Diagnosing Chronic Pancreatitis: Comparison and Evaluation of Different Diagnostic Tools.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the M-ANNHEIM, Büchler, and Lüneburg diagnostic tools for chronic pancreatitis (CP).

METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of the development of CP was performed in a prospectively collected multicenter cohort including 669 patients after a first episode of acute pancreatitis. We compared the individual components of the M-ANNHEIM, Büchler, and Lüneburg tools, the agreement between tools, and estimated diagnostic accuracy using Bayesian latent-class analysis.

RESULTS: A total of 669 patients with acute pancreatitis followed-up for a median period of 57 (interquartile range, 42-70) months were included. Chronic pancreatitis was diagnosed in 50 patients (7%), 59 patients (9%), and 61 patients (9%) by the M-ANNHEIM, Lüneburg, and Büchler tools, respectively. The overall agreement between these tools was substantial (κ = 0.75). Differences between the tools regarding the following criteria led to significant changes in the total number of diagnoses of CP: abdominal pain, recurrent pancreatitis, moderate to marked ductal lesions, endocrine and exocrine insufficiency, pancreatic calcifications, and pancreatic pseudocysts. The Büchler tool had the highest sensitivity (94%), followed by the M-ANNHEIM (87%), and finally the Lüneburg tool (81%).

CONCLUSIONS: Differences between diagnostic tools for CP are mainly attributed to presence of clinical symptoms, endocrine insufficiency, and certain morphological complications.