Comparison between minimally invasive and open surgical treatment in necrotizing pancreatitis

Factors affecting the time interval of endoscopic ultrasound-guided endoscopic necrosectomy of walled-off pancreatic necrosis: A retrospective single-center study in China

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided endoscopic necrosectomy is an effective and minimally invasive treatment for walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON). This study investigated the factors affecting the time interval of EUS-guided WON necrosectomy.

METHODS

Patients who received EUS-guided necrosectomy in the Endoscopy Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University in the past 5 years were retrospectively analyzed. Data including general information, etiology, blood biochemical indexes, physical signs, CT severity grade, location, size, solid necrotic ratio, type and number of stents, and immediate necrosectomy were collected to explore the relationships between these factors and the interval of endoscopic necrosectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 51 WON patients were included. No significant correlation has been noted between the endoscopic debridement interval and the following indexes, including the patients' general information, the etiology of pancreatitis, blood biochemical indexes (leukocyte count, neutrophil percentage, C-reactive protein), preoperative fever, and WON's location and size, type and number of stents, and whether immediate necrosectomy. However, there were significant differences between the debridement interval and the modified CT Severity Index (MCTSI) (p < 0.001), the solid necrotic ratio of WON (p < 0.001) before the intervention, postoperative fever (p = 0.038), C-reactive protein increasing (p = 0.012) and fever before reintervention (p = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

The EUS-measured solid necrotic ratio, the MCTSI, postoperative fever, C-reactive protein increase, and fever before reintervention in patients affect the time interval of EUS-guided endoscopic necrosectomy in WON patients. These five indicators may be promisingly effective in predicting and managing endoscopic necrosectomy intervals.

Endoscopic and surgical treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis-a comparison of short- and long-term outcome

BACKGROUND

Acute necrotizing pancreatitis is still related to high morbidity and mortality rates. Minimal-invasive treatment options, such as endoscopic necrosectomy, may decrease peri-interventional morbidity and mortality. This study aims to compare the initial operative with endoscopic treatment on long-term parameters, such as endocrine and exocrine functionality, as well as mortality and recurrence rates.

METHODS

We included 114 patients, of whom 69 were treated with initial endoscopy and 45 by initial surgery. Both groups were further assessed for peri-interventional and long-term parameters.

RESULTS

In the post-interventional phase, patients in the group of initial surgical treatment (IST) showed significantly higher rates of renal insufficiency (p < 0.001) and dependency on invasive ventilation (p < 0.001). The in-house mortality was higher in the surgical group, with 22% vs. 10.1% in the group of patients following initial endoscopic treatment (IET; p = 0.077). In long-term follow-up, the overall mortality was 45% for IST and 31.3% for IET (p = 0.156). The overall in-hospital stay and intensive care unit (ICU) stay were significantly shorter after IET (p < 0.001). In long-term follow-up, the prevalence of endocrine insufficiency was 50% after IST and 61.7% after IET (p = 0.281). 57.1% of the patients following IST and 16.4% of the patients following IET had persistent exocrine insufficiency at that point (p =  < 0.001). 8.9% of the IET and 27.6% of the IST patients showed recurrence of acute pancreatitis (p = 0.023) in the long-term phase.

CONCLUSION

In our cohort, an endoscopic step-up approach led to a reduced in-hospital stay and peri-interventional morbidity. The endocrine function appeared comparable in both groups, whereas the exocrine insufficiency seemed to recover in the endoscopic group in the long-term phase. These findings advocate for a preference for endoscopic treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis whenever feasible.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic drainage versus percutaneous drainage for pancreatic fluid collection; a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) are debris or fluid of the pancreas that needs to be drained out. This may result from surgery or necrotizing pancreatitis. This meta-analysis compared the outcomes of PFC through endoscopic and percutaneous interventions.

METHODS

A medical database was searched up to June 2022, comparing the outcomes of endoscopic drainage (ED) and percutaneous drainage (PD) for the PFC. Eligible studies reporting clinical and technical success and adverse events were selected.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies with 1170 patients were included for meta-analysis, of which 543 patients underwent ED and 627 underwent PD. The odd ratio (OR) of technical success was 0.81 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31, 2.1) and clinical success was in the favor of the ED group at OR 2.23 (95% CI 1.45, 3.41). Adverse events OR 0.62 (95% CI 0.27, 1.39) and stent migration OR 0.61 (95% CI 0.10, 3.88) were the same in both groups, but hospital stay pooled mean difference of 15.02 days (95% CI 9.86, 20.18), mortality OR 0.24 (95% CI 0.09, 0.67), and re-interventions OR 0.25 (95% CI 0.16, 0.40) favored ED.

CONCLUSIONS

ED is safe and efficient for PFC with higher clinical success, lower mortality rate, hospital stay, and re-interventions compared with PD.

Endoscopic versus minimally invasive surgical approach for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Acute pancreatitis is a common condition of the digestive system, but sometimes it develops into severe cases. In about 10-20% of patients, necrosis of the pancreas or its periphery occurs. Although most have aseptic necrosis, 30% of cases will develop infectious necrotizing pancreatitis. Infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) requires a critical treatment approach. Minimally invasive surgical approach (MIS) and endoscopy are the management methods. This meta-analysis compares the outcomes of MIS and endoscopic treatments.

METHODS

We searched a medical database until December 2022 to compare the results of endoscopic and MIS procedures for INP. We selected eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported treatment complications for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Five RCTs comparing a total of 284 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Among them, 139 patients underwent MIS, while 145 underwent endoscopic procedures. The results showed significant differences (p < 0.05) in the risk ratios (RRs) for major complications (RR: 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49-0.97), new onset of organ failure (RR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.11-0.82), surgical site infection (RR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.07-0.92), fistula or perforation (RR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.12-0.64), and pancreatic fistula (RR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.05-0.45). The hospital stay was significantly shorter for the endoscopic group compared to the MIS group, with a mean difference of 6.74 days (95% CI: -12.94 to -0.54). There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the RR for death, bleeding, incisional hernia, percutaneous drainage, pancreatic endocrine deficiency, pancreatic exocrine deficiency, or the need for enzyme use.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic management of INP performs better compared to surgical treatment due to its lower complication rate and higher patient life quality.

Surgical management of acute pancreatitis: Historical perspectives, challenges, and current management approaches

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a serious condition presenting catastrophic consequences. In severe AP, the mortality rate is high, and some patients initially diagnosed with mild-to-moderate AP can progress to a life-threatening severe state. Treatment of AP has evolved over the years. Drainage was the first surgical procedure performed for AP; however, later, surgical approaches were replaced by more conservative approaches due to the availability of advanced medical care and improved understanding of the course of AP. Currently, surgery is used to manage several complications of AP, such as pseudocysts, pancreatic fistulas, and biliary tract obstruction. Patients who are unresponsive to conservative treatment or have complications are typically considered for surgical intervention. This review focuses on the surgical approaches (endoscopic, percutaneous, and open) that have been established in recent studies to treat this acute condition and summarizes the common management guidelines for AP, discussing the relevant indications, significance, and complications. It is evident that despite their reduced involvement, surgeons lead the multidisciplinary care of patients with AP; however, given the gaps in existing knowledge, more research is required to standardize surgical protocols for AP.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections: What impacts treatment duration?

BACKGROUND

Peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are complications resulting from acute or chronic pancreatitis and require treatment in certain clinical conditions. The present study aimed to identify the factors influencing the duration of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of symptomatic pancreatic pseudocysts (PPCs), walled-off necrosis (WON), and acute necrotic collections (ANCs).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of 68 patients with PFCs who underwent EUS-guided drainage. The timing and duration of EUS-guided drainage of various PFCs (ANC, WON, and PPCs) were compared, and the factors influencing the duration of endoscopic treatment were identified.

RESULTS

The mean time to first EUS-guided PFC drainage since the acute pancreatitis episode was 372.0, 505.0, and 18.7 days for WON, PPC, and ANC, respectively, and the mean duration of treatment was 90, 60, and 63 days, respectively. A disconnected pancreatic duct, a history of percutaneous drainage, and an infected PFC were identified as factors influencing the treatment duration. A positive correlation was observed between the treatment duration and patients' age. Patients with a disconnected pancreatic duct had to undergo more procedures. In patients with PPC, clinically successful drainage was more frequently achieved after a single procedure without the need for repeated procedures than in those with WON (90% vs. 59%, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with a history of percutaneous drainage, disconnected pancreatic duct, or PFC infection may require longer endoscopic treatment.

Routine laboratory parameters in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis by the time of operative pancreatic debridement: Food for thought

BACKGROUND

Timing of invasive intervention such as operative pancreatic debridement (OPD) in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) is linked to the degree of encapsulation in necrotic collections and controlled inflammation. Additional markers of these processes might assist decision-making on the timing of surgical intervention. In our opinion, it is logical to search for such markers among routine laboratory parameters traditionally used in ANP patients, considering simplicity and cost-efficacy of routine laboratory methodologies.

AIM

To evaluate laboratory variables in ANP patients in the preoperative period for the purpose of their use in the timing of surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of routine laboratory parameters in 53 ANP patients undergoing OPD between 2017 and 2020 was performed. Dynamic changes of routine hematological and biochemical indices were examined in the preoperative period. Patients were divided into survivors and non-survivors. Survivors were divided into subgroups with short and long post-surgery length of stay (LOS) in hospital. Correlation analysis was used to evaluate association of laboratory variables with LOS. Logistic regression was used to assess risk factors for patient mortality.

RESULTS

Seven patients (15%) with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) and 46 patients (85%) with moderately SAP (MSAP) were included in the study. Median age of participants was 43.2 years; 33 (62.3%) were male. Pancreatitis etiology included biliary (15%), alcohol (80%), and idiopathic/other (5%). Median time from diagnosis to OPD was ≥ 4 wk. Median postoperative LOS was at the average of 53 d. Mortality was 19%. Progressive increase of platelet count in preoperative period was associated with shortened LOS. Increased aspartate aminotransferase and direct bilirubin (DB) levels the day before the OPD along with weak progressive decrease of DB in preoperative period were reliable predictors for ANP patient mortality.

CONCLUSION

Multifactorial analysis of dynamic changes of routine laboratory variables can be useful for a person-tailored timing of surgical intervention in ANP patients.

Treatment of Acute Necrotising Pancreatitis and Its Complications: The Surgeon's Perspective

Acute necrotising pancreatitis (ANP) is associated with high complication and mortality rates. It is still difficult for the surgeon to choose and schedule the most appropriate treatment. Compared to the past, the current minimally invasive "step-up" approach enables better outcomes in terms of morbidity/mortality, notwithstanding long periods of hospitalisation, and above all ensures better levels of residual pancreatic function. We hereby report the case of a patient hospitalised in our division for approximately 4 months with a diagnosis of ANP complicated by infection and late bleeding, handled with a sequential approach.

Acute necrotizing pancreatitis: Has conservative management replaced surgery? Perspective from a tertiary care centre in Pakistan: A cross-sectional study

Background

The main purpose of this study was to review the trends in management of patients presenting with acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) over the last seven years and its effect on morbidity and mortality.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted on all patients presenting with the diagnosis of acute necrotizing pancreatitis to the Aga Khan University Hospital in between the year 2008-2015. The study population was broadly categorized in to two groups based on the way these were managed. The first group consisted of patient who underwent surgery for acute necrotizing pancreatitis while the second group was composed of those patients with necrotizing pancreatitis who were conservatively managed. Patient outcomes were assessed in terms of hospital stay, complication rates and in-hospital mortality. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 20. Comparison of outcomes between two groups was done using chi-square test, Fischer exact test or t-test wherever applicable. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

A total of n = 110 patients were included in the study with 68% (n = 75) males and 32% (n = 35) females. Nasojejunal route was found to be the most commonly utilized route of feeding in these patients consisting of around 49% (n = 54) patients with forty percent (n = 44) tolerating direct oral diet. The outcomes in both these groups in terms of hospital stay, complication rate, and in hospital mortality were not found to be statistically significant. The conservative group however was significant in terms of cost-effectiveness which was shown by a p value of (0.035). The management of this clinically important disease over the years showed an increased trend towards conservative approach in our institute.

Conclusion

Our study further substantiates the recent global trend of conservative approach towards managing patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis as reflected in the recent available literature. Therefore surgeons of the developing world need to evolve and adapt to these new measures for better outcomes in patient management.

Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Percutaneous Drainage of Infected Walled-Off Pancreatic Necrosis: A Nationwide Inpatient Sample Study

Background

Walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) represents an encapsulated collection of necrotic pancreatic or peripancreatic tissue that tends to develop four weeks after the onset of acute necrotizing pancreatitis. When infected, it is managed initially by antibiotic therapy before drainage by endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical means. This study aims to describe the morbidity, mortality, length of stay (LOS), and cost of care associated with open surgical, laparoscopic, and radiology-guided percutaneous drainage in adult patients with infected WOPN.

Methods

Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), patients aged 18 years and older discharged with the diagnosis of WOPN between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016 who underwent open, laparoscopic, or percutaneous drainage were included. Patients’ characteristics including age, gender, and body mass index were reported. The primary endpoints were the mortality rate as well as length and cost of stay in each group. The secondary endpoint was the rate of procedural complications in each arm. Endpoints were reported and compared with studies assessing similar outcomes. Statistical Analysis System (SAS) statistical software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA) was used to perform the analysis.

Results

A total of 229 patients with the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis with infected necrosis were identified. Of these 229 patients, 27, 15, and 20 underwent open, laparoscopic, and percutaneous drainage, respectively. A total of eight studies were used for comparison of outcome variables. Mortality rate was found to be similar among comparison studies. LOS and costs varied widely among studies. There were significantly fewer pancreatic fistula and significantly more multi-organ failure complications as a result of open necrosectomy in the NIS study sample.

Conclusion

Overall, in analyzing the outcomes of patients undergoing intervention for infected WOPN through the 2016 NIS database, it appears that the database is representative of the majority of outcomes seen in similar clinical trials.

Is endoscopic drainage better than percutaneous drainage for patients with pancreatic fluid collections? A comparative meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

though endoscopic and percutaneous drainage have emerged as the most common minimally invasive treatments for pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs), estimates of therapeutic superiority for either treatment have yielded inconsistent results.

METHODS

we retrieved studies comparing the efficacy and safety of these two approaches in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Primary outcomes were differences in technical success, clinical success, and adverse events, and secondary outcomes included differences in reintervention, need for surgical intervention, mortality, recurrence rate, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

there were nonsignificant differences in technical success rate (OR 0.54; CI: 0.15-1.86), clinical success rate (OR 1.39; CI: 0.82-2.37), adverse events rate (OR 1.21; CI: 0.70-2.11), mortality rate (OR 0.81; CI: 0.30-2.16), and recurrence rate (OR 1.94; CI 0.74-5.07) between the two groups. Reintervention rate (OR 0.19; CI: 0.08-0.45) and percentage of need for surgical intervention (OR 0.08; CI: 0.02-0.39) in the endoscopic drainage group were much lower than in the percutaneous drainage group. Total length of hospital stay (standard mean difference [SMD] -0.60; CI: -0.84 to -0.36) in the endoscopic drainage group was shorter; however, there was a nonsignificant difference in the length of post-procedure hospital stay (SMD: -0.30; CI: -1.05-0.44) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

endoscopic drainage is effective for PFCs, and superior in terms of lower reintervention and need for surgery rates over traditional percutaneous drainage, despite a similar clinical efficacy and safety compared with traditional percutaneous drainage.

Evaluation of Chinese updated guideline for acute pancreatitis on management of moderately severe and severe acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

/Objectives: The management of acute pancreatitis (AP) in China has undergone major changes since the launch of the updated guideline in 2013. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of this guideline on clinical practice and patient outcome.

METHODS

Moderately severe and severe adult AP patients, who were admitted to Peking Union Medical College Hospital from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2016, were retrospectively included in the study. All enrolled patients were divided into two groups based on the publication date of the updated guideline, as the pre-guideline (Pre) group and post-guideline (Post) group. In-hospital case-fatality rates were compared between two groups after adjusting baseline features, including gender, age, etiology and disease severity. In addition, the associations between specific therapeutic approaches recommended in the updated guideline and in-hospital case-fatality rates were explored.

RESULTS

A total of 475 patients were enrolled in this study, including 273 (57%) in the Pre group and 202 (43%) in the Post group. The adjusted in-hospital case-fatality rate significantly decreased in the Post group (14.3% vs. 5.9%, OR 0.39, 95%CI 0.19-0.82). In the post-hoc analysis, the use of enteral nutrition was a protective factor against in-hospital death (OR: 0.08, 95%CI: 0.03-0.18), while open surgery showed an opposite effect (OR: 3.81, 95%CI: 1.06-13.74). Prophylactic antibiotics was not significantly associated with in-hospital death (OR: 1.00, 95%CI: 0.39-2.60).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a prominent transition in the management of moderately severe and severe AP after the release of the guideline in China in 2013, which made the prognosis better.

Open necrosectomy is feasible as a last resort in selected cases with infected pancreatic necrosis: a case series and systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis is a common inflammatory pancreatic disorder, often caused by gallstone disease and frequently requiring hospitalization. In 80% of cases, a rapid and favourable outcome is described, while a necrosis of pancreatic parenchyma or extra-pancreatic tissues is reported in 10-20% of patients. The onset of pancreatic necrosis determines a significant increase of early organ failure rate and death that has higher incidence if infection of pancreatic necrosis (IPN) or extra-pancreatic collections occur. IPN always requires an invasive intervention, and, in the last decade, the advent of minimally invasive techniques has gradually replaced the employment of the open traditional approach. We report a series of three severe cases of IPN managed with primary open necrosectomy (ON) and a systematic review of the literature, in order to understand if emergency surgery still has a role in the current clinical practice.

METHODS

From January 2010 to January 2020, 3 cases of IPN were treated in our Academic Department of General and Emergency Surgery. We performed a PubMed MEDLINE search on the ON of IPN, selecting 20 from 654 articles for review.

RESULTS

The 3 cases were male patients with a mean age of 61.3 years. All patients referred to our service complaining an evolving severe clinical condition evocating a sepsis due to IPN. CT scan was the main diagnostic tool. Patients were initially conservatively managed. In consideration of clinical worsening conditions, and at the failure of conservative and minimal invasive treatment, they were, finally, managed with emergency ON. Patients reported no complications nor procedure-related sequelae in the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

The ON is confirmed to be the last resort, useful in selected severe cases, with a defined timing and in case of proven non-feasibility and no advantage of other minimally invasive approaches.

Factors associated with mortality in patients with infected pancreatic necrosis: the "surgery effect"

Severe acute pancreatitis complicated by infection is associated with high mortality. Invasive treatment is indicated in the presence of infected (suspected) pancreatic and/or peripancreatic necrosis (IPN) in the absence of response to intensive medical support. Step-up approach (SUA) has been demonstrated to lower complication rate compared to upfront open surgery. However, this approach has not been associated with lower mortality, and no factors have been studied that could help to identify the high risk patients. In this study, we aimed to analyse those factors associated with mortality following the invasive treatment of IPN, focusing on the role of surgical necrosectomy. A retrospective and observational study based on a multicentre prospective database was conducted. The database was coordinated by the Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Spain and the Spanish Association of Pancreatology. Demographics, clinical data, and laboratory and imaging findings were collected. Atlanta 2012 criteria were considered to classify acute necrotizing pancreatitis and for the definition of IPN. Step-up approach was used in all centres with the intention of avoiding surgery whenever possible. Surgical necrosectomy was performed by open approach. From January 2013 to October 2014, a total of 1655 patients with the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis were included in our database. 1081 were recruited for the final analysis. Out of them, 205 (19%) were classified into acute necrotizing pancreatitis. 77 (8.3%) patients underwent invasive treatment of INP and were included in our study. Overall mortality was 29.9%. Upfront endoscopic or percutaneous drainage was performed in 60 (77.9%) patients and mortality was 26.6%. Out of 60, 22 (36.6%) patients subsequently received rescue surgery; mortality in rescue surgery group was 18.3%. Upfront surgery was carried out in 17 (22.1%) patients; mortality in this group was 41%. At univariate analysis, surgical necrosectomy, extrapancreatic infection, immunosuppression and de-novo haemodialysis were associated with mortality. At multivariate analysis, only surgical necrosectomy was significantly associated with mortality (p = 0.002 OR 3.89). Surgical approach for IPN is associated with high mortality rate. However, these data should be interpreted with caution, since we are not able to assess whether this occurs due to the need of surgery as the only resort when the other approaches are not feasible or fail.

Step-up approach for the management of pancreatic necrosis: a review of the literature

Infected necrotizing pancreatitis is a challenging condition to treat because of the profound inflammatory response these patients undergo which can then be exacerbated by interventions. Treatment of this condition has evolved in timing of intervention as well as method of intervention and includes less invasive options for treatment such as percutaneous drainage and endoscopic drainage, in addition to less invasive endoscopic and video-assisted or laparoscopic debridements. The precise optimal treatment strategy for these patients is an ongoing topic of discussion and may be different for each patient as this is a heterogenous condition.

An endoscopic or minimally invasive surgical approach for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

the incidence of acute pancreatitis is rising across the world, thus further increasing the burden on healthcare services. Approximately 10% of patients with acute pancreatitis will develop infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP), which is the leading cause of high mortality in the late phase. There is currently no consensus with regard to the use of endoscopic or minimally invasive surgery as the first-line therapy of choice for INP. However, more clinical research with regard to the superiority of an endoscopic approach has been recently published. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine which of the two treatments leads to a better prognosis.

METHODS

four databases (Medline, SINOMED, EMBASE and Cochrane Library) were searched for eligible studies from 1980 to 2018, comparing endoscopic and minimally invasive surgery for INP.

RESULTS

two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven clinical cohort studies were included. After the analysis of data amenable to polling, significant advantages were found in favor of the endoscopic approach in terms of pancreatic fistulas (OR = 0.10, 95% CI 0.04-0.30, p < 0.001) and the length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -24.72, 95% CI = -33.87 to -15.57, p < 0.001). No marked differences were found in terms of mortality, multiple organ failure, intra-abdominal bleeding, enterocutaneous fistula, recurrence of pseudocysts, and length of stay (LOS) in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), endocrine insufficiency and exocrine insufficiency.

CONCLUSION

compared with minimally invasive surgery, an endoscopic approach evidently improved short-term outcomes for infected necrotizing pancreatitis, including pancreatic fistula and the length of hospital stay. Furthermore, relevant multicenter RCTs are eager to validate these findings.

Endoscopic Transgastric Versus Surgical Approach for Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Surgical approach (SA) is the standard treatment for infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) and endoscopic transgastric approach (ETA) is a promising alternative treatment. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of ETA versus SA in INP. Several databases were systematically searched for eligible studies that compared ETA with SA for INP. Predefined criteria were used for study selection. Three reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias. Primary outcomes included clinical resolution rate, short-term mortality, major complications, and hospital stay. Study-specific effect sizes and their 95% confidence interval (CI) were combined to calculate the pooled value using fixed-effects or random-effects model. Six studies were included with 295 patients. Major complication rate [odds ratio (OR), 0.13; 95% CI, 0.06-0.29], new-onset organ failure rate (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.12-0.54), postoperative pancreatic fistula rate (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.03-0.28), and incisional hernia rate (OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.01-0.85) were lower in the ETA group. There was a shorter hospital stay (mean difference, -17.72; 95% CI, -21.30 to -14.13) in the ETA group. No differences were found in clinical resolution, short-term mortality, postoperative bleeding, perforation of visceral organ, and endocrine or exocrine insufficiency. Compared with SA, ETA showed comparable effectiveness and safety for the treatment of INP based on current evidence.

Acute pancreatitis: current perspectives on diagnosis and management

The last two decades have seen the emergence of significant evidence that has altered certain aspects of the management of acute pancreatitis. While most cases of acute pancreatitis are mild, the challenge remains in managing the severe cases and the complications associated with acute pancreatitis. Gallstones are still the most common cause with epidemiological trends indicating a rising incidence. The surgical management of acute gallstone pancreatitis has evolved. In this article, we revisit and review the methods in diagnosing acute pancreatitis. We present the evidence for the supportive management of the condition, and then discuss the management of acute gallstone pancreatitis. Based on the evidence, our local institutional pathways, and clinical experience, we have produced an outline to guide clinicians in the management of acute gallstone pancreatitis.