obstructive causes (such as pancreatic duct stricture, etc.), and trauma. In 10–25% patients no identifiable
etiology is found on evaluation[2]. The two main determinants of mortality in AP are the presence of infected
necrosis and organ failure, especially when persistent
(>48 h) or involving more than one organ[3]. The risk of
death increases with age and comorbidities[4]. Increased
morbidity is seen in patients with local complications
who do not have organ failure[5].
Readmissions
After the first attack of AP, about 20–30% patients are
readmitted to hospital (Table40.1). The reason for readmission differs based on time since discharge from the
hospital. Vipperla etal.[6] differentiated between early
(<30days after index AP) and late (>30days) readmissions and found that early readmissions were more likely
due to smoldering symptoms from AP and/or local complications, whereas late admissions were more likely to
be due from recurrent AP episodes. Younger age, alcohol
use and/or alcohol-
related etiology, non- private medical
insurance, increased length of stay during index admission, and discharge to long- term care facilities have been
identified as predictors of readmissions[6–8].
The Pancreatitis Activity Scoring System (PASS) was
developed in 2017 as a tool to measure disease activity
The Pancreas: An Integrated Textbook of Basic Science, Medicine, and Surgery, Fourth Edition. Edited by Hans G. Beger, Markus W. Büchler,
RalphH. Hruban, Julia Mayerle, John P. Neoptolemos, Tooru Shimosegawa, Andrew L. Warshaw, David C. Whitcomb, and Yupei Zhao.
© 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Published 2023 by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Companion website: www.wiley.com/go/beger/thepancreas4e

Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Universität Bern, Wiley Online Library on [22/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
https://t.me/medicina_free
Table40.1 Summary ofrecent studies examining rates andrisk factors forreadmission after afirst attack ofacute pancreatitis.
Readmission rate (%)
Author, year, design Cohort size Follow- up time (months)
Yadav etal., 2014[7]
Retrospective
Vipperla etal.,
2014[6]
Retrospective
Garg etal., 2018[8]
Retrospective
CP: chronic pancreatitis.
5239 39.0 22 40 15 32 Unclear Younger age Alcoholic etiology
127 36.0 34 60 29 59 1.3 Younger age Male gender
243816 Unclear 16 Not stated Unclear Younger age
Time to readmission
(months) Risk factors for readmissionOverall Alcoholic Biliary Idiopathic
Subsequent diagnosis of CP
Alcoholic or idiopathic etiology
Severe disease at index attack
private medical insurance
NonDischarge to longfacilities
Increased length of stay
term care

Natural History ofRecurrent Acute andChronic Pancreatitis
Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Universität Bern, Wiley Online Library on [22/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
https://t.me/medicina_free
336
and better predict the prognosis of AP. PASS incorporates organ failure, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), abdominal pain, opiate requirement and
diet tolerance, with each component having a different
weight according to their prognostic importance[9]. In a
prospective study examining the predictive utility of
PASS, a score of >60was highly associated with readmission within 30days of AP discharge[10].
These data suggest that focused discharge planning
may reduce the risk of early readmissions— i.e., ensuring
that the patients’ symptoms are well controlled and they
have received counseling for behavior modification. In
patients with severe AP, close follow- up with relevant
specialists (e.g., nutrition, gastroenterologist, surgeon) is
helpful to determine the need and timing of crosssectional imaging, duration of enteral feeds, and “step up” therapy. Many patients with severe AP need
short- term stay at a transitional care facility or rehabilitation unit prior to safe discharge home.
First Recurrence
The risk of recurrent AP (RAP) after the first attack has
been evaluated in several, mostly retrospective, population and nonpopulation based studies (Table40.2). The
overall risk of a subsequent attack of AP is ~20% during
a median follow- up period ranging from 4 to 8 years.
Similar to the first attack, among patients with a second
attack of AP, alcohol, gallstones, and idiopathic are the
most common etiologies[11–13]. When compared with
the first attack of AP, subsequent recurrence is generally
milder with an overall lower mortality[14].
The risk of recurrent attack is highest among patients
with alcohol etiology (35–40%) followed by idiopathic
and biliary AP (both 10–20%)[11–13]. Takeyama etal.
noted that the risk of subsequent recurrence was directly
related to continued alcohol consumption— the risk was
highest in patients who continued drinking at the same
level, and lowest among patients who stopped drinking
completely[15]. Contrary to what many physicians may
believe, counseling against alcohol consumption has a
significant impact on patient behavior. This was tested
empirically in a randomized controlled trial (RCT),
where repeated counseling of patients led to a significant
decrease in the risk of abdominal pain attacks, AP episodes and hospitalizations[16].
After an attack of biliary pancreatitis, the risk of recurrence can be dramatically reduced by early cholecystectomy. This has been demonstrated in RCTs, as well as in
meta- analyses of published data [17]. In patients with
mild biliary pancreatitis, cholecystectomy should be considered as close to the attack of AP as possible, preferably
during the same admission. In patients with severe AP,
cholecystectomy should be delayed until resolution of
inflammatory changes in the pancreas/pancreatic area. In
patients with pancreatic/peripancreatic collections that
need drainage, a surgical approach (preferably laparoscopic or minimally invasive) to address this along with a
cholecystectomy should be considered [18]. In patients
with another known etiology, i.e., medications, hypertriglyceridemia, hypercalcemia, etc., addressing the inciting
cause will decrease the risk of recurrence[19].
Tobacco abuse has been a consistent association with
the risk of recurrent AP (odds ratio 1.5–2) [11,13,20].
Therefore, after an attack of AP, patients should be
informed about this risk and counseled for tobacco cessation. This will be especially relevant in patients in
whom the cause was alcohol, hypertriglyceridemia,
genetic or idiopathic, or if the AP attack was moderate to
severe. Individual studies have also shown that age and
severity of initial attack may also play a role in recurrent
attacks[11,13,20].
The burden of recurrent AP at a population level is not
well defined. Using information on the total number of
admissions for AP in the USA and applying the incident
AP rates from California, approximate number of recurrent attacks can be estimated[1,21]. Among the 275,000
annual admissions for AP in the USA, approximately
150,000–160,000 would be incident attacks, while the
remaining 115,000–125,000would represent RAP (first
or subsequent recurrences), readmissions for ongoing
symptoms or complications of AP, or acute CP.
Subsequent Recurrences
Alcohol is the most common etiology of subsequent
recurrences, followed by idiopathic pancreatitis, genetic
causes, hypertriglyceridemia, and underlying CP as
other important causes. The role of pancreas divisum
and sphincter of Oddi dysfunction in causing initial or
recurrent AP attacks is controversial[22].
Approximately one- third of patients who have a recurrence after the first attack of AP will have one or more
subsequent recurrences. Burden of recurrent AP was
further quantified in in two previous studies. Among 562
patients with a first attack of alcoholic AP who survived
the index admission, Sand et al. reported at least one
recurrence in 260 (46%) patients. Among these patients,
133 (51%) had only one recurrence, 49 (19%) had two
recurrences, 39 (15%) had three recurrences, and 39
(15%) had four or more recurrences[23]. Among patients
who underwent a cholecystectomy for presumed biliary
pancreatitis, Trna et al. noted the risk of subsequent
attacks to be related to the presence of abnormal liver
function tests and documentation of gallbladder stones
or sludge. Among patients who did not have either, 26%
had a second attack, and 9% had a third attack of AP[24].
Although few empiric data is available, the risk of

Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Universität Bern, Wiley Online Library on [22/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
https://t.me/medicina_free
Table40.2 Summary ofrecent studies examining therate andrisk factors fordevelopment ofrecurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP) after afirst attack ofacute pancreatitis.
RAP rate (%)
Follow- up
Author, year Cohort size
Lankisch etal., 2009[12] Prospective 532 8.0 17 33 12 14 Unclear Younger age Alcoholic
Yadav etal., 2012[13] Retrospective 7456 3.3 29 52 18 26 7.2 Younger age Alcoholic
Bertilsson etal., 2015[11] Retrospective 1457 4.2 23 37 17 24 5.1 Alcoholic etiology Severe
Ahmed Ali etal., 2016[20] Prospective 669 4.8 17 Not stated 5.0 Younger age Idiopathic
time (years)
Time to recurrence
(months) Risk factors for RAPOverall Alcoholic Biliary Idiopathic
etiology Male gender
etiology Tobacco use
disease at index attack
Tobacco use
etiology Tobacco abuse
Severe disease at index attack

Natural History ofRecurrent Acute andChronic Pancreatitis
Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Universität Bern, Wiley Online Library on [22/08/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
https://t.me/medicina_free
338
multiple attacks of AP seems high in patients with
genetic mutations (e.g., PRSS1, CFTR)[25]. The risk of
recurrences would also be higher in patients with uncommon causes of AP, such as hypertriglyceridemia, hypercalcemia, etc., especially if the underlying cause is not
corrected, but definitive data on the burden of attacks in
these patients is limited.
Diabetes andExocrine Insufficiency After AP
Recent data have documented that AP increases the risk
of diabetes mellitus (DM) and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) irrespective of severity. In two populationbased studies patients with mild AP were about two
times more likely to develop DM than age- and sexmatched controls[26,27]. In a systematic review of 24
prospective studies, the pooled prevalence of newly
diagnosed DM after the first episode of AP was reported
to be 23% (95% CI 16–31%), and increased with the duration of follow-
up[28]. The risk of DM after AP is greater
in patients with severe AP, necrotizing pancreatitis and
in those with alcohol etiology. The mechanisms leading
to DM are not well defined.
With regards to EPI, a meta- analysis of 39 studies
reported that the pooled prevalence of EPI after an index
episode of AP was 35% and the prevalence was greater
during the time of AP hospitalization [29]. The risk of
EPI increased with disease severity, presence of necrosis,
and alcohol etiology.
disease progression have been alcohol etiology, tobacco
abuse, and RAP. The association with severity of AP is
less consistent and has been noted in some studies.
Lankisch etal. noted that progression to CP occurred
almost exclusively in patients with alcohol etiology[12].
However, in other studies progression was also noted
with nonalcoholic or idiopathic CP, albeit at a lower rate.
The role of tobacco, especially in combination with alcohol in disease progression is important. Ali etal. reported
that while the cumulative risk of progression to CP overall was 7.6%, it was 18% among current smokers, and
increased to 30% in current smokers who also had alcohol etiology[20]. Therefore, including the counseling of
tobacco cessation along with alcohol abstinence should
be emphasized. Genetic factors also seem to play a role
in the development of CP, but outside of hereditary pancreatitis, little empiric data is available[25].
Perhaps the strongest risk factor for disease progression is RAP, and the risk of progression in these patients
is ~30–40%. Bertilsson etal. noted that among patients
who transitioned to CP, 74% had at least two AP attacks,
and 54% had more than two attacks. When compared
with alcohol or tobacco (hazard ratio between 2 and 3),
the risk of progression to CP in RAP is much higher
(hazard ratio ~6)[11].
Natural History ofChronic
Pancreatitis
Quality ofLife After AP
Several studies have demonstrated that AP deleteriously
impacts quality of life. In a single- center prospective
study of 91 patients, patients who experienced AP had a
significantly lower physical healthcare- related quality of
life (HRQOL) as compared to controls even after
14 months of AP [30]. Factors associated with lower
physical HRQOL included the presence of ongoing
abdominal pain and use of analgesics, disability, and
smoking. Multiorgan failure was the only disease- related
factor associated with a lower physical HRQOL.
Progression toCP
Many studies evaluating the natural history after a first
attack of AP have determined the risk of progression to
CP (Table40.3)[11–13,20]. In a meta- analysis of 14 studies consisting of 8492 patients, Sankaran etal. reported
that following a sentinel attack of AP the pooled prevalence of RAP was 22% (38% for alcohol etiology, 17% for
biliary etiology) and of CP was 10%[31]. The three factors consistently shown to have an independent effect on
Disease Burden, Demographics, andEtiology
Recent population studies estimate that the incidence
of CP ranges from 4 to 14 per 100,000 per year, and the
prevalence ranges from 42 to 73 per 100,000 population[19,32]. The prevalence of CP peaks at the age of
45–55 years and has a male predominance[32]. Alcohol
is the most common cause of CP worldwide (frequency
~40–70%), followed by idiopathic etiology (frequency
~20–30%)[19]. Smoking is a well-
recognized factor for
CP and works in a dose- dependent manner— the risk of
CP is fivefold greater in those smoking over 35 packyears compared to never smokers [33]. The role of
genetic factors is increasingly recognized and mutations in some susceptibility genes (PRSS1, SPINK1,
CFTR, CTRC, CPA, CASR) are found in 10–15% of CP
patients. Alcoholic CP is seen more commonly in men,
while the other etiologies are more evenly distributed
in both sexes[33]. The diagnosis of CP is preceded by
AP in at least 50% of patients[34]. This has been well
demonstrated in patients with hereditary and alcoholic
CP, in whom AP precedes the progression of CP by
10years[19].
Соседние файлы в папке @xirurgi_2025
