Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-induced and non-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-induced acute pancreatitis: Two distinct clinical and immunological entities?

Table 2 Differences in post-endoscopic pancreatitis vs non- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography induced acute pancreatitis clinical presentation

	PEP	non-ERCP-induced AP	Conclusion
Fung et al[10] ERCP-induced acute necrotising pancreatitis vs ANP induced by other causes	Higher APACHE II scores on admission	Lower APACHE II scores on admission	ANP is more severe when ERCP-induced
	More extensive pancreatic necrosis	Less extensive pancreatic necrosis
	Higher rate of infected necrosis	Lower rate of infected necrosis
Testoni et al[12] ERCP induced AP vs non ERCP induced AP	No statistical difference: severity of the pancreatitis mortality rate (double in severe PEP) hospitalisation
	In mild form serum amylase fell 50% in 38.9 h. Peak serum amylase halved within 48 h in 92%	In mild form serum amylase fell 50% in 46, 4 h. Peak serum amylase halved within 48 h in 73.6%	Statistical difference (P < 0.001) Mild form of PEP a sort of pancreatic reaction, instead of true episode of acute pancreatitis
Abid et al[9] Mild form: ERCP induced AP vs non ERCP induced AP	Shorter duration of pain; Shorter time of intravenous hydration; Shorter time to resumption of oral diet; Shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001)		ERCP-induced AP mild attacks run a significantly shorter and milder course than non-ERCP related mild attacks

PEP: Post-endoscopic pancreatitis; ERCP: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; AP: Acute pancreatitis.