Human pancreatic tissue concentration of bactericidal antibiotics

Appropriate Use of Antibiotics in Acute Pancreatitis: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

While selective use of antibiotics for infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) in acute pancreatitis (AP) is recommended, studies indicate a high rate of inadequate treatment.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases was conducted, focusing on primary research and meta-analyses. Data were categorized based on core concepts, and a narrative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

The search identified a total of 1016 publications. After evaluating 203 full texts and additional sources from the grey literature, 80 studies were included in the review. The answers obtained were: (1) Preventive treatment does not decrease the incidence of IPN or mortality. Given the risks of bacterial resistance and fungal infections, antibiotics should be reserved for highly suspected or confirmed IPN; (2) The diagnosis of IPN does not always require microbiological samples, as clinical suspicion or computed tomography signs can suffice. Early diagnosis and treatment may be improved by using biomarkers such as procalcitonin and novel microbiological methods; (3) When indicated, early initiation of antibiotics is a key determinant in reducing mortality associated with IPN; (4) Antibiotics with good penetration into pancreatic tissue covering Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria should be used. Routine antifungal therapy is not recommended; (5) The step-up approach, including antibiotics, is the standard for IPN management; (6) Antibiotic duration should be kept to a minimum and should be based on the quality of source control and patient condition.

CONCLUSIONS

Early antibiotic therapy is essential for the treatment of IPN, but prophylactic antibiotics are not recommended in AP. High-quality randomized controlled trials are required to better understand the role of antibiotics and antifungals in AP management.

Guidelines for Antibiotics Prescription in Critically Ill Patients

How to cite this article: Khilnani GC, Tiwari P, Mittal S, Kulkarni AP, Chaudhry D, Zirpe KG, et al. Guidelines for Antibiotics Prescription in Critically Ill Patients. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(S2):S104-S216.

Meropenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam for the treatment of pancreatic necrosis

PURPOSE

To date, there are three published guidelines discussing management of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) with conflicting recommendations. Specifically, The World Society of Emergency Surgery lists piperacillin-tazobactam as a treatment option in addition to meropenem and ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole. Piperacillin-tazobactam may serve as an effective carbapenem-sparing alternative. Although previous studies shed light on antimicrobial penetration data, there is a lack of clinical data comparing piperacillin-tazobactam to meropenem. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of meropenem and piperacillin-tazobactam for the treatment of IPN.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study conducted across three institutions. Patients with IPN who received either meropenem or piperacillin-tazobactam from January 2015 to December 2020 were included. The primary composite outcome was the incidence of 90-day clinical failure, which encompassed 90-day all-cause mortality and 90-day intra-abdominal infection recurrence. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, antimicrobial duration of therapy, and the need for surgical intervention.

RESULTS

We identified 229 patients with IPN that received either meropenem or piperacillin-tazobactam during hospital admission. After screening, 63 patients were included in the study. Incidence of 90-day clinical failure was observed in 33 % of the meropenem group and 50 % in the piperacillin-tazobactam group (OR, 1.98; 95 % CI 0.57 to 7.01, p = 0.259). The meropenem group had a lower incidence of 90-day infection recurrence in the piperacillin-tazobactam group (56 % vs 29 %, p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

Piperacillin-tazobactam may be an efficacious carbapenem-sparing treatment alternative for infected pancreatic necrosis.

Selective and Concentrative Enteropancreatic Recirculation of Antibiotics by Pigs

Antibiotics that are efficacious for infectious pancreatitis are present in pancreatic exocrine secretion (PES) after intravenous administration and above minimal inhibitory concentrations. We measured concentrations of four antibiotics by tandem liquid chromatography-mass spectroscopy in plasma and PES after enteral administration to juvenile pigs with jugular catheters and re-entrant pancreatic-duodenal catheters. Nystatin, which is not absorbed by the intestine nor used for infectious pancreatitis (negative control), was not detected in plasma or PES. Concentrations of amoxicillin increased in plasma after administration (p = 0.035), but not in PES (p = 0.51). Metronidazole and enrofloxacin that are used for infectious pancreatitis increased in plasma after enteral administration and even more so in PES, with concentrations in PES averaging 3.1 (±0.5)- and 2.3 (±0.6)-fold higher than in plasma, respectively (p's < 0.001). The increase in enrofloxacin in PES relative to plasma was lower after intramuscular administration (1.8 ± 0.5; p = 0.001). The present results demonstrate the presence of a selective and concentrative enteropancreatic pathway of secretion for some antibiotics. Unlike the regulated secretion of bile, the constitutive secretion of PES and intestinal reabsorption may provide a continuous exposure of pancreas tissue and the small intestine to recirculated antibiotics and potentially other therapeutic molecules. There is a need to better understand the enteropancreatic recirculation of antibiotics and the associated mechanisms.

Effect of early antibiotic treatment strategy on prognosis of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic use in the early stages of acute pancreatitis is controversial. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of early antibiotic application on the prognosis of acute pancreatitis (AP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical data of patients with primary AP admitted to our emergency ward within 72 hours of onset were retrospectively collected from January 2016 to December 2020. We classified patients with acute pancreatitis according to etiology and disease severity, and compared the differences in hospital stay, laparotomy rate, and in-hospital mortality among AP patients who received different antibiotic treatment strategies within 72 hours of onset.

RESULTS

A total of 1134 cases were included, with 681 (60.1%) receiving early antibiotic treatment and 453 (39.9%) not receiving it. There were no significant differences in baseline values and outcomes between the two groups. In subgroup analysis, patients with biliary severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) who received early antibiotics had lower rates of laparotomy and invasive mechanical ventilation, as well as shorter hospital stays compared to those who did not receive antibiotics. In logistic regression analysis, the early administration of carbapenem antibiotics in biliary SAP patients was associated with a lower in-hospital mortality rate. Early antibiotic use in biliary moderate-severe acute pancreatitis (MSAP) reduced hospital stays and in-hospital mortality. Quinolone combined with metronidazole treatment in biliary mild acute pancreatitis (MAP) shortened hospital stays. Early antibiotic use does not benefit patients with non-biliary AP.

CONCLUSION

Strategies for antibiotic use in the early stages of AP need to be stratified according to cause and disease severity.

Overuse and Misuse of Antibiotics and the Clinical Consequence in Necrotizing Pancreatitis: An Observational Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE

The use and impact of antibiotics and the impact of causative pathogens on clinical outcomes in a large real-world cohort covering the entire clinical spectrum of necrotizing pancreatitis remain unknown.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

International guidelines recommend broad-spectrum antibiotics in patients with suspected infected necrotizing pancreatitis. This recommendation is not based on high-level evidence and clinical effects are unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study is a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective cohort of 401 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis in 15 Dutch centers (2010-2019). Across the patient population from the time of admission to 6 months postadmission, multivariable regression analyses were used to analyze (1) microbiological cultures and (2) antibiotic use.

RESULTS

Antibiotics were started in 321/401 patients (80%) administered at a median of 5 days (P25-P75: 1-13) after admission. The median duration of antibiotics was 27 days (P25-P75: 15-48). In 221/321 patients (69%) infection was not proven by cultures at the time of initiation of antibiotics. Empirical antibiotics for infected necrosis provided insufficient coverage in 64/128 patients (50%) with a pancreatic culture. Prolonged antibiotic therapy was associated with Enterococcus infection (OR 1.08 [95% CI 1.03-1.16], P =0.01). Enterococcus infection was associated with new/persistent organ failure (OR 3.08 [95% CI 1.35-7.29], P <0.01) and mortality (OR 5.78 [95% CI 1.46-38.73], P =0.03). Yeast was found in 30/147 cultures (20%).

DISCUSSION

In this nationwide study of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis, the vast majority received antibiotics, typically administered early in the disease course and without a proven infection. Empirical antibiotics were inappropriate based on pancreatic cultures in half the patients. Future clinical research and practice must consider antibiotic selective pressure due to prolonged therapy and coverage of Enterococcus and yeast. Improved guidelines on antimicrobial diagnostics and therapy could reduce inappropriate antibiotic use and improve clinical outcomes.

The Effect of Prophylactic Carbapenem Use on Outcomes in Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

This study aimed to determine the effect of prophylactic use of carbapenems for acute pancreatitis on clinical outcomes.

Materials and Methods

It was conducted according to the preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines by using the keywords "Pancrea * AND carbapenem OR imipenem OR ertapenem OR meropenem OR doripenem." Primer outcomes were mortality, surgical intervention, and pancreatic and non-pancreatic infection. Subgroup analyses were also performed to reduce the risk of bias.

Results

Ten studies with 4038 patients were included in the meta-analyses. While eight of ten were randomized controlled trials, two were observational studies. The prophylactic use of carbapenems had no statistically significant effect on mortality (OR=0.82, 95% CI=0.65-1.04, I²=0%) and surgical intervention. (OR=0.81, 95% CI=0.57-1.17, I²=0%). However, the real impact of prophylaxis on reducing the incidence of mortality and surgical intervention was uncertain due to the insufficient sample size. The prophylactic use of carbapenems was significantly associated with a lower risk of peripancreatic (OR=0.37, 95% CI=0.25-0.55, I²=61%) and non-pancreatic infection risk (OR=0.60, 95% CI=0.46-0.78, I²=65%). The definitions of infection in the articles were not clear, and the diagnostic approach to infection was based on subjective criteria. In addition, there was inadequate collateral damage and safety assessments. In high-quality studies with a low risk of bias, prophylactic carbapenems had no effect on peripancreatic infection (RR=1.54, 95% CI=0.65-3.47, I²=0%) and non-pancreatic infection (RR=0.72, 95% CI=0.48-1.07, I²=0%).

Conclusion

Although there is a reduction in the infection risk, routine carbapenem use in acute pancreatitis cases should not be recommended based on current evidence. Cooperation with Infectious Disease specialists and developing diagnostic algorithms are required instead of routine prophylaxis to prevent infection, especially non-pancreatic infection.

Antibiotic Utilization in Acute Pancreatitis: A Narrative Review

Acute pancreatitis is a complex inflammatory disease with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite advances in its management, the role of antibiotics in the prophylaxis and treatment of acute pancreatitis remains controversial. The aim of this comprehensive review is to analyze current evidence on the use of antibiotics in acute pancreatitis, focusing on prophylactic and therapeutic strategies. Prophylactic use aims to prevent local and systemic infections. However, recent studies have questioned the routine use of antibiotics for prophylaxis and highlighted the potential risks of antibiotic resistance and adverse effects. In selected high-risk cases, such as infected necrotizing pancreatitis, prophylactic antibiotic therapy may still be beneficial. As for therapeutic use, antibiotics are usually used to treat infected pancreatic necrosis and extrapancreatic infections. When selecting an antibiotic, the microbiologic profile and local resistance patterns should be considered. Combination therapy with broad-spectrum antibiotics is often recommended to cover both Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens. Recent research has highlighted the importance of individualized approaches to antibiotic use in acute pancreatitis and underscored the need for a tailored approach based on patient-specific factors. This review also highlights the potential role of new antimicrobial agents and alternative strategies, such as probiotics, in the management of acute pancreatitis.

Gut Microbiota and Antibiotic Treatments for the Main Non-Oncologic Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Disorders

The gut microbiota is a pivotal actor in the maintenance of the balance in the complex interconnections of hepato-biliary-pancreatic system. It has both metabolic and immunologic functions, with an influence on the homeostasis of the whole organism and on the pathogenesis of a wide range of diseases, from non-neoplastic ones to tumorigenesis. The continuous bidirectional metabolic communication between gut and hepato-pancreatic district, through bile ducts and portal vein, leads to a continuous interaction with translocated bacteria and their products. Chronic liver disease and pancreatic disorders can lead to reduced intestinal motility, decreased bile acid synthesis and intestinal immune dysfunction, determining a compositional and functional imbalance in gut microbiota (dysbiosis), with potentially harmful consequences on the host's health. The modulation of the gut microbiota by antibiotics represents a pioneering challenge with striking future therapeutic opportunities, even in non-infectious diseases. In this setting, antibiotics are aimed at harmonizing gut microbial function and, sometimes, composition. A more targeted and specific approach should be the goal to pursue in the future, tailoring the treatment according to the type of microbiota modulation to be achieved and using combined strategies.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Pancreatitis

The pancreas is a glandular organ that is responsible for the proper functioning of the digestive and endocrine systems, and therefore, it affects the condition of the entire body. Consequently, it is important to effectively diagnose and treat diseases of this organ. According to clinicians, pancreatitis—a common disease affecting the pancreas—is one of the most complicated and demanding diseases of the abdomen. The classification of pancreatitis is based on clinical, morphologic, and histologic criteria. Medical doctors distinguish, inter alia, acute pancreatitis (AP), the most common causes of which are gallstone migration and alcohol abuse. Effective diagnostic methods and the correct assessment of the severity of acute pancreatitis determine the selection of an appropriate treatment strategy and the prediction of the clinical course of the disease, thus preventing life-threatening complications and organ dysfunction or failure. This review collects and organizes recommendations and guidelines for the management of patients suffering from acute pancreatitis.

Rethinking Carbapenems: A Pharmacokinetic Approach for Antimicrobial Selection in Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of pathophysiological changes to the pancreas during infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP), optimal drug properties needed to penetrate the pancreas, human and animal studies supporting the use of antimicrobials, and carbapenem-sparing strategies in INP.

DATA SOURCES

A literature analysis of PubMed/MEDLINE was performed (from 1960 to September 2020) using the following key terms: infected necrotizing pancreatitis, necrotizing acute pancreatitis, and infected pancreatitis antimicrobial concentration. Individual antimicrobials were investigated with these search terms.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All relevant studies describing the management of INP, and human and animal pharmacokinetic (PK) data supporting antimicrobial use in the pancreas were reviewed for possible inclusion regardless of sample size or study design.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Piperacillin/tazobactam and cefepime achieve adequate pancreatic tissue concentrations in INP studies. A majority of the literature supporting carbapenem use in INP involves imipenem, and meropenem Monte Carlo simulations suggest that standard dosing regimens of meropenem may not achieve PK targets to eradicate Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

Carbapenems are often utilized for INP treatment based on guideline recommendations. This review discusses PK data, the history of carbapenem use in INP, and the pathophysiology of pancreatitis to suggest carbapenem-sparing strategies and provides stewardship tactics such as when to start antimicrobials, which empirical antimicrobial to use, and when to discontinue antimicrobials in the INP setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Noncarbapenem antipseudomonals, such as piperacillin/tazobactam and cefepime, are appropriate carbapenem-sparing options in INP, based on PK data, spectrum of activity, and risk of collateral damage.

Use of antibiotics in acute pancreatitis: ten major concerns

Acute pancreatitis is one of the most common gastrointestinal causes for hospitalization. In 15-20% it evolves into severe necrotizing pancreatitis. Recent studies have shown no association between the initiation of antibiotic therapy in acute pancreatitis and severe outcomes such as organ failure, infection of pancreatic necrosis, extrapancreatic infections or mortality. Specific subgroups with predicted severe acute pancreatitis or both extensive sterile necrosis and persistent organ failure may benefit from prophylactic antibiotics. Local infection develops in 30% of patients with pancreatic necrosis and results in morbidity and mortality. Contrast enhanced computed tomography should be performed in all patients with acute pancreatitis who develop sepsis, organ failure or fail to improve. C-reactive protein is an independent predictor of severe acute pancreatitis. Procalcitonin is the most sensitive laboratory test for detection of pancreatic infection. Antibiotics do however play a large role in patients with suspected or confirmed infected pancreatic necrosis and extrapancreatic infections. In clinical practice most clinicians prescribe antibiotics in the first 3 days of acute pancreatitis which in turns lead to excessive, unjustified use of antibiotics. Deep knowledge of the recent guidelines combined with an individualized management based on right clinical judgment is a rationale approach of patients with acute pancreatitis.

Management of infected pancreatic necrosis in the intensive care unit: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Severe acute pancreatitis is marked by organ failure and (peri)pancreatic necrosis with local complications such as infected necrosis. Infection of these necrotic collections together with organ failure remain the major causes of admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) in acute pancreatitis. Appropriate treatment of infected necrosis is essential to reduce morbidity and mortality. Overall knowledge of the treatment options within a multidisciplinary team-with special attention to the appropriate use of antimicrobial therapy and invasive treatment techniques for source control-is essential in the treatment of this complex disease.

OBJECTIVES

To address the current state of microbiological diagnosis, antimicrobial treatment, and source control for infected pancreatic necrosis in the ICU.

SOURCES

A literature search was performed using the Medline and Cochrane libraries for articles subsequent to 2003 using the keywords: infected necrosis, pancreatitis, intensive care medicine, treatment, diagnosis and antibiotic(s).

CONTENT

This narrative review provides an overview of key elements of diagnosis and treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis in the ICU.

IMPLICATIONS

In pancreatic necrosis it is essential to continuously (re)evaluate the indication for antimicrobial treatment and invasive source control. Invasive diagnostics (e.g. through fine-needle aspiration, FNA), preferably prior to the start of broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapy, is advocated. Antimicrobial stewardship principles apply: paying attention to altered pharmacokinetics in the critically ill, de-escalation of broad-spectrum therapy once cultures become available, and early withdrawal of antibiotics once source control has been established. This is important to prevent the development of antimicrobial resistance, especially in a group of patients who may require repeated courses of antibiotics during the prolonged course of their illness.

2019 WSES guidelines for the management of severe acute pancreatitis

Although most patients with acute pancreatitis have the mild form of the disease, about 20-30% develops a severe form, often associated with single or multiple organ dysfunction requiring intensive care. Identifying the severe form early is one of the major challenges in managing severe acute pancreatitis. Infection of the pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis occurs in about 20-40% of patients with severe acute pancreatitis, and is associated with worsening organ dysfunctions. While most patients with sterile necrosis can be managed nonoperatively, patients with infected necrosis usually require an intervention that can be percutaneous, endoscopic, or open surgical. These guidelines present evidence-based international consensus statements on the management of severe acute pancreatitis from collaboration of a panel of experts meeting during the World Congress of Emergency Surgery in June 27-30, 2018 in Bertinoro, Italy. The main topics of these guidelines fall under the following topics: Diagnosis, Antibiotic treatment, Management in the Intensive Care Unit, Surgical and operative management, and Open abdomen.

Impact of Antimicrobial Prophylaxis for Severe Acute Pancreatitis on the Development of Invasive Candidiasis: A Large Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Antimicrobial prophylaxis is not generally recommended for patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) owing to the limited clinical benefits. Nonetheless, it is frequently administered in actual practice given the patients' critical condition and the lack of solid evidence showing adverse effects of antimicrobial prophylaxis. We evaluated herein an association between antimicrobial prophylaxis and invasive pancreatic candidiasis as an adverse effect in patients with SAP.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients with SAP who were admitted to the study institutions (n = 44) between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2013. We performed multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusting for the extent of pancreatic necrosis and surgical interventions for invasive pancreatic candidiasis.

RESULTS

Of the 1097 patients with SAP, 850 (77.5%) received antimicrobial prophylaxis, and 21 (1.9%) had invasive pancreatic candidiasis. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, antimicrobial prophylaxis was significantly associated with the development of invasive pancreatic candidiasis (adjusted odds ratio, 4.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-27.6) (P = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that antimicrobial prophylaxis may contribute to the development of invasive pancreatic candidiasis, and therefore, the routine use of antimicrobial prophylaxis for SAP may be discouraged.

Can infected pancreatic necrosis really be managed conservatively?

OBJECTIVES

Guidelines advocate minimally invasive drainage rather than open surgery for infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) after acute pancreatitis. We hypothesized that the conservative approach could be extended even further by treating patients using an antibiotics-only protocol.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between June 2009 and July 2017, patients with IPN were selectively managed with carbapenem antibiotics for a minimum of 6 weeks. We compared these patients with patients who underwent minimal access retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy (MARPN) for IPN to identify characteristics of this patient group.

RESULTS

Of 33 patients with radiologically proven IPN, 13 patients received antibiotics without any surgical or radiological intervention and resulted in no disease-specific mortality and one case of pancreatic insufficiency. In comparison, 44 patients underwent MARPN with a mortality of 20%, and 81.8% developed pancreatic insufficiency. The modified Glasgow score and computed tomography severity score was less in the antibiotic-only group (P<0.001 and P=0.014, respectively). Patients who underwent MARPN had lower serum haemoglobin and albumin levels (P=0.030 and 0.001, respectively), and a higher C-reactive protein (P=0.027).

CONCLUSION

Conservative treatment of IPN with antibiotics is a valid management option for haemodynamically stable patients experiencing less severe disease, requiring careful selection by experienced clinicians.

The microbiology of infected pancreatic necrosis

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis (AP) continues to cause significant morbidity and mortality, especially when it leads to infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN). Modern treatment of IPN frequently involves prolonged courses of antibiotics in combination with minimally invasive therapies. This study aimed to update the existing evidence base by identifying the pathogens causing IPN and therefore aid future selection of empirical antibiotics.

METHODS

Clinical data, including microbiology results, of consecutive patients with IPN undergoing minimally invasive necrosectomy at our institution between January 2009 and July 2016 were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The results of 40 patients (22 males and 18 females, median age 60 years) with IPN were reviewed. The etiology of AP was gallstones, alcohol, dyslipidemia and unknown in 31, 2, 2 and 5 patients, respectively. The most frequently identified microbes in microbiology cultures were Enterococcus faecalis and faecium (22.5% and 20.0%) and Escherichia coli (20.0%). In 19 cases the cultures grew multiple organisms. The antibiotics with the least resistance amongst the microbiota were teicoplanin (5.0%), linezolid (5.6%), ertapenem (6.5%), and meropenem (7.4%).

CONCLUSION

The carbapenem antibiotics, ertapenem and meropenem provide good antimicrobial cover against the common, mainly enteral, microorganisms causing IPN. Culture and sensitivity results of acquired samples should be regularly reviewed to adjust prescribing and monitor for emergence of resistance.

Impact of continuous regional arterial infusion in the treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis: analysis of a national administrative database

BACKGROUND

Although continuous regional arterial infusion (CRAI) of protease inhibitors and broad antibiotics has been suggested as one of the therapeutic option for patients with acute necrotic pancreatitis (ANP), the effectiveness has not been well-corroborated in clinical studies.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a Japanese national administrative database. Severe acute pancreatitis patients with a poorly enhanced pancreas region (i.e., definitive or clinically suspected ANP) were identified and dichotomized according to whether CRAI was performed. We compared the outcomes of in-hospital mortality, surgical interventions, hospital-free days, and healthcare costs between groups adjusted by the well-validated case-mix adjustment model using a multivariate mixed-effect regression analysis and a propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

Of 243,312 acute pancreatitis patients, 702 eligible patients were identified, of these 339 patients underwent CRAI. The case-mix adjustment model established had good predictability for in-hospital mortality with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.87. CRAI was significantly associated with reduced in-hospital mortality [14.5% in the CRAI group vs. 18.2% in the non-CRAI group, adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval; CI) = 0.60 (0.36-0.97)]. Significant associations were not observed for the frequency of surgical interventions and mean hospital-free days; however, significantly higher healthcare costs were observed in the CRAI group. Results of the propensity score matching analysis did not alter these results.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of a nationwide large-scale database suggested that CRAI was significantly associated with reduced in-hospital mortality for patients with ANP. Further randomized controlled trials are warranted.

Vancomycin Concentrations in Necrotic Pancreatic Tissue: A Pilot Study

Purpose:

To determine vancomycin concentrations in necrotic pancreatic tissue of intensive care unit (ICU) patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

Methods:

The prospective, observational pilot study was conducted at a university-based tertiary hospital. The patient population consisted of 11 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis receiving vancomycin and undergoing necrosectomy. Tissue samples taken during surgical debridement were assayed for vancomycin by immunoassay. Patients were divided into steady state and nonsteady-state groups. Two patients were excluded because necrosectomy was not performed, and one tissue sample could not be assayed because of contamination.

Results:

The mean tissue concentration was 5.84 mcg/mL (ranging from 3.1 mcg/mL to 8.94 mcg/mL). Four patients in the nonsteady-state group, who each received a single dose of vancomycin, had a mean tissue concentration of 4.5 ± 1.68 mcg/mL, compared with 7.76 ± 1.05 mcg/mL for the four steady-state patients.

Conclusion:

The data shows that vancomycin is detectable in necrotic pancreas tissue but possibly not in concentrations sufficient to prevent or treat bacterial contamination in patients with pancreatic necrosis.

Theoretical approach to local infusion of antibiotics for infected pancreatic necrosis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Infected pancreatic necrosis is a major complications of acute pancreatitis. If drainage is required, local administration of antibiotics through transmural nasocystic or percutaneous catheter may allow increasing local antibiotic concentrations. Drug diffusion becomes the main factor influencing local drug tissue penetration. The present study aims at providing the rationale for the design of new research protocols evaluating the efficacy of local antibiotics for infected pancreatic necrosis.

METHODS

A review of microbiological data was performed for the most common organisms causing the infection, antibiotics spectrum and minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC). A search of the physico-chemical properties of antibiotics was performed to calculate the diffusion coefficients. An estimation of the antibiotic concentrations in pancreatic tissue was obtained using a mathematical model. Efficacy factors (EF) were calculated and the stability of the antibiotic solutions were evaluated to optimize the dosing regimen.

RESULTS

Piperacillin, vancomycin and metronidazole achieve high concentrations in the surrounding tissue very fast. Imipenem, ceftriaxone, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, linezolid and cloxacillin achieve intermediate concentration values. Tigecycline, showed the lowest concentration values (<2 mg/L). Calculated EF is highest for piperacillin and imipenem short after administration and near to surface diffusion area (0.5 cm), but EF of imipenem is higher at deeper areas and longer time after administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering obtained results, some solutions are proposed using saline as diluent and 25 °C of temperature during administration. Imipenem has the best theoretical results in empiric local treatment. Linezolid and tigecycline solutions are not recommended.

Perfusion CT: can it predict the development of pancreatic necrosis in early stage of severe acute pancreatitis?

PURPOSE

Pancreatic necrosis is an important determinant of patient outcome in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). This prospective study was conducted to evaluate if perfusion CT (PCT) can predict the development of necrosis at an early stage in SAP.

METHODS

PCT was performed within 72 h of abdominal pain in 57 consecutive admitted patients of acute pancreatitis, out of which four patients were excluded. Thirty-two patients were classified as SAP and 21 as mild acute pancreatitis (MAP) on the basis of APACHE II or SIRS criteria or presence of organ failure. All patients underwent a follow-up CECT at 3 weeks to look for pancreatic necrosis.

RESULTS

Out of 32 patients of SAP, 14 patients showed perfusion defects. The mean blood flow (BF) in these areas was 11.47 ± 5.56 mL/100 mL/min and median blood volume (BV) was 3.92 mL/100 mL (0.5-8.49 mL/100 mL). All these patients developed necrosis on follow-up scan. Two patients who did not show perfusion defects also developed necrosis. Remaining 37 patients (16 SAP and 21 MAP) did not show perfusion defect and did not develop necrosis on follow-up. All regions showing BF less than ≤23.45 mL/100 mL/min and BV ≤8.49 mL/100 mL developed pancreatic necrosis. The values of perfusion parameters may vary with the scanner, mathematical model and protocol used. The sensitivity and specificity of PCT for predicting pancreatic necrosis were 87.5% and 100%, respectively. The cut off values of BF and BV for predicting the development of pancreatic necrosis were 27.29 mL/100 mL/min and 8.96 mL/100 mL, respectively, based on ROC curve. PCT is a reliable tool for early prediction of pancreatic necrosis, which may open new avenues to prevent this ominous complication.

Antibiosis of Necrotizing Pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Necrotizing pancreatitis is a life-threatening presentation of acute pancreatitis. The mortality of 20-80% initially depends on the persistence of organ failure and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and, in the later course of the disease, on secondary infection of the necrosis. The questions whether prophylactic antibiotics aiming to prevent this infection should be administered and which antibiotic is the best to use, as well as the problem of fungal infection under antibiotic treatment are still intriguing and insufficiently solved.

METHODS

A search of the literature using PubMed was carried out, supplemented by a review of the programmes of the Digestive Disease Week (DDW) and the United European Gastroenterology Week (UEGW).

RESULTS

Despite the widely practised prophylactic antibiotic administration in severe pancreatitis, no evidence for the benefit of this strategy exists. One of the drawbacks might be a tendency for disastrous fungal infection under prophylactic antibiotics. Bacterial translocation from the gut in the second week after the onset of symptoms is the major source for infection of pancreatic necrosis and provides a clear indication for antibiotic treatment. However, routine fine-needle aspiration for a calculated antibiotic therapy cannot be recommended, and all other tests offer only indirect signs. Important factors such as enteral versus parenteral feeding and the method of necrosectomy are mostly neglected in the trials but seem to be essential for the outcome of the patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though most meta-analyses including the newer double-blind, placebo-controlled trials on prophylactic antibiotics showed no beneficial effects in the prevention of infection of necrosis and/or outcome of the patients, this strategy is still widely used in clinical routine. Since nearly all trials published so far show systematic problems (i.e. inaccurate definition of the severity of the disease, poor statistical testing, and neglect of differences in the route of nutrition), there is a need for randomized controlled prospective trials with exact definitions of the disease.

Japanese guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis: Japanese Guidelines 2015

BACKGROUND

Japanese (JPN) guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis were published in 2006. The severity assessment criteria for acute pancreatitis were later revised by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) in 2008, leading to their publication as the JPN Guidelines 2010. Following the 2012 revision of the Atlanta Classifications of Acute Pancreatitis, in which the classifications of regional complications of pancreatitis were revised, the development of a minimally invasive method for local complications of pancreatitis spread, and emerging evidence was gathered and revised into the JPN Guidelines.

METHODS

A comprehensive evaluation was carried out on the evidence for epidemiology, diagnosis, severity, treatment, post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis and clinical indicators, based on the concepts of the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). With the graded recommendations, where the evidence was unclear, Meta-Analysis team for JPN Guidelines 2015 conducted an additional new meta-analysis, the results of which were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine questions were prepared in 17 subject areas, for which 43 recommendations were made. The 17 subject areas were: Diagnosis, Diagnostic imaging, Etiology, Severity assessment, Transfer indication, Fluid therapy, Nasogastric tube, Pain control, Antibiotics prophylaxis, Protease inhibitor, Nutritional support, Intensive care, management of Biliary Pancreatitis, management of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome, Interventions for the local complications, Post-ERCP pancreatitis and Clinical Indicator (Pancreatitis Bundles 2015). Meta-analysis was conducted in the following four subject areas based on randomized controlled trials: (1) prophylactic antibiotics use; (2) prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis; (3) prophylactic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis; and (4) peritoneal lavage. Using the results of the meta-analysis, recommendations were graded to create useful information. In addition, a mobile application was developed, which made it possible to diagnose, assess severity and check pancreatitis bundles.

CONCLUSIONS

The JPN Guidelines 2015 were prepared using the most up-to-date methods, and including the latest recommended medical treatments, and we are confident that this will make them easy for many clinicians to use, and will provide a useful tool in the decision-making process for the treatment of patients, and optimal medical support. The free mobile application and calculator for the JPN Guidelines 2015 is available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/jpn-guideline2015.html.

Role of antibiotic prophylaxis in necrotizing pancreatitis: a meta-analysis

Several studies have yielded conflicting results on the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in improving outcomes in acute necrotizing pancreatitis. A meta-analysis was carried out to investigate the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis in the incidence of infected pancreatic necrosis and mortality.

METHODOLOGY

Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies investigating impact of prophylactic systemic antibiotic used in acute necrotizing pancreatitis were retrieved from online databases. An overall analysis was done with all studies (Group 1), followed by subgroup analyses with randomized controlled trials (Group 2) and cohort studies (Group 3). Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis in the incidence of infected pancreatic necrosis and mortality in each group using random effects model.

RESULTS

Eleven studies involving 864 patients were included. No significant differences in the incidence of infected pancreatic necrosis were observed with prophylactic antibiotic use in all groups. Prophylactic antibiotic use was not associated with significant differences in all-cause mortality in Group 2 (RR = 0.75; p = 0.24) but was associated with a reduction in Groups 1 (RR = 0.66, p = 0.02) and 3 (RR = 0.55, p = 0.04). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of fungal infections and surgical interventions.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotic prophylaxis does not significantly reduce the incidence of infected pancreatic necrosis but may affect all-cause mortality in acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

Clinical pharmacokinetics of meropenem in pancreatic juice and site-specific pharmacodynamic target attainment against Gram-negative bacteria: dosing considerations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Very few studies have revealed the dynamics of meropenem penetration into the pancreas or pancreatic juice in humans. This study of the clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of meropenem in human pancreatic juice was performed to establish a basis for the validation of dosing regimens for pancreatic infections.

METHODS

Ten patients with endoscopic naso-pancreatic drainage received 500 mg meropenem over 0.5 h via intravenous infusion. Venous blood and pancreatic juice samples were collected post-infusion for up to 5.0 h and used to obtain measures of meropenem concentration. The probability of attaining the pharmacodynamic target (40% of the time above the minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC]) in pancreatic juice against MIC distributions for clinical isolates of Gram-negative bacteria was determined using a Monte Carlo simulation.

RESULTS

The mean maximum concentration of meropenem in pancreatic juice was 2.08 ± 0.94 μg/mL at 1.025 ± 0.18 h. The pancreatic juice/plasma ratio was 0.055 ± 0.028. A 0.5-h infusion of 500 mg meropenem every 8 h achieved a 99.4% probability of target attainment against Escherichia coli, 96.4% against Klebsiella species, 94.3% against Enterobacter species and 96.2% against Proteus species, but only 41.3% against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous meropenem exhibits low penetrance into pancreatic juice. However, a dosing regimen of 500 mg meropenem (0.5-h infusion) every 8 h provides sufficient drug-exposure time in pancreatic juice against the four common Gram-negative bacteria populations.

The role of antimicrobial therapy in severe acute pancreatitis

The role of antimicrobial therapy in patients with severe acute pancreatitis is to treat secondary pancreatic infections to prevent systemic sepsis and death. Infected pancreatic necrosis is diagnosed using image-directed fine needle aspiration with culture and Gram's stain. Prophylactic antibiotics have not proven efficacious, while the precise timely detection of secondary pancreatic infections is often elusive. A high clinical index of suspicion should prompt the empiric initiation of antimicrobial therapy until culture results are available. Positive cultures should guide antimicrobial therapy, and for infected pancreatic necrosis, antibiotics should be used in conjunction with interventional techniques for source control.

Penetration of meropenem into human pancreatic juice

This study examined the penetration of meropenem into pancreatic juice in patients who had undergone hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery. The patients received a 0.5-h infusion of 500 mg meropenem. The observed maximum concentration (mean ± standard deviation, n = 5) was 39.1 ± 11.2 μg/ml at 0.5 h in plasma and 2.12 ± 0.73 μg/ml at 1.10 ± 0.14 h in pancreatic juice. The pancreatic juice/plasma ratio was 0.06 ± 0.02. The area under the drug concentration-time curve was 73.0 ± 37.5 μg•h/ml in plasma and 4.24 ± 2.77 μg•h/ml in pancreatic juice. The pancreatic juice/plasma ratio was 0.06 ± 0.01. The mean drug-exposure times above 0.125 μg/ml and 0.25 μg/ml (the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) for common pathogens) in pancreatic juice were 99.4% and 87.3%, respectively, for 500 mg meropenem 3 times daily. This commonly used regimen for pancreatitis achieved the drug-exposure time target (40% of the time above the MIC) at the action site, despite the low penetrability of meropenem.

[Gastrointestinal emergencies - acute pancreatitis]

The acute pancreatitis is a frequent event with an impressive clinical presentation. Specific treatment does not exist. The goals of the medical measures are to ameliorate complaints and to prevent complications. During recent years, insights into adequate treatment have significantly increased. Recommendations on volume therapy have now been specified. Moreover, progress has been made in the efficient employment of nutritional support, imaging and antibiotic treatment. In addition, the treatment of large or infected necrosis has significantly improved. The article reviews the current state-of-the-art care of acute pancreatitis.

Activity of moxifloxacin, imipenem, and ertapenem against Escherichia coli, Enterobacter cloacae, Enterococcus faecalis, and Bacteroides fragilis in monocultures and mixed cultures in an in vitro pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model simulating concentrations in the human pancreas

The activities of moxifloxacin, imipenem, and ertapenem against pathogens causing severe necrotizing pancreatitis were studied in an in vitro pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) model. Escherichia coli, Enterobacter cloacae, Enterococcus faecalis, and Bacteroides fragilis were exposed in monocultures and mixed cultures to concentrations of the three agents comparable to those in the human pancreas. Moxifloxacin was more active than the two carbapenems in monocultures and mixed cultures, reducing the numbers of CFU more drastically and more rapidly.

[Clinical characteristics of acute pancreatitis in Mexico]

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis (AP) etiology and frequency vary in relation to geographic region.

AIMS

To determine the etiology, frequency, and mortality of AP in a Mexican population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We carried out a prospective study of first episode AP patients over a period of 6 years.

RESULTS

A total of 605 patients with a mean age of 40 years were included in the study. Sixty-four percent of them presented with overweight and/or obesity determined through BMI. Etiology was biliary in 66.60%, it was due to alcohol consumption in 15.90%, hypertriglyceridemia in 7.80%, it was post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in 2.10%, and was undetermined in 7.20%. Pancreatic infection was suspected in 70 patients and they underwent CT-guided fine needle aspiration. Thirty-two of those patients were diagnosed with pancreatic infection in which Staphylococcus spp was the most common microorganism. Overall mortality was 5.00% (2.60% < 30 years and 10.00% > 70 years). Necrosis, pancreatic infection, and mortality were more frequent in the cases in which etiology was due to alcohol ingestion.

CONCLUSIONS

The most frequent AP etiology was biliary, but that caused by alcohol presented with more complications. Overall mortality was 5.00% and was higher in the elderly patients.

The role of antibiotics in the management of patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis

Our understanding of the role of antibiotics in the management of patients with pancreatic necrosis has changed over the past 5 years. Initial studies suggested that antibiotics were useful in preventing infection of necrosis, septic complications, and mortality in patients with acute pancreatitis; however, more recent, better-designed studies established that prophylactic antibiotics are not helpful. In the absence of infection, sterile necrosis is treated conservatively. With insufficient evidence to recommend antibiotics, these agents should be reserved to treat established infection of pancreatic necrosis. Infected necrosis is treated by targeting microbes with pancreatic-penetrating antibiotics (eg, carbapenems, quinolones in combination with metronidazole, or high-dose cephalosporins). If the patient with infected necrosis remains septic or deteriorates, surgical intervention should be performed urgently. Stable patients with infected necrosis can be managed more conservatively in a closely monitored environment. Recent studies suggest that many patients can clear the infection with antibiotics, but even if they do not clear the infection, delay in surgery decreases the mortality rate. Delaying surgery by using antibiotics may allow use of less invasive procedures if drainage is needed. The timing and method of interventions must be individualized based on the patient's condition, anatomic complications, patient's preference after informed consent, and expertise available at the institution.

Early management of severe acute pancreatitis

Significant literature on the management of acute severe acute pancreatitis has emerged in recent years. The new information ranges from data on newer single or multiparameter severity assessment tools and classification systems to therapeutic modalities. However, a few basic issues-the ideal severity assessment modality, volume of intravenous fluids required in the first 48 to 72 h, and the role of prophylactic antibiotics-are still not clear and are subject to controversy. The International Working Group has devised the Revised Atlanta Classification, which will be published soon. This new classification is eagerly awaited worldwide, and hopefully clarifies many of the problems of the original Atlanta Classification. In this article, we discuss the developments that have arisen in the past 2 to 3 years concerning the classification, prognostication, and early management of severe acute pancreatitis.

Changes in antibiotic distribution due to pancreatitis

This work sought to define how pancreatitis affected antibiotic distribution in a perfused rat pancreas model. The distribution kinetics of four antibiotics were examined in control animals and animals with pancreatitis. Meropenem and piperacillin distributed into the extracellular space, and their distribution kinetics were unaffected by pancreatitis. In contrast, in pancreatic cells from animals with pancreatitis, ciprofloxacin showed a reduced uptake and clindamycin showed a reduced distribution.

The use of antibiotics for acute pancreatitis: is there a role?

Infections due to pancreatic necrosis and abscesses are observed in one third of patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). Based on results of double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials, antibiotic prophylaxis in SAP is ineffective for reducing the frequency of infected necrosis and to decrease hospital mortality. Antibiotic treatment using carbapenems and quinolones is indicated on demand in patients with SAP and multiorgan failure at admission and in those with hemodynamic shock. Patients with biliary acute pancreatitis (AP) and clinically acute cholecystitis and/or cholangitis benefit from antibiotic treatment. Patients with AP associated with bacteremia, positive bronchoalveolar lavage, and urinary tract infection should receive antibiotics. In necrotizing pancreatitis, evidence-based data do not support late use of antibiotic prophylaxis after onset. Further high-quality, randomized, controlled trials are needed to evaluate antibiotic prophylaxis in the first 24 to 48 hours after SAP onset.

Antibiotic therapy for prophylaxis against infection of pancreatic necrosis in acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic necrosis may complicate severe acute pancreatitis, and is detectable by computed tomography (CT). If it becomes infected mortality increases, but the use of prophylactic antibiotics raises concerns about antibiotic resistance and fungal infection.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of prophylactic antibiotics in acute pancreatitis complicated by CT proven pancreatic necrosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Searches were updated in November 2008, in The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2008), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Conference proceedings and references from found articles were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antibiotics versus placebo in acute pancreatitis with CT proven necrosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Primary outcomes were mortality and pancreatic infection rates. Secondary end-points included non pancreatic infection, all sites infection, operative rates, fungal infections, and antibiotic resistance. Subgroup analyses were performed for antibiotic regimen (beta-lactam, quinolone, and imipenem).

MAIN RESULTS

Seven evaluable studies randomised 404 patients. There was no statistically significant effect on reduction of mortality with therapy: 8.4% versus controls 14.4%, and infected pancreatic necrosis rates: 19.7% versus controls 24.4%. Non-pancreatic infection rates and the incidence of overall infections were not significantly reduced with antibiotics: 23.7% versus 36%; 37.5% versus 51.9% respectively. Operative treatment and fungal infections were not significantly different. Insufficient data were provided concerning antibiotic resistance.With beta-lactam antibiotic prophylaxis there was less mortality (9.4% treatment, 15% controls), and less infected pancreatic necrosis (16.8% treatment group, 24.2% controls) but this was not statistically significant. The incidence of non-pancreatic infections was non-significantly different (21% versus 32.5%), as was the incidence of overall infections (34.4% versus 52.8%), and operative treatment rates. No significant differences were seen with quinolone plus imidazole in any of the end points measured. Imipenem on its own showed no difference in the incidence of mortality, but there was a significant reduction in the rate of pancreatic infection (p=0.02; RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.84).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No benefit of antibiotics in preventing infection of pancreatic necrosis or mortality was found, except for when imipenem (a beta-lactam) was considered on its own, where a significantly decrease in pancreatic infection was found. None of the studies included in this review were adequately powered. Further better designed studies are needed if the use of antibiotic prophylaxis is to be recommended.

Acute pancreatitis and critical illness: a pancreatic tale of hypoperfusion and inflammation

Since it was first widely recognized at the end of the 19th century, acute pancreatitis has proven a formidable clinical challenge, frequently resulting in management within critical care settings. Because the early assessment of severity is difficult, the recognition of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) and the implementation of critical care treatment precepts often are delayed. Although different management strategies for life-threatening features of SAP have been debated for decades, there has been little recent reduction in mortality rates, which can be as high as 30%. This article discusses severity designation at the time of diagnosis, reviews the pathophysiologic mechanisms so well characterized by the noxious combination of severe systemic inflammation and hypoperfusion, and provides a management algorithm that parallels current critical care strategies.

Fundamental and intensive care of acute pancreatitis

Patients who have been diagnosed as having acute pancreatitis should be, on principle, hospitalized. Crucial fundamental management is required soon after a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis has been made and includes monitoring of the conscious state, the respiratory and cardiovascular system, the urinary output, adequate fluid replacement and pain control. Along with such management, etiologic diagnosis and severity assessment should be conducted. Patients with a diagnosis of severe acute pancreatitis should be transferred to a medical facility where intensive respiratory and cardiovascular management as well as interventional treatment, blood purification therapy and nutritional support are available. The disease condition in acute pancreatitis changes every moment and even symptoms that are mild at the time of diagnosis may become severe later. Therefore, severity assessment should be conducted repeatedly at least within 48 h following diagnosis. An adequate dose of fluid replacement is essential to stabilize cardiovascular dynamics and the dose should be adjusted while assessing circulatory dynamics constantly. A large dose of fluid replacement is usually required in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Prophylactic antibiotic administration is recommended to prevent infectious complications in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Although the efficacy of intravenous administration of protease inhibitors is still a matter of controversy, there is a consensus in Japan that a large dose of a synthetic protease inhibitor should be given to patients with severe acute pancreatitis in order to prevent organ failure and other complications. Enteral feeding is superior to parenteral nutrition when it comes to the nutritional support of patients with severe acute pancreatitis. The JPN Guidelines recommend, as optional continuous regional arterial infusion and blood purification therapy.

Effects of Chai-Qin-Cheng-Qi Decoction on cefotaxime in rats with acute necrotizing pancreatitis

AIM: To investigate the effect of Chai-Qin-Cheng-Qi Decoction (CQCQD) on cefotaxime (CTX) concentration in pancreas of rats with acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP).

METHODS: Sixty healthy male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided randomly into an ANP group (ANP model + CTX, n = 20), treatment group (ANP model + CTX + CQCQD, n = 20) and control group (normal rats + CTX, n = 20). ANP models were induced by retrograde intraductal injection of 3.5% sodium taurocholate (1 mL/kg), and the control group was injected intraductally with normal saline. All rats were injected introperitoneally with 0.42 g/kg CTX (at 12-h intervals for a continuous 72 h) at 6 h after intraductal injection. Meanwhile, the treatment group received CQCQD (20 mL/kg) intragastrically at 8-h intervals, and the ANP and control group were treated intragastrically with normal saline. At 15 min after the last CTX injection, blood and pancreas samples were collected for the determination of CTX concentration using validated high-performance liquid chromatography. Pathological changes and wet-to-dry-weight (W/D) ratio of pancreatic tissue were examined.

RESULTS: Serum CTX concentrations in three groups were not significantly different. Pancreatic CTX concentration and penetration ratio were lower in ANP group vs control group (4.4 ± 0.6 μg/mL vs 18.6 ± 1.7 μg/mL, P = 0.000; 5% vs 19%, P = 0.000), but significantly higher in treatment group vs ANP group (6.4 ± 1.7 μg/mL vs 4.4 ± 0.6 μg/mL, P = 0.020; 7% vs 5%, P = 0.048). The histological scores and W/D ratio were significantly decreased in treatment group vs ANP and control group.

CONCLUSION: CQCQD might have a promotive effect on CTX concentration in pancreatic tissues of rats with ANP.

[Antibiotic therapy in acute pancreatitis]

Infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) is one of the main causes of mortality in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). The choice of antibiotic therapy in AP should be based on penetration of the drug in the pancreas and the degree of coverage provided against the typical bacterial flora produced in IPN. Drugs such as imipenem, ciprofloxacin and metronidazole have been widely studied and seem to be ideal in the treatment of INP. Clinical practice guidelines recommend a carbapenem agent as the initial empirical treatment. When Gram-positive pathogens are isolated in pancreatic samples, vancomycin can be used alone or associated with a carbapenem. Currently, prophylactic antibiotic therapy for IPN is not supported by the scientific evidence, since both the best quality studies (double-blind) and the latest meta-analysis published have found no benefit of the use of this strategy.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ciprofloxacin prophylaxis in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The use of prophylactic antibiotics in acute severe necrotizing pancreatitis is controversial.

METHODS

Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study was carried out at Bellvitge Hospital, in Barcelona, Spain. Among 229 diagnosed with severe acute pancreatitis, 80 had evidence of necrotizing pancreatitis (34/80 patients were excluded of the protocol). Forty-six patients without previous antibiotic treatment with pancreatic necrosis in a contrast-enhanced CT scan were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous ciprofloxacin or placebo. Five patients were secondarily excluded, and the remaining 41 patients were finally included in the study (22 patients received intravenous ciprofloxacin and 19 patients placebo).

RESULTS

Comparing the 22 with intravenous ciprofloxacin and 19 with placebo, infected pancreatic necrosis was detected in 36% and 42% respectively (p = 0.7). The mortality rate was 18% and 11%, respectively (p = 0.6). No significant differences between both treatment groups were observed with respect to variables such as: non-pancreatic infections, surgical treatment, timing and the re-operation rate, organ failure, length of hospital and ICU stays.

CONCLUSION

The prophylactic use of ciprofloxacin in patients with severe necrotizing pancreatitis did not significantly reduce the risk of developing pancreatic infection or decrease the mortality rate. The small number of patients included in this study should be considered.

Effect of early antibiotic prophylaxis with ertapenem and meropenem in experimental acute pancreatitis in rats

BACKGROUND

The clinical course in acute necrotizing pancreatitis is mainly influenced by bacterial infection of pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis. The effect of two antibiotic treatments for early prophylaxis was studied in the taurocholate model of necrotizing pancreatitis in the rat.

METHODS

Sixty male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into three pancreatitis groups (15 animals each) and a sham-operated group (15 animals, control group). Pancreatitis was induced by intraductal infusion of 3% taurocholate under sterile conditions. Animals were placed on one of two different antibiotic regimens (15 mg/kg ertapenem or 20 mg/kg meropenem, one shot) after the induction of pancreatitis or received no antibiotics (control). All animals were sacrificed after 24 h to study pancreatic and extrapancreatic infection.

RESULTS

Early antibiotic prophylaxis with either erapenam or meropenem significantly decreased pancreatic infection from 12/15 (control group) to 4/15 (ertapenem antibiotic group) and 3/15 (meropenem antibiotic group) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In our animal model of necrotizing pancreatitis, early antibiotic prophylaxis with ertapenem and meropenem reduced bacterial infection of the pancreas. The efficacy of early antibiotic prophylaxis with ertapenem in the clinical setting should be subject to further research.

Prophylactic antibiotic treatment in acute necrotizing pancreatitis: results from a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The effect of prophylactic antibiotic treatment on infection and survival of acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) remains uncertain. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term efficacy of prophylactic antibiotic treatment for ANP.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Searches were carried out of electronic databases including Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, the Science Citation Index, and PubMed (updated to December 2007), and manual bibliographical searches were also conducted. A meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylactic antibiotic treatment with placebo or no treatment was performed.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs including 540 patients were assessed. The outcomes included infected necrosis, death, non-pancreatic infection, surgical intervention, and length of hospital stay. Prophylactic antibiotic use leads to a significant reduction of infected necrosis (relative risk (RR) 0.69, 95% CI, 0.50-0.95; p=0.02), non-pancreatic infections (RR 0.66 95% CI, 0.48-0.91; p=0.01), and length of hospital stay (p=0.004) but was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in mortality (RR 0.76 95% CI, 0.50-1.18; p=0.22) and surgical intervention (RR 0.90 95% CI, 0.66-1.23; p=0.52). In a subgroup analysis, carbapenem was associated with a significant reduction in infected necrosis (p=0.009) and non-pancreatic infections (p=0.006), whereas other antibiotics were not.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic antibiotic treatment is associated with a significant reduction of pancreatic or peripancreatic infection, non-pancreatic infection, and length of hospital stay, but cannot prevent death and surgical intervention in acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

Piperacillin-tazobactam penetration into human pancreatic juice

Piperacillin-tazobactam was administered as a single dose (4.5 g intravenous) to five patients with stabilized external pancreatic fistula. The penetration into pancreatic juice was prompt, and inhibitory concentrations were achieved and maintained for different periods (0.5 to 6 h) according to bacterial susceptibility and patients' characteristics. Piperacillin and tazobactam showed superimposable pharmacokinetics in both serum and pancreatic juice.

Acute pancreatitis: etiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and therapy

Acute pancreatitis is a relatively common disease that affects about 300,000 patients per annum in America with a mortality of about 7%. About 75% of pancreatitis is caused by gallstones or alcohol. Other important causes include hypertriglyceridemia, medication toxicity, trauma from endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, hypercalcemia, abdominal trauma, various infections, autoimmune, ischemia, and hereditary causes. In about 15% of cases the cause remains unknown after thorough investigation. This article discusses the causes, diagnosis, imaging findings, therapy, and complications of acute pancreatitis.