Impact of the site of necrosis on outcome of acute pancreatitis

Does the site, size, and number of necrotic collections affect the outcome of necrotizing pancreatitis? - a prospective analysis

PURPOSE

In patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP), the site, size, and the number of acute necrotic collections (ANC) may determine the outcome of patients. The current study aimed to correlate the nature of ANC with the adverse outcomes in ANP patients.

METHODS

This was a single-center, prospective study (August 2019-August 2022) recruiting patients with ANP, correlating the site, size, and number of ANC with the length of hospital stay, intensive care unit (ICU) stays, development of organ failure and infection, need for intervention, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients (mean age: 37.3 ± 13.4 years, 85.1% males) with ANP were included in the study. The number and maximum diameter of collections significantly correlated with the length of the hospital and ICU stay and the need for intervention. Taking a cut-off size of 8 cm, the sensitivity and specificity for predicting the need for intervention were 82.7% and 74.2%, respectively. ANCs located in the perinephric, paracolic, subhepatic, and epigastric regions had a significant correlation with two or more adverse outcomes. Additional points were added to the modified CT severity index (mCTSI) based on the present study's findings. The new score had significantly higher AUROC than mCTSI for predicting infection, need for intervention, ICU stay > 1 week, and mortality.

CONCLUSION

The site, size, and number of EPNs have a significant correlation with adverse clinical outcomes in patients with ANP. The inclusion of these parameters, along with present scoring systems, will help further improve the prognostication of patients.

Endoscopic management of pancreatic collections. Endoscopic Ultrasound Group from the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (GSEED-USE) Clinical Guidelines

Acute pancreatitis is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. It can develop complications such as fluid collections and necrosis. Infection of necrosis occurs in about 20-40% of patients with severe acute pancreatitis, and is associated with organ failure and worse prognosis. In the past years, the treatment of pancreatic collections has shifted from open surgery to minimally invasive techniques, such as endoscopic ultrasound guided drainage. These guidelines from a selection of experts among the Endoscopic Ultrasound Group from the Spanish Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (GSEED-USE) have the purpose to provide advice on the management of pancreatic collections based on a thorough review of the available scientific evidence. It also reflects the experience and clinical practice of the authors, who are advanced endoscopists or clinical pancreatologists with extensive experience in managing patients with acute pancreatitis.

Unusual Sites of Necrotic Collections in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis: Association with Parenchymal Necrosis and Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The presence of necrotic collection in acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) at intra-abdominal sites other than the retroperitoneum has not been systematically studied.

AIM

To investigate unusual sites of necrotic collections at computed tomography (CT) and to evaluate association with pancreatic necrosis and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective study comprised of consecutive patients with ANP evaluated between January 2018 and March 2019. Based on CT findings, patients were divided into two groups: collections at unusual sites (small bowel mesentery, mesocolon, omentum, subcapsular collections along liver and spleen, pelvis, anterior abdominal wall, and inguinoscrotal regions) and collections at usual retroperitoneal locations (lesser sac, gastrosplenic location, anterior and posterior pararenal spaces, and paracolic gutters). The differences in CT findings and clinical outcomes (need for drainage, length of hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, surgery, and death) between the two groups were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 75 patients with ANP were evaluated. There were 25 (33.3%) patients with collections in unusual locations. These included mesentery (n = 17), splenic subcapsular location (n = 7), omentum (n = 6), hepatic subcapsular location (n = 4), anterior abdominal wall (n = 3), pelvis (n = 2), and inguinoscrotal location (n = 1). Compared to patients with collections at usual locations (n = 50), there were no differences in the CT findings except complete parenchymal necrosis (32% vs. 0%, P = .001). There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical outcomes between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Mesenteric collections are frequent in ANP. The other non-retroperitoneal sites are infrequently involved. There is no association between unusual sites of collection and clinical outcomes.

Assessment of the course of acute pancreatitis in the light of aetiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The main causes of acute pancreatitis (AP) are biliary disease, alcohol consumption, hypertriglyceridaemia (HTG) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of these aetiological factors on the severity and outcome of AP. Pubmed and Embase were searched between 01/01/2012 and 31/05/2020. Included articles involved adult alcoholic, biliary, HTG- or post-ERCP AP (PAP) patients. Primary outcome was severity, secondary outcomes were organ failures, intensive care unit admission, recurrence rate, pancreatic necrosis, mortality, length of hospital stay, pseudocyst, fluid collection and systematic inflammatory response syndrome. Data were analysed from 127 eligible studies. The risk for non-mild (moderately severe and severe) condition was the highest in HTG-induced AP (HTG-AP) followed by alcoholic AP (AAP), biliary AP (BAP) and PAP. Recurrence rate was significantly lower among BAP vs. HTG-AP or AAP patients (OR = 2.69 and 2.98, 95% CI 1.55–4.65 and 2.22–4.01, respectively). Mortality rate was significantly greater in HTG-AP vs. AAP or BAP (OR = 1.72 and 1.50, 95% CI 1.04–2.84 and 0.96–2.35, respectively), pancreatic necrosis occurred more frequently in AAP than BAP patients (OR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.08–2.30). Overall, there is a potential association between aetiology and the development and course of AP. HTG-AP is associated with the highest number of complications. Furthermore, AAP is likely to be more severe than BAP or PAP. Greater emphasis should be placed on determining aetiology on admission.

Site and size of extrapancreatic necrosis are associated with clinical outcomes in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The site and size of extrapancreatic necrosis (EPN) as assessed on computed tomography may influence the severity of acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP). The objective of the study was to evaluate the impact of site and size of EPN on the clinical outcomes in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP).

METHOD AND MATERIALS

This retrospective study comprised of consecutive patients with ANP who were admitted between January 2017 and March 2019. Patients in whom the initial contrast enhanced CT showed EPN were eligible for inclusion. The site, volume and maximum dimension of EPN were recorded. The severity of AP and modified CT severity index (MCTSI) was calculated. Clinical outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients (mean age, 37.56 years, 91 males) were included. There was a significant association between the location of EPN and the outcome parameters. The left posterior pararenal collections were significantly associated with mortality (P = 0.041), left paracolic gutter collections with the length of hospitalisation (LOH) (P = 0.014), and right paracolic gutter and mesenteric collections with the intensive care unit (ICU) stay (P = 0.024, and P = 0.021, respectively). There was a significant correlation between the volume and the maximum dimension of collection with LOH and ICU stay. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for volume, maximum dimension and MCTSI for predicting death was 0.724 (95% CI, 0.612-0.837), 0.644 (95% CI, 0.516-0.772) and 0.574 (95% CI, 0.452-0.696), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The site and size of EPN provide reliable and objective information for assessing clinical outcomes in patients with ANP.

Isolated peripancreatic necrosis (PPN) is associated with better clinical outcomes compared with combined pancreatic and peripancreatic involvement (CPN)- a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Peripancreatic necrosis (PPN) is considered as a distinct entity with a better outcome when compared with combined pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis (CPN), but there is no systematic review to summarize the evidence. Our study aimed to perform a meta-analysis of existing observational studies comparing the outcomes of PPN with CPN.

METHODS

Studies in adult patients comparing the outcomes of PPN and CPN from PubMed, Medline, and Scopus databases from inception to November 2018 were systematically searched. The primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcomes included multi-organ failure, persistent organ failure, infected necrosis, need for interventions including open necrosectomy. Pooled adjusted odds ratios, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were obtained by the random-effects model. Forrest plots were constructed to show the summary pooled estimate. Heterogeneity was assessed by using I2 measure of inconsistency.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies involving 1851 patients (1295 (70%) with CPN and 556 (30%) with PPN) were included. Patients with CPN had a significantly higher mortality (OR 2.49, 95% CI: 1.61-3.87), risk for multi-organ failure (OR 3.24, 95% CI: 2.38-4.43), persistent organ failure (OR 2.79, 95% CI: 1.53-5.08), and infected necrosis (OR 6.21, 95% CI: 3.85-10.03). They underwent more interventions (OR 5.86, 95% CI: 3.69-9.32), including open necrosectomy (OR 5.04, 95% CI: 3.33-7.63). Heterogeneity was low (I2 = 18.1, p = 0.296), and there was no publication bias.

CONCLUSION

Isolated peripancreatic necrosis portends an overall better prognosis when compared to necrosis involves pancreatic parenchyma. Clinicians should recognize this distinction for management decisions.