Diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis. Is a gold standard necessary?

Abstract

The question that serves as this article's title is rhetorical. Clinicians have diagnosed and managed chronic pancreatitis without a gold standard for decades and must continue to do so in the foreseeable future. Although clinicians have a much wider array of diagnostic tools available for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis, a single readily applied gold standard remains elusive. Diagnostic studies are rarely compared with a true gold standard--histopathology. Furthermore, even if a safe biopsy technique were available, it might fall short of a gold standard, given the patchy nature of early-stage chronic pancreatitis. Indeed, different stages of chronic pancreatitis require not only recognition of the different clinical presentations but also different levels of intensity of diagnostic testing to establish the diagnosis confidently. The diagnosis in most patients with chronic pancreatitis can be made confidently with a good clinical history and a limited number of currently available structural and functional tests. No single diagnostic study, functional or structural, suffices for all patients. It is also axiomatic that patients with intractable abdominal pain in whom early-stage chronic pancreatitis is suspected represent a challenge for clinicians partly because of this lack of a single, dependable gold standard. Perhaps we have reached the point at which further refinements of current tests of structure or function are not beneficial because increased sensitivity is countered by loss of specificity. We suggest that a new approach to developing a gold standard for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis is necessary. With advances in the understanding of the mediators of the inflammatory process, it may be possible to devise a test to assess the earliest events in this disease.