Minimally invasive operations for acute necrotizing pancreatitis: comparison of minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy with endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy

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.

Indications, Techniques and Future Perspectives of Walled-off Necrosis Management

Necrotizing pancreatitis is a complex clinical condition burdened with significant morbidity and mortality. In recent years, the huge progress of interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has allowed a shift in the management of pancreatic necrotic collections from surgical/percutaneous approaches to mini-invasive endoscopic internal drainage and debridement procedures. The development of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs), devices specifically dedicated to transmural EUS interventions, further prompted the diffusion of such techniques. Several studies have reported excellent outcomes of endoscopic interventions, in terms of technical success, clinical efficacy and safety compared to surgical interventions, and thus endoscopic drainage of walled-off necrosis (WON) has become a fundamental tool for the management of such conditions. Despite these advancements, some critical unresolved issues remain. Endoscopic therapeutic approaches to WON are still heterogeneous among different centers and experts. A standardized protocol on indication, timing and technique of endoscopic necrosectomy is still lacking, and experts often adopt a strategy based on personal experience more than robust data from well-conducted studies. In this review, we will summarize the available evidence on endoscopic management of WON and will discuss some unanswered questions in this rapidly evolving field.

[Transgastric necrectomy for acute pancreatitis]

The review is devoted to transgastric necrectomy in the treatment of infected forms of acute pancreatitis. The authors discuss the indications for transgastric necrectomy and technical features of these interventions (direct endoscopic necrectomy, laparoscopic and open transgastric necrectomy). Numerous studies devoted to results of transgastric necrectomy indicate advisability of this procedure in carefully selected patients and interdisciplinary interaction of various specialists before and after surgery. Regional specialized centers for the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis are necessary for wider introduction of minimally invasive surgical technologies and their personalization.

Current trends in acute pancreatitis: Diagnostic and therapeutic challenges

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is an inflammatory disease of the pancreas, which can progress to severe AP, with a high risk of death. It is one of the most complicated and clinically challenging of all disorders affecting the abdomen. The main causes of AP are gallstone migration and alcohol abuse. Other causes are uncommon, controversial and insufficiently explained. The disease is primarily characterized by inappropriate activation of trypsinogen, infiltration of inflammatory cells, and destruction of secretory cells. According to the revised Atlanta classification, severity of the disease is categorized into three levels: Mild, moderately severe and severe, depending upon organ failure and local as well as systemic complications. Various methods have been used for predicting the severity of AP and its outcome, such as clinical evaluation, imaging evaluation and testing of various biochemical markers. However, AP is a very complex disease and despite the fact that there are of several clinical, biochemical and imaging criteria for assessment of severity of AP, it is not an easy task to predict its subsequent course. Therefore, there are existing controversies regarding diagnostic and therapeutic modalities, their effectiveness and complications in the treatment of AP. The main reason being the fact, that the pathophysiologic mechanisms of AP have not been fully elucidated and need to be studied further. In this editorial article, we discuss the efficacy of the existing diagnostic and therapeutic modalities, complications and treatment failure in the management of AP.

JPN clinical practice guidelines 2021 with easy-to-understand explanations for the management of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

In preparing the Japanese (JPN) guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis 2021, the committee focused the issues raised by the results of nationwide epidemiological survey in 2016 in Japan METHOD: In addition to a systematic search using the previous JPN guidelines, papers published from January 2014 to September 2019 were searched for the contents to be covered by the guidelines based on the concept of GRADE system.

RESULTS

Thirty-six clinical questions (CQ) were prepared in 15 subject areas. Base on the facts that patients diagnosed with severe disease by both Japanese prognostic factor score and contrast-enhanced CT grade had a high fatality rate and that little prognosis improvement after 2 weeks of disease onset was not obtained, we emphasized the importance of Pancreatitis Bundles, which was shown to be effective in improving prognosis, and the CQ sections for local pancreatic complications had been expanded to ensure adoption of a step-up approach. Furthermore, on the facts that enteral nutrition for severe acute pancreatitis was not started early within 48 hours of admission and that unnecessary prophylactic antibiotics was used in almost all cases, we emphasized early enteral nutrition in small amounts even if gastric feeding is used and no prophylactic antibiotics in mild pancreatitis.

CONCLUSION

All the members of the committee have put a lot of effort into preparing the extensively revised guidelines in the hope that more people will have a common understanding and that better medical care will be spread.

Endoscopic drainage versus percutaneous drainage for the management of infected walled-off necrosis: a comparative analysis

BACKGROUND

Comparative data on percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) vs EUS-guided drainage (EUS-D) for management of symptomatic walled-off-necrosis (WON), specially infected WON with/without organ failure(OF) is limited.

METHODS

Patients with symptomatic WON were divided into two groups of PCD and EUS-D, depending on the modality of drainage. Resolution of OF, adverse events, and other outcome measures were recorded. The two modalities were compared among infected WON sub-cohort and also degree of solid component (SC).

RESULTS

218 patients (175 males; 80.3%) were included who underwent either PCD (n = 102) or EUS-D (n = 116). Clinical success was significantly higher in the EUS-D group (92.1% vs 64.6%; p < 0.0001) and even for infected WON (n = 128) (p = 0.004), with higher (p = 0.007) and faster (p < 0.0001) OF resolution. Other outcome measures including mortality were significantly higher in the PCD group. Among subgroups, PCD with >40% SC had the worst clinical success/OF resolution rates, while EUS-D with <40% SC had the best outcomes.

CONCLUSION

EUS-D should be preferred over PCD in the management of WON, infected or otherwise, for higher clinical success, and higher/faster resolution of OF. PCD should be avoided in WON with>40% SC.

Effectiveness of digestive endoscopy and surgery in the treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Background

Digestive endoscopy and surgery are the primary invasive methods for the clinical treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis. However, there are relatively few studies evaluating the effectiveness and safety of these two methods.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on endoscopic and surgical treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis published from January 2000 to December 2020 were searched in the PubMed, Medline, Embase, China Biology Medicine Disc (CBM), and WanFang databases. The Cochrane System Review Manual was adopted to evaluate the quality of the included literature, and Review Manager 5.3 was used for data analysis.

Results

Ten articles were included in this meta-analysis, involving a total of 401 patients, including 188 in the endoscopy group and 213 in the surgery group. Meta-analysis results revealed that the clinical remission rate (CRR) [odds ratio (OR) =1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.58-2.92, P=0.52], new organ failure rate (OFR) (OR =0.53, 95% CI: 0.26-1.09, P=0.08), abdominal bleeding rate (ABR) (OR =0.62, 95% CI: 0.33-1.15, P=0.13), and intensive care unit (ICU) stay time (IST) [mean deviation (MD) =-7.33, 95% CI: -16.76 to 2.11, P=0.13] were not significantly different between the endoscopy and surgery groups. In the endoscopy group, the mortality rate (OR =0.56, 95% CI: 0.31-1.02, P=0.05), intestinal fistula rate (IFR) or gastrointestinal perforation rate (GPR) (OR =0.50, 95% CI: 0.26-0.99, P=0.05), and pancreatic fistula rate (PFR) (OR =0.09, 95% CI: 0.04-0.23, P<0.00001) were markedly lower compared to the surgery group.

Discussion

There was no obvious difference in the clinical efficacy of endoscopic and surgical treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis. However, endoscopy can greatly reduce the incidence of postoperative death and major complications in patients.

Comparison of Different Surgical Methods for Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Meta-Analysis

Purpose: To compare the effectiveness and safety of three methods of open necrosectomy, minimally invasive surgery and endoscopic step-up approach for necrotizing pancreatitis.

Methods: We searched Pubmed, Embase, ScienceDirect, and CNKI full text database (CNKI) (to December 25, 2019). RCT, prospective cohort study (PCS), and retrospective cohort study (RCS) comparing the effectiveness and safety of any two of above-mentioned three methods were included.

Results: There was no significant difference in major complications or death, and mortality between the minimally invasive surgery treatment group and the endoscopic step-up approach treatment group (RR = 1.66, 95%CI: 0.83–3.33, P = 0.15; RR = 1.05, 95%CI: 0.59–1.86, P = 0.87); the incidence rate of new-onset multiple organ failure, enterocutaneous fistula, pancreatic-cutaneous fistula, intra-abdominal bleeding, and endocrine pancreatic insufficiency in the endoscopic step-up approach treatment group was significantly lower than minimally invasive surgery group (RR = 2.65, 95%CI: 1.10–6.36, P = 0.03; RR = 6.63, 95%CI: 1.59–27.60, P = 0.009; RR = 7.73, 95%CI: 3.00–19.89, P < 0.0001; RR = 1.91, 95%CI: 1.13–3.24, P = 0.02; RR = 1.83, 95%CI: 1.9–3.16, P = 0.02); hospital stay in the endoscopic step-up approach group was significantly shorter than minimally invasive surgical treatment group (MD = 11.26, 95%CI: 5.46–17.05, P = 0.0001). The incidence of pancreatic-cutaneous fistula in the endoscopic escalation step therapy group was significantly lower than that in the open necrosectomy group (RR = 0.11, 95%CI: 0.02–0.58, P = 0.009).

Conclusion: Compared with minimally invasive surgery and open necrosectomy, although endoscopic step-up approach cannot reduce the main complications or death and mortality of patients, it can significantly reduce the incidence of some serious complications, such as pancreatic-cutaneous fistula, enterocutaneous fistula, intra-abdominal bleeding, endocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and can significantly shorten the patient's hospital stay.

[Endoscopic transluminal interventions in the treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis]

The review is devoted to endoscopic transluminal interventions in the treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Terminology, indications and options for transluminal drainage procedures and endoscopic sequestrectomy are presented in detail. The authors analyzed the results of numerous studies devoted to effectiveness of endoscopic interventions and possible combination of treatment options. Modern international clinical guidelines indicating the feasibility of endoscopic treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis in multi-field specialized centers are considered.

Adherence to the evidence-based guidelines in the management of acute biliary pancreatitis: A case series

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is considered one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders; the annual worldwide incidence for AP is 4.9-73.4 cases / 100,000 people and the total mortality rate is 4-8%, increasing to 33% in patients with infected necrosis. This study aims to assess the outcome of providing standardized evidence-based care to patients with acute biliary pancreatitis.

METHODS

Thirty patients diagnosed with acute biliary pancreatitis, were enrolled in this study and managed according to the Japanese guidelines, 2015 with a complementary scope on other recent guidelines.

RESULTS

Out of 30 patients in the study, 60% were females. Twenty-five cases were presented in the early phase of the disease while the rest presented in the late phase. Gallstones were the commonest cause (80%). The complications encountered were a systemic complication in one case, organ failure in three cases, and the local complications in the form of fluid collections in (43.3%) of cases.Out of 30 patients, 6 patients had an intervention. The main approach was minimally invasive techniques (4 cases), Open approach was performed in 2 cases. The total mortality rate was 10%. Most mild cases were discharged within one week from admission. Cases readmitted with recurrent attacks of acute pancreatitis were 3 cases, one male and 2 females.

CONCLUSION

By applying guidelines in the management of acute biliary pancreatitis, we can reduce disease-related morbidity and mortality. Besides, we can reduce the costs of medical services with the proper investment of healthcare resources.

The Effect of an Invasive Strategy for Treating Pancreatic Necrosis on Mortality: a Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Infected acute necrotic collections (ANC) and walled-off necrosis (WON) of the pancreas are associated with high mortality. The difference in mortality between open necrosectomy and minimally invasive therapies in these patients remains unclear.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted among 44 institutions in Japan from 2009 to 2013. Patients who had undergone invasive treatment for suspected infected ANC/WON were enrolled and classified into open necrosectomy and minimally invasive treatment (laparoscopic, percutaneous, and endoscopic) groups. The association of each treatment with mortality was evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

Of 1159 patients with severe acute pancreatitis, 122 with suspected infected ANC or WON underwent the following treatments: open necrosectomy (33) and minimally invasive treatment (89), (laparoscopic three, percutaneous 49, endoscopic 37). Although the open necrosectomy group had a significantly higher mortality on univariate analysis (p = 0.047), multivariate analysis showed no significant associations between open necrosectomy or Charlson index and mortality (p = 0.29, p = 0.19, respectively). However, age (for each additional 10 years, p = 0.012, odds ratio [OR] 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-2.06) and revised Atlanta criteria-severe (p = 0.001, OR 7.84, 95% CI 2.40-25.6) were significantly associated with mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute pancreatitis and infected ANC/WON, age and revised Atlanta criteria-severe classification are significantly associated with mortality whereas open necrosectomy is not. The mortality risk for patients undergoing open necrosectomy and minimally invasive treatment does not differ significantly. Although minimally invasive surgery is generally preferred for patients with infected ANC/WON, open necrosectomy may be considered if clinically indicated.

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.

Retrospective Validation of an Algorithmic Treatment Pathway for Necrotizing Pancreatitis

The role of surgical intervention for necrotizing pancreatitis has evolved; however, no widely accepted algorithm has been established to guide timing and optimal modality in the minimally invasive era. This study aimed to retrospectively validate an established institutional timing- and physiologic-based algorithm constructed from evidence-based guidelines in a high-volume hepatopancreatobiliary center. Patients with necrotizing pancreatitis requiring early (≤six weeks from symptom onset) or delayed (>six weeks) surgical intervention were reviewed over a four-year period (n = 100). Early intervention was provided through laparoscopic drain-guided retroperitoneal debridement (n = 15) after failed percutaneous drainage unless they required an emergent laparotomy (due to abdominal compartment syndrome, bowel necrosis/perforation, or hemorrhage) after which conservative, sequential open necrosectomy was performed (n = 47). Robot-assisted (n = 16) versus laparoscopic (n = 22) transgastric cystgastrostomy for the delayed management of walled-off pancreatic necrosis was compared, including patient factors, operative characteristics, and 90-day clinical outcomes. Major complications after early debridement were similarly high (open 25% and drain-guided 27%), yet 90-day mortality was low (open 8.5% and drain-guided 7.1%). Patient and operative characteristics and 90-day outcomes were statistically similar for robotic versus laparoscopic transgastric cystogastrostomy. Our evidence-based algorithm provides a stepwise approach for the management of necrotizing pancreatitis, emphasizing minimally invasive early and late interventions when feasible with low morbidity and mortality. Robot-assisted transgastric cystogastrostomy is an acceptable alternative to a laparoscopic approach for the delayed treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic vs surgical management of necrotizing pancreatitis: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopy and surgery are the two major invasive interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis. However, studies comparing their efficacy and safety are lacking.

AIM

To systemically compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic and surgical interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang database, and Sino Med were searched to identify all randomized control trials (RCT) and cohort studies comparing the efficacy and safety of endoscopic vs surgical management of necrotizing pancreatitis from January 2000 to June 2019. Revman 5.3 was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies were included, with three RCT and five cohort studies. The total number of patients involved was 366, with 167 in the endoscopy group and 199 in the surgery group. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups in clinical remission (odds ratio [OR] = 1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-2.92, P = 0.52), primary composite endpoint (relative risk [RR] = 0.46, 95%CI: 0.17-1.27, P = 0.14), or mortality (OR = 0.78, 95%CI: 0.37-1.56, P = 0.52). Compared to surgery, endoscopic therapy significantly reduced the rates of postoperative complications including new-onset organ failure (OR = 0.40, 95%CI: 0.18-0.90, P = 0.03), enterocutaneous fistula or perforation of a visceral organ (OR = 0.46, 95%CI: 0.23-0.91, P = 0.02), and pancreatic fistula (OR = 0.09, 95%CI: 0.03-0.24, P < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic treatment, as compared to surgery, significantly reduces complications in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis.

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.

Quantification of the impact of interventional radiology in the management of acute pancreatitis

OBJECTIVES

Interventional radiology plays a central role in the management of complicated acute pancreatitis, contributing to image-guided drainages, treating haemorrhagic complications and maintaining the patency of the biliary tree. In addition, many of these patients require long-term venous access for antibiotics or parenteral feeding. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role and level of involvement of the interventional radiology in this sub-group of patients.

METHODS

This was a single-centre retrospective review of all admissions for acute pancreatitis over a 5-year period. Each case was assessed to determine whether radiological intervention was utilised.

RESULTS

Our review included 401 patients. A total of 18.7% (75/401) of patients required vascular access procedures and 18.4% (74/401) required image-guided drainage. A total of 1.2% (2/401) patients had embolisation procedures performed. The embolisation procedures were performed to treat a pseudoaneurysm that had formed. Overall, 20.9% (84/401) of patients were referred to the interventional radiology department for a procedure; a majority of these patients were referred for multiple procedures over the course of their admission. The patients in the 'severe pancreatitis' category had a total of 154 procedures performed, which was 65.5% of the total procedures. On average, the patients who underwent multiple interventional procedures tended to have a longer admission and more complex disease.

CONCLUSION

The diagnosis and treatment of complicated acute pancreatitis is heavily dependent on the interventional radiology department. A substantial proportion of patients with pancreatitis required radiological intervention as part of their management, the proportion of which increased significantly in complex disease.

Time for a Changing of Guard: From Minimally Invasive Surgery to Endoscopic Drainage for Management of Pancreatic Walled-off Necrosis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic drainage (ED) with or without necrosectomy, and minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy (MISN) have been increasingly utilized for treatment of symptomatic sterile and infected pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON). We conducted this systematic review to compare the safety of ED with MISN for management of WON.

METHODS

We searched several databases from inception through November 9, 2017 to identify comparative studies evaluating the safety of ED versus MISN for management of WON. MISN could be performed using video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement or laparoscopy. We evaluated difference in mortality, major organ failure, adverse events, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Six studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 4 observational studies) with 641 patients (326 ED and 315 MISN) were included in this meta-analysis. Rates of mortality for ED and MISN were 8.5% and 14.2%, respectively. Pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval was 0.59 (0.35-0.98), I=0% in favor of ED. On subgroup analysis: no difference in mortality was seen based on randomized controlled trials [OR, 0.65 (0.08-5.11)], while ED had improved survival in observational studies [OR, 0.49 (0.27-0.89)]. Development of new major organ failure rates after interventions were 12% and 54% for ED and MISN, respectively. Pooled OR was 0.12 (0.06-0.31), I=25% in favor of ED. For adverse events, pooled OR was 0.25 (0.10-0.67), I=70% in favor of ED. There was no difference in risk of bleeding [OR, 0.68 (0.44-1.05)], while ED was associated with a significantly lower rate of pancreatic fistula formation [OR, 0.20 (0.11-0.37)], I=0%. Length of stay was also lower with ED, pooled mean difference was -21.07 (-36.97 to -5.18) days.

CONCLUSIONS

When expertise is available, ED is the preferred invasive management strategy over MISN for management of WON as it is associated with lower mortality, risk of major organ failure, adverse events, and length of hospital stay.

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.

Minimally invasive surgery in the era of step-up approach for treatment of severe acute pancreatitis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the minimally invasive surgery into the step-up approach procedures as a standard treatment for severe acute pancreatitis and comparing its results with those obtained by classical management.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study comparative with two groups treated over two consecutive, equal periods of time were defined: group A, classic management with open necrosectomy from January 2006 to June 2010; and group B, management with the step-up approach with minimally invasive surgery from July 2010 to December 2014.

RESULTS

In group A, 83 patients with severe acute pancreatitis were treated, of whom 19 underwent at least one laparotomy, and in 5 any minimally invasive surgery. In group B, 81 patients were treated: minimally invasive surgery was necessary in 17 cases and laparotomy in 3. Among operated patients, the time from admission to first interventional procedures was significantly longer in group B (9 days vs. 18.5 days; p = 0.042). There were no significant differences in Intensive Care Unit stay or overall stay: 9.5 and 27 days (group A) vs. 8.5 and 21 days (group B). Mortality in operated patients and mortality overall were 50% and 18.1% in group A vs 0% and 6.2% in group B (p < 0.001 and p = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of the step-up approach and minimally invasive surgery algorithm is feasible and could be considered as the standard of treatment for severe acute pancreatitis. The mortality rate deliberately descends when it is used.

Endoscopic or surgical step-up approach for infected necrotising pancreatitis: a multicentre randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Infected necrotising pancreatitis is a potentially lethal disease and an indication for invasive intervention. The surgical step-up approach is the standard treatment. A promising alternative is the endoscopic step-up approach. We compared both approaches to see whether the endoscopic step-up approach was superior to the surgical step-up approach in terms of clinical and economic outcomes.

METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised, superiority trial, we recruited adult patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis and an indication for invasive intervention from 19 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned to either the endoscopic or the surgical step-up approach. The endoscopic approach consisted of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transluminal drainage followed, if necessary, by endoscopic necrosectomy. The surgical approach consisted of percutaneous catheter drainage followed, if necessary, by video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement. The primary endpoint was a composite of major complications or death during 6-month follow-up. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN09186711.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 20, 2011, and Jan 29, 2015, we screened 418 patients with pancreatic or extrapancreatic necrosis, of which 98 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the endoscopic step-up approach (n=51) or the surgical step-up approach (n=47). The primary endpoint occurred in 22 (43%) of 51 patients in the endoscopy group and in 21 (45%) of 47 patients in the surgery group (risk ratio [RR] 0·97, 95% CI 0·62-1·51; p=0·88). Mortality did not differ between groups (nine [18%] patients in the endoscopy group vs six [13%] patients in the surgery group; RR 1·38, 95% CI 0·53-3·59, p=0·50), nor did any of the major complications included in the primary endpoint.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis, the endoscopic step-up approach was not superior to the surgical step-up approach in reducing major complications or death. The rate of pancreatic fistulas and length of hospital stay were lower in the endoscopy group. The outcome of this trial will probably result in a shift to the endoscopic step-up approach as treatment preference.

FUNDING

The Dutch Digestive Disease Foundation, Fonds NutsOhra, and the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.

Predictive factors of pancreatic necrosectomy following percutaneous catheter drainage as a primary treatment of patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis

Pancreatic necrosectomy (PN) following percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) is an effective method of treating patients with necrotizing pancreatitis, however, the predictive factors for PN after PCD have not yet been identified. A total of 74 patients with suspected infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) and peripancreatic fluid collection were enrolled in the current study between October 2010 and October 2015. These patients received ultrasound or computer topography guided PCD followed by PN. Patients were divided into two groups: i) A PCD-alone group (n=32) and ii) a PCD+necrosectomy group (n=42). Multivariate analysis revealed that reduction of fluid collection after PCD (P=0.021), maximum extent of peripancreatic necrosis (P=0.019) and multiple organ failure (P=0.017) were predictors of PN following PCD. A prediction model was produced to evaluate the aforementioned factors and indicated that the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.827. The probability of successful PCD was determined using a prognostic nomogram. Thus, the results of the current study demonstrated that a reduction of fluid collection by <50% following PCD, a maximum extent of peripancreatic necrosis of >50% and multiple organ failure are effective predictors of necrosectomy in patients with INP following PCD failure.

Combined totally mini-invasive approach in necrotizing pancreatitis: a case report and systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Currently, both the step-up approach, combining percutaneous drainage (PD) and video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD), and endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy (ETN) are mini-invasive techniques for infected necrosis in severe acute pancreatitis. A combination of these approaches could maximize the management of necrotizing pancreatitis, conjugating the benefits from both the experiences. However, reporting of this combined strategy is anecdotal. This is the first reported case of severe necrotizing pancreatitis complicated by biliary fistula treated by a combination of ETN, PD, VARD, and endoscopic biliary stenting. Moreover, a systematic literature review of comparative studies on minimally invasive techniques in necrotizing pancreatitis has been provided.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 59-year-old patient was referred to our center for acute necrotizing pancreatitis associated with multi-organ failure. No invasive procedures were attempted in the first month from the onset: enteral feeding by a naso-duodenal tube was started, and antibiotics were administered to control sepsis. After 4 weeks, CT scans showed a central walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) of pancreatic head communicating bilateral retroperitoneal collections. ETN was performed, and bile leakage was found at the right margin of the WOPN. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography confirmed the presence of a choledocal fistula within the WOPN, and a biliary stent was placed. An ultrasound-guided PD was performed on the left retroperitoneal collection. Due to the subsequent repeated onset of septic shocks and the evidence of size increase of the right retroperitoneal collection, a VARD was decided. The CT scans documented the resolution of all the collections, and the patient promptly recovered from sepsis. After 6 months, the patient is in good clinical condition.

CONCLUSIONS

No mini-invasive technique has demonstrated significantly better outcomes over the others, and each technique has specific indications, advantages, and pitfalls. Indeed, ETN could be suitable for central WOPNs, while VARD or PD could be suggested for lateral collections. A combination of different approaches is feasible and could significantly optimize the clinical management in critically ill patients affected by complicated necrotizing pancreatitis.

Asian consensus statements on endoscopic management of walled-off necrosis Part 1: Epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment

Walled-off necrosis (WON) is a relatively new term for encapsulated necrotic tissue after severe acute pancreatitis. Various terminologies such as pseudocyst, necroma, pancreatic abscess, and infected necrosis were previously used in the literature, resulting in confusion. The current and past terminologies must be reconciled to meaningfully interpret past data. Recently, endoscopic necrosectomy was introduced as a treatment option and is now preferred over surgical necrosectomy when the expertise is available. However, high-quality evidence is still lacking, and there is no standard management strategy for WON. The consensus meeting aimed to clarify the diagnostic criteria for WON and the role of endoscopic interventions in its management. In the Consensus Conference, 27 experts from eight Asian countries took an active role and examined key clinical aspects of WON diagnosis and endoscopic management. Statements were crafted based on literature review and expert opinion, employing the modified Delphi method. All statements were substantiated by the level of evidence and the strength of the recommendation. We created 27 consensus statements for WON diagnosis and management, including details of endoscopic procedures. When there was not enough solid evidence to support the statements, this was clearly acknowledged to facilitate future research. Proposed management strategies were formulated and are illustrated using flow charts. These recommendations, which are based on the best current scientific evidence and expert opinion, will be useful for guiding endoscopic management of WON. Part 1 of this statement focused on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and timing of intervention.

Asian consensus statements on endoscopic management of walled-off necrosis. Part 2: Endoscopic management

Walled-off necrosis (WON) is a new term for encapsulated necrotic tissue after severe acute pancreatitis. Various terminologies such as pseudocyst, necroma, pancreatic abscess, and infected necrosis were previously used in the literature, resulting in confusion. The current and past terminologies must be reconciled to meaningfully interpret past data. Recently, endoscopic necrosectomy was introduced as a treatment option and is now preferred over surgical necrosectomy when the expertise is available. However, high-quality evidence is still lacking, and there is no standard management strategy for WON. The consensus meeting aimed to clarify the diagnostic criteria for WON and the role of endoscopic interventions in its management. In the Consensus Conference, 27 experts from eight Asian countries took an active role and examined key clinical aspects of WON diagnosis and endoscopic management. Statements were crafted based on literature review and expert opinion, employing the modified Delphi method. All statements were substantiated by the level of evidence and the strength of the recommendation. We created 27 consensus statements for WON diagnosis and management, including details of endoscopic procedures. When there was not enough solid evidence to support the statements, this was clearly acknowledged to facilitate future research. Proposed management strategies were formulated and are illustrated using flow charts. These recommendations, which are based on the best current scientific evidence and expert opinion, will be useful for guiding endoscopic management of WON. Part 2 of this statement focused on the endoscopic management of WON.

Outcomes From Minimal Access Retroperitoneal and Open Pancreatic Necrosectomy in 394 Patients With Necrotizing Pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the outcomes from minimal access retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy (MARPN) and open pancreatic necrosectomy (OPN) for severe necrotizing pancreatitis in a single center.

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of severe pancreatic necrosis is evolving with a few large center single series.

METHODS

Between 1997 and 2013, patients with necrotizing pancreatitis at the Liverpool Pancreas Center were reviewed. Outcome measures were retrospectively analyzed by intention to treat.

RESULTS

There were 394 patients who had either MARPN (274, 69.5%) or OPN (120, 30.5%). Complications occurred in 174 MARPN patients (63.5%) and 98 (81.7%) OPN patients (P < 0.001). OPN was associated with increased postoperative multiorgan failure [42 (35%) vs 56 (20.4%), P = 0.001] and median (inter-quartile range) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score 9 (6-11.5) vs 8 (5-11), P < 0.001] with intensive care required less frequently in MARPN patients [40.9% (112) vs 75% (90), P < 0.001]. The mortality rate was 42 (15.3%) in MARPNs and 28 (23.3%) in OPNs (P = 0.064). Both the mortality and the overall complication rates decreased between 1997-2008 and 2008-2013 [49 (23.8%) vs 21 (11.2%) P = 0.001, respectively; and 151 (73.3%) vs 121 (64.4%), P = 0.080, respectively). Increased mortality was independently associated with age (P < 0.001), preoperative intensive care stay (P = 0.014), and multiple organ failure (P < 0.001); operation before 2008 (P < 0.001) and conversion to OPN (P = 0.035). MARPN independently reduced mortality odds risk (odds ratio = 0.27; 95% confidence interval = 0.12-0.57; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing experience and advances in perioperative care have led to improvement in outcomes. The role of MARPN in reducing complications and deaths within a multimodality approach remains substantial and should be used initially if feasible.

Intra-Abdominal Pressure Reduction After Percutaneous Catheter Drainage Is a Protective Factor for Severe Pancreatitis Patients With Sterile Fluid Collections

OBJECTIVES

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is a fatal disease with natural course of early SAP (ESAP) and late SAP (LSAP) phases. Peripancreatic percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) is effective in management of LSAP. Although our previous study indicates that intra-abdominal PCD ahead of peripancreatic PCD benefits ESAP patients with sterile fluid collections, the mechanism is still uncovered.

METHODS

According to therapeutic results, 452 SAP patients who underwent PCD were divided into sterile group (248 cases), secondary infection group (145 cases), and primary infection group (59 cases).

RESULTS

The mortality was 4.1%, 10.9%, and 18.6%, respectively. Logistic-regression analysis indicated that multiorgan dysfunction syndrome (odds ratio [OR], 1.717; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.098-2.685; P = 0.018), catheters located intra-abdominally (OR, 0.511; 95% CI, 0.296-0.884; P = 0.016), and intra-abdominal hypertension (OR, 1.534; 95% CI, 1.016-2.316; P = 0.042) were predictors for infection after PCD. Receiver operating characteristics curve delineated that decrease of intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) of more than 6.5 mm Hg after PCD had the ability to predict infection with sensitivity of 84.0% and specificity of 79.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Intra-abdominal PCD for acute sterile fluid collections seems to be an effective option rather than peripancreatic PCD. Patients with a significant decrease of IAP had a lower incidence of infection and better alleviation of organ failure.

Missing the obvious: psychosocial obstacles in Veterans with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomic disparities in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) influence medical treatment. In addition to socioeconomic barriers, the Veteran population suffers from significant psychosocial obstacles. This study identifies the social challenges that Veterans face while undergoing treatment for HCC.

METHODS

One hundred Veterans at the Palo Alto VA treated for HCC from 2009 to 2014 (50 consecutive patients who underwent a surgical procedure; 50 treated with intra-arterial therapy) were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Substance abuse history was identified in 96%, and half were unemployed. Most patients survived on a limited income [median $1340, interquartile range (IQR) 900-2125]; 36% on ≤ $1000/month, 37% between $1001-2000/month and 27% with >$2000/month. A history of homelessness was found in 30%, more common in those of the lowest income (57% of ≤$1K/month group, 23% of $1-2K/month group and 9% of >$2K/month group, P < 0.01). Psychiatric illness was present in 64/100 patients; among these the majority received ongoing psychiatric treatment. Transportation was provided to 23% of patients who would otherwise have been unable to attend medical appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychiatric disease and substance abuse are highly prevalent among Veterans with HCC. Most patients survive on a very meager income. These profound socioeconomic and psychosocial problems must be recognized when providing care for HCC to this population to provide adequate treatment and surveillance.

Necrotizing pancreatitis: new definitions and a new era in surgical management

BACKGROUND

Necrotizing pancreatitis is a challenging condition that requires surgical treatment commonly and is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Over the past decade, new definitions have been developed for standardization of severity of acute and necrotizing pancreatitis, and new management techniques have emerged based on prospective, randomized clinical trials.

METHODS

Review of English-language literature.

RESULTS

A new international classification of acute pancreatitis has been developed by PANCREA (Pancreatitis Across Nations Clinical Research and Education Alliance) to replace the Atlanta Classification. It is based on the actual local (whether pancreatic necrosis is present or not, whether it is sterile or infected) and systemic determinants (whether organ failure is present or not, whether it is transient or persistent) of severity. Early management requires goal-directed fluid resuscitation (with avoidance of over-resuscitation and abdominal compartment syndrome), assessment of severity of pancreatitis, diagnostic computed tomography (CT) imaging to assess for necrotizing pancreatitis, consideration of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for biliary pancreatitis and early enteral nutrition support. Antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended. Therapeutic antibiotics are required for treatment of documented infected pancreatic necrosis. The initial treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis is percutaneous catheter or endoscopic (transgastric/transduodenal) drainage with a second drain placement as required. Lack of clinical improvement after these initial procedures warrants consideration of minimally invasive techniques for pancreatic necrosectomy including video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD), minimally invasive retroperitoneal pancreatectomy (MIRP), or transluminal direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN). Open necrosectomy is associated with substantial morbidity, but to date no randomized trial has documented superiority of either minimally invasive or open surgical technique. Additional trials are underway to address this.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe acute and necrotizing pancreatitis requires a multi-disciplinary treatment strategy that must be individualized for each patient. Optimal treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis now requires a staged, multi-disciplinary, minimally invasive "step-up" approach that includes a team of interventional radiologists, therapeutic endoscopists, and surgeons.

Step-up approach and video assisted retroperitoneal debridement in infected necrotizing pancreatitis: A case complicated by retroperitoneal bleeding and colonic fistula

INTRODUCTION

Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis carries a high mortality and necessitates intervention to achieve sepsis control. The surgical strategy for proven infected necrosis has evolved, with abandonment of open necrosectomy to a step-up approach consisting of percutaneous drains and Video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD). We present a case that underwent VARD complicated by bleeding and colonic perforation and describe its management.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 38 year-old male with acute pancreatitis developed infected necrotizing pancreatitis. Initial treatment was by percutaneous drainage under radiological guidance and intravenous antibiotics. The infected retroperitoneal necrosis was then debrided using gasless laparoscopy through a mini-incision. Post-operatively, he developed peripancreatic bleeding which was controlled with angioembolisation. He also developed a descending colon fistula which was treated with laparotomy and defunctioning loop ileostomy. He recovered and subsequently had his ileostomy closed twelve months later. The colonic fistula recurred and was treated with endoscopic clips and histoacryl glue injection and finally closed.

DISCUSSION

Step-up approach consists of the 3 D's: Delay, drain and debride. VARD is recommended as it is replicable in general surgical units using standard laparoscopic instruments. Bleeding and colon perforation are potential complications which must have multi-disciplinary input, aggressive resuscitation and timely radiologic intervention. Defunctioning ileostomy is recommended to control sepsis in colonic fistulation. Novel fistula closing methods using endoscopic clips and histoacryl glue are potential treatment options.

CONCLUSION

Step-up approach and VARD is the new paradigm to treat necrotizing pancreatitis. Complications of bleeding and colon fistula are uncommon and require multi-disciplinary management.

Abdominal paracentesis drainage ahead of percutaneous catheter drainage benefits patients attacked by acute pancreatitis with fluid collections: a retrospective clinical cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided abdominal paracentesis drainage ahead of percutaneous catheter drainage as the new second step of a step-up approach are evaluated.

DESIGN

The observed parameters were compared between groups including mortality, infection, organ failure, inflammatory factor levels, indexes of further interventions, and drainage-related complications.

PATIENTS

This retrospective study included 102 consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis from June 2009 to June 2011.

INTERVENTIONS

In this step-up approach, all patients subsequently received medical management, percutaneous catheter drainage (with or without previous abdominal paracentesis drainage), and necrosectomy if necessary according to indications. The patients were divided into two groups: 53 cases underwent abdominal paracentesis drainage followed by percutaneous catheter drainage (abdominal paracentesis drainage + percutaneous catheter drainage group) and 49 cases were managed only with percutaneous catheter drainage (percutaneous catheter drainage-alone group).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The demographic data and severity scores of the two groups were comparable. The mortality rate was lower in the abdominal paracentesis drainage + percutaneous catheter drainage group (0%) than the percutaneous catheter drainage-alone group (8.2%) (p = 0.050). Compared with the percutaneous catheter drainage-alone group, the laboratory variables of the abdominal paracentesis drainage + percutaneous catheter drainage group decreased more rapidly, the mean number of failed organs was lower, and the interval from the onset of disease to further interventions was much longer. However, there was no significant difference in the prevalence and duration of infections between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Application of abdominal paracentesis drainage ahead of percutaneous catheter drainage is safe and beneficial to patients by reducing inflammatory factors, postponing further interventions, and delaying or avoiding multiple organ failure.

Clinical significance of serum triglyceride elevation at early stage of acute biliary pancreatitis

Background

Pancreatitis induced by hypertriglyceridemia (HTG) has gained much attention. However, very limited numbers of studies have focused on the clinical significance of TG elevation in non-HTG induced pancreatitis, such as acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP). This study aimed to study the clinical significances of triglyceride (TG) elevation in patients with ABP.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed a total of 426 ABP cases in our research center. According to the highest TG level within 72 h of disease onset, the patients were divided into a normal TG group and an elevated TG group. We analyzed the differences between the two groups of patients in aspects such as general information, disease severity, APACHE II (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II) and Ranson scores, inflammatory cytokines, complications and prognosis.

Results

Compared with the normal TG group, patients in the elevated TG group showed a significantly higher body mass index and were significantly younger. TG elevation at the early stage of ABP was associated with higher risk of severe pancreatitis and organ failures, especially respiratory failure. For patients with severe pancreatitis, those with elevated TG levels were more likely to have a larger area of necrosis, and higher incidence of pancreatic abscess as well as higher mortality (17.78% versus 9.80%, P < 0.05).

Conclusions

In ABP patients, TG elevation might participate in the aggravation of pancreatitis and the occurrence of systemic or local complications. Thus, the TG level may serve as an important indicator to determine the prognosis of patients with ABP.

Predictors of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) after abdominal paracentesis drainage (APD) in patients with moderately severe or severe acute pancreatitis along with fluid collections

Aims

Although we previously demonstrated abdominal paracentesis drainage (APD) preceding percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) as the central step for treating patients with moderately severe (MSAP) or severe acute pancreatitis (SAP), the predictors leading to PCD after APD have not been studied.

Methods

Consecutive patients with MSAP or SAP were recruited between June 2011 and June 2013. As a step-up approach, all patients initially received medical management, later underwent ultrasound-guided APD before PCD, if necessary, followed by endoscopic necrosectomy through the path formed by PCD. APD primarily targeted fluid in the abdominal or pelvic cavities, whereas PCD aimed at (peri)pancreatic fluid.

Results

Of the 92 enrolled patients, 40 were managed with APD alone and 52 received PCD after APD (14 required necrosectomy after initial PCD). The overall mortality was 6.5%. Univariate analysis showed that among the 20 selected parameters, 13 factors significantly affected PCD intervention after APD. Multivariate analysis revealed that infected (peri)pancreatic collections (P = -0.001), maximum extent of necrosis of more than 30% of the pancreas (P = -0.024), size of the largest necrotic peri(pancreatic) collection (P = -0.007), and reduction of (peri)pancreatic fluid collections by <50% after APD (P = -0.008) were all independent predictors of PCD.

Conclusions

Infected (peri)pancreatic collections, a largest necrotic peri(pancreatic) collection of more than 100 ml, and reduction of (peri)pancreatic fluid collections by <50% after APD could effectively predict the need for PCD in the early course of the disease.

Is necrosectomy obsolete for infected necrotizing pancreatitis? Is a paradigm shift needed?

In 1886, Senn stated that removing necrotic pancreatic and peripancreatic tissue would benefit patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Since then, necrosectomy has been a mainstay of surgical procedures for infected necrotizing pancreatitis (NP). No published report has successfully questioned the role of necrosectomy. Recently, however, increasing evidence shows good outcomes when treating walled-off necrotizing pancreatitis without a necrosectomy. The literature concerning NP published primarily after 2000 was reviewed; it demonstrates the feasibility of a paradigm shift. The majority (75%) of minimally invasive necrosectomies show higher completion rates: between 80% and 100%. Transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy has shown remarkable results when combined with percutaneous drainage or a metallic stent. Related morbidities range from 40% to 92%. Single-digit mortality rates have been achieved with transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy, but not with video-assisted retroperitoneal necrosectomy series. Drainage procedures without necrosectomy have evolved from percutaneous drainage to transluminal endoscopic drainage with or without percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy access for laparoscopic instruments. Most series have reached higher success rates of 79%-93%, and even 100%, using transcystic multiple drainage methods. It is becoming evident that transluminal endoscopic drainage treatment of walled-off NP without a necrosectomy is feasible. With further refinement of the drainage procedures, a paradigm shift from necrosectomy to drainage is inevitable.

Retroperitoneoscopic Anatomical Necrosectomy

Background. Video-assisted retroperitoneal necrosectomy is a minimally invasive surgical technique for the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis. This study evaluated the safety and feasibility of a modified single-stage video-assisted retroperitoneal necrosectomy, retroperitoneoscopic anatomical necrosectomy (REAN). Methods. Between September 2010 and May 2012, a total of 17 patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis underwent REAN. The surgical procedures were similar to retroperitoneoscopic pancreatectomy, in which 3 trocars are utilized. Briefly, the perirenal space was entered through the posterior pararenal space. Dissection proceeded from posterior to anterior direction to expose the dorsal side of the perirenal fascia. This was opened to reach the anterior perirenal space, where the peripancreatic abscess was located. Necrotic tissue was then debrided and catheter drainage was performed in a single stage. Results. Operating time ranged from 45 to 100 minutes with minimal blood loss. All patients recovered except for one who died. Major perisurgical complications included peritoneal injury (1 patient), splenic vein injury (1 patient), retroperitoneal infection with paralytic ileus (1 patient), hydrothorax and atelectasis (2 patients), and subcutaneous cellulitis beneath the incision (3 patients). Two patients required additional percutaneous catheter drainage, and 1 patient required a laparotomy to debride the remaining necrotic tissue. Postoperative hospital stay ranged from 21 to 64 days. Conclusions. This study demonstrates that REAN, a modified single-stage video-assisted retroperitoneal approach, was safe and feasible for the treatment of infected necrotizing pancreatitis. The advantages of this procedure include direct access with shorter operating time, complete necrotic tissue debridement, easy hemostasis, simple manipulation, and easy drainage.

Minimally invasive procedures in severe acute pancreatitis treatment - assessment of benefits and possibilities of use

Introduction

Acute pancreatitis (AP) consists of an extremely varied complex of pathological symptoms and clinical conditions, ranging from mild gastric complaints to multi-organ failure resulting in death.

Aim

To present the authors’ own experience regarding surgical treatment for pancreatic necrosis complicated by infection using different methods, including classic and laparoscopic methods as well as those combined with percutaneous techniques.

Material and methods

In the period 2007–2010, 34 patients with the diagnosis of severe AP were treated at the Department of General, Gastroenterological and Oncological Surgery, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University. In 7 patients classic necrosectomy with repeated peritoneal flushing was performed (type 1), in 5 patients laparotomy with active drainage (type 2), in 12 video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement (type 3), and in 10 only percutaneous drainage methods (type 4).

Results

Total duration of hospitalisation was from 10 to 192 days. The highest death rate was observed for type 1 procedures. Significant differences with regard to the absolute number of postoperative complications between different groups were not observed; however, their quality varied. Classic methods were used in patients whose general and local condition was more severe.

Conclusions

When AP and its complications are diagnosed, a suitable method of surgical treatment has to be selected extremely precisely and in an individualised way. Minimally invasive methods used in selected patients provide better outcomes and higher safety superseding classic, open techniques of surgical treatment.

Endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy in necrotising pancreatitis: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We performed a systematic review to assess the outcome of endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy in necrotising pancreatitis with additional focus on indication, disease severity, and methodological quality of studies.

DESIGN

We searched the literature published between January 2005 and June 2013. Cohorts, including patients with (infected) necrotising pancreatitis, undergoing endoscopic necrosectomy were included. Indication, disease severity, and methodological quality were described. The main outcomes were mortality, major complications, number of endoscopic sessions, and definitive successful treatment with endoscopic necrosectomy alone.

RESULTS

After screening 581 papers, 14 studies, including 455 patients, fulfilled the eligibility criteria. All included studies were retrospective analyses except for one randomized, controlled trial. Overall methodological quality was moderate to low (mean 5, range 2-9). Less than 50 % of studies reported on pre-procedural severity of disease: mean APACHE-II score before intervention was 8; organ failure was present in 23 % of patients; and infected necrosis in 57 % of patients. On average, four (range 1-23) endoscopic interventions were performed per patient. With endoscopic necrosectomy alone, definitive successful treatment was achieved in 81 % of patients. Mortality was 6 % (28/460 patients) and complications occurred in 36 % of patients. Bleeding was the most common complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy is an effective treatment for the majority of patients with necrotising pancreatitis with acceptable mortality and complication rates. It should be noted that methodological quality of the available studies is limited and that the combined patient population of endoscopically treated patients is only moderately ill.

Laparoscopic pancreatic resections

PURPOSE

Pancreatic surgery is technically complex and requires considerable expertise. Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery adds the need for considerable experience with advanced laparoscopic techniques. Despite the technical difficulties, an increasing number of centers propagate the use of laparoscopy in pancreatic surgery over the last decade.

METHODS

In this review, we provide an overview of the literature regarding the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. Larger prospective randomized studies have emerged in the subset of laparoscopic or retroperitoneoscopic surgery for acute pancreatitis, considerable single center experience has been reported for laparoscopic pancreatic tail resection, and laparoscopic pancreatic head resection, however, is still restricted to a few experienced centers worldwide.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery is becoming more and more established, in particular for the treatment of benign and premalignant lesions of the pancreatic body and tail. It has been shown to decrease postoperative pain, narcotic use, and length of hospital stay in larger single center experience. However, prospective trials are needed in laparoscopic resective pancreatic surgery to evaluate its advantages, safety, and efficacy in the treatment of pancreatic neoplasms and in particular in malignant pancreatic tumors.

Spontaneous bleeding in pancreatitis treated by transcatheter arterial coil embolization: a retrospective study

Background/Objectives

A rare, but life-threatening complication in pancreatitis is a spontaneous bleeding from intestinal vessels with or without previous formation of (pseudo-) aneurysms. And yet, the optimal diagnostic and therapeutic strategies remain unclear.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients with pancreatitis and intraabdominal bleeding at a German tertiary referral center between January 2002 and December 2012.

Results

Bleeding occurred in <1% (14/3,421) of patients with pancreatitis. Most involved vessels were arteria lienalis, arteria gastroduodenalis, and arteria pancreaticoduodenalis. All bleedings could be stopped by transcatheter arterial coil embolization. Recurrent bleeding after coil embolization occurred in 2/14 (14%) patients.

Conclusions

In cases of intraabdominal hemorrhage in patients with pancreatitis, transcatheter arterial coil embolization should be considered as the first interventional procedure.

Grenzen des laparoskopischen Operierens bei abdomineller Sepsis

<b><i>Hintergrund: </i></b>Zahlreiche präklinische Daten weisen auf Vorteile des laparoskopischen Operierens auch bei abdomineller Sepsisquelle und septischem Patienten hin. <b><i>Methode und Ergebnisse: </i></b>Anhand derzeit verfügbarer Literatur betrachten wir die Möglichkeiten und Limitierungen laparoskopischen Operierens beim septischen Patienten mit abdominellem Fokus. Neben generellen Überlegungen werden im Speziellen das Vorgehen bei Appendizitis, Cholezystitis, perforiertem Ulkus, Sigmadivertikulitis und akuter Pankreatitis erörtert. <b><i>Schlussfolgerungen: </i></b>Erfahrene laparoskopische Chirurgen können die Sanierung der abdominellen Sepsisquelle bei Appendizitis, Cholezystitis, perforiertem Ulkus oder auch Sigmadivertikulitis sicher durchführen. Kombinationen aus interventionellen Techniken und minimal invasiven Operationen bieten insbesondere bei der perforierten Sigmadivertikulitis und bei infizierten Pankreasnekrosen innovative Ansätze, die derzeit in multizentrischen prospektiven Studien untersucht werden.

Current Status of Direct Endoscopic Necrosectomy

The management of pancreatic necrosis has evolved. Sterile necrosis is now managed conservatively. Intervention is generally required for infected necrosis but is now deferred until four weeks after disease onset in order to permit encapsulation and demarcation of the necrotic collection. Demarcation facilitates necrosectomy and reduces complications related to the drainage and debridement procedures. The approach to pancreatic necrosectomy has evolved from primary open necrosectomy to minimally-invasive radiologic, surgical and endoscopic procedures. Direct endoscopic necrosectomy is a minimally-invasive technique that was introduced in recent years for the treatment of infected walled-off necrosis. A stoma is created endoscopically between the gastric lumen and the walled-off collection. An endoscope is then inserted directly into the cavity to perform endoscopic necrosectomy. This is followed by short-term placement of double pigtail transgastric stents and nasocystic catheter for post-procedural irrigation and drainage. This review will summarise the current status of direct endoscopic necrosectomy.