[Percutaneous drainage of infected pancreatic necrosis: an alternative to surgery]

Predictors of surgery in patients with severe acute pancreatitis managed by the step-up approach

BACKGROUND

Initial management of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is conservative. As a step-up approach, percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) with saline irrigation is reported to be effective. Factors leading to surgery are unclear.

METHODS

In this ongoing prospective study, 70 consecutive patients with SAP were recruited. As a step-up approach, all patients initially received medical management and later underwent PCD and surgery as per the indication.

RESULTS

Of the 70 consecutive patients with SAP, 14 were managed medically, 29 managed with PCD alone, whereas 27 required surgery after initial PCD. Sepsis reversal was achieved with PCD alone in 62.5%. The curative efficacy of PCD alone was in 27 patients (48%). Overall mortality in the whole group was 24%. On univariate analysis, factors significantly affecting surgical intervention included initial acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score, APACHE II score at first intervention, sepsis reversal by PCD within a week, number of organs failed, organ failure within a week of the onset of disease, number of bacteria isolated per patient, renal failure, respiratory failure, Escherichia coli, computerized tomography severity index score at admission, parenteral nutrition requirement before or after radiological intervention, maximum extent of necrosis of more than 50% of the pancreas, and extrapancreatic necrosis. On multivariate analysis, renal failure (P = -0.03), APACHE II score at first intervention (P = -0.006), and the number of bacteria isolated per patient (P = -0.01) remained independent predictors of surgery. An APACHE II score of more than 7.5 at first intervention (PCD) had the ability to predict surgery with a sensitivity of 88.9% and a specificity of 69%.

CONCLUSIONS

PCD reversed sepsis in 62% and avoided surgery in 48% of the patients. Reversal of sepsis within a week of PCD, APACHE II score at first intervention (PCD), and organ failure within a week of the onset of disease could predict the need for surgery in the early course of disease.

Management of infected pancreatic necrosis using retroperitoneal necrosectomy with flexible endoscope: 10 years of experience

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to provide our experience in the management of infected and drained pancreatic necrosis using the retroperitoneal approach.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study in a tertiary care university hospital. Thirty-two patients with confirmed infected pancreatic necrosis were studied. Superficial necrosectomy was performed with lavage and aspiration of debris. This was achieved though a retroperitoneal approach of the pancreatic area and under the direct vision of a flexible endoscope. The follow-up procedure using retroperitoneal endoscopy did not require taking the patient to the operating room. The main outcome measures were infection control, morbidity, and mortality related to technique, reintervention, and long-term follow-up.

RESULTS

No significant morbidity or mortality related to the technique was observed in all of the patients with infected pancreatic necrosis treated with this retroperitoneal approach compared with published data using other approaches. Reinterventions were not required and patients are currently asymptomatic.

CONCLUSIONS

Retroperitoneal access of the pancreatic area is a good approach for drainage and debridement of infected pancreatic necrosis. Translumbar retroperitoneal endoscopy allows exploration under direct visual guidance avoiding open transabdominal reintervention and the risk of contamination of the abdominal cavity. This technique does not increase morbidity and mortality, can be performed at the patients' bedside as many times as necessary, and has advantages over other retroperitoneal approaches.

Percutaneous catheter drainage for infective pancreatic necrosis: is it always the first choice for all patients?

OBJECTIVE

To learn the clinical outcome of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) for patients with infective pancreatic necrosis and the possible influencing factors.

METHODS

A retrospective review of medical records of patients with infective pancreatic necrosis who received PCD as the first choice for treatment in the recent 2 years. The patients were divided into 2 groups: (1) PCD success group and (2) PCD alteration group. Characteristics, complications, and PCD process were compared.

RESULTS

In this study, 19 of 34 patients were cured by PCD alone (55.9%), whereas open necrosectomy were needed for 15 patients (44.1%). Between these 2 groups, most baseline and clinical characteristics did not show any statistical difference, including the number and size of catheter used and the bacterial culture result. The PCD alteration group had higher mean computed tomographic density (P = 0.012) and larger distribution range of infected pancreatic necrosis (4.53 ± 1.35 vs 5.93 ± 1.62; P = 0.009) than the PCD success group (P < 0.01). The logistic regression analysis revealed the same facts.

CONCLUSION

The mean computed tomographic density and distribution range of infective pancreatic necrosis could significantly influence the success rate of PCD; higher values of them indicate less appropriate for PCD; thus, it should be considered seriously before the treatment decision.

Percutaneous lavage as primary treatment for infected pancreatic necrosis

BACKGROUND

The classic treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) is surgical debridement and drainage. This study reviews our experience with nonoperative percutaneous catheter drainage and serial lavage as primary treatment in patients with IPN.

STUDY DESIGN

Between 1993 and 2009, a prospective nonselected series of 63 consecutive patients with microbiologically confirmed IPN were enrolled with the intent of treating them nonoperatively, and they were retrospectively analyzed. Catheters were placed percutaneously in the interventional radiology (IR) suite, and were used to lavage and debride the necrosis 1-3 times per week. The lavages continued on an outpatient basis by IR, and the catheters were removed with disease resolution.

RESULTS

One patient rapidly became unstable and had to be taken primarily for open debridement. In the remaining 62 patients, 57 survived, for an overall mortality rate of 8%. Fifty patients were treated solely with percutaneous lavage, and 47 survived. Mean hospital length of stay was 61 days, ranging from 6 to 190 days. Mean length of outpatient treatment was 42 days, ranging from 3 to 180 days. Mean number of lavages was 21, ranging from 11 to 75. Eleven patients (18%) deteriorated during percutaneous treatment and required laparotomy, and 9 of these survived. One patient treated percutaneously resolved his sepsis but had a persistent pancreatic fistula and was managed with pancreaticojejunostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous catheter drainage and serial lavage are an effective alternative to open surgical debridement in patients with IPN. Overall survival is excellent, and most patients avoid the morbidity of open debridement. A minority of patients deteriorate, but most of those can be salvaged with open drainage.

Acute pancreatitis with an emphasis on infection

Acute pancreatitis is an inflammatory disease that is mild and self-limiting in about 80% of cases. However, severe necrotizing disease still has a mortality of up to 30%. Differentiated multimodal treatment concepts are needed for these patients, including a multidisciplinary team (intensivists, gastroenterologists, interventional radiologists, and surgeons). The primary therapy is supportive. Patients with infected pancreatic necrosis who are septic undergo interventional or surgical treatment, ideally not before the fourth week after onset of symptoms. This article reviews the pathophysiologic mechanisms of acute pancreatitis and describes clinical pathways for diagnosis and management based on the current literature and guidelines.

Infected pancreatic necrosis: minimizing the cut

The challenge for the pancreatologist managing patients with infected pancreatic necrosis is to devise a treatment algorithm that enables recovery but at the same time limits the morbidity and mortality. The current gold standard remains open necrosectomy. Recent literature contains scattered reports of endoscopic, radiologic, laparoscopic, percutaneous and lumbotomy approaches to managing patients with this condition. This literature review addresses the role of techniques that aim to minimize the physiological insult to the patient with infected pancreatic necrosis.

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous drainage may decrease the mortality of severe acute pancreatitis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) treatment for severe acute pancreatitis compared to conservative and conventional surgical treatments.

METHODS

Eighty-one patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) were admitted and divided into three groups: forty-nine cases in the conservative therapy group; nineteen cases in the surgery group; and thirteen cases in the PCD therapy group. Forty-five patients with a CT severity index (CTSI) < or = 8.0 received conservative treatment. One patient with CTSI = 7.0 underwent surgery. Thirty-five patients with a CTSI > 8.0 were randomly selected for surgery or PCD treatment. After randomization, six patients (four patients in the surgery group and two patients in the PCD group) were dropped from the study. The total number of patients included in the surgery and PCD groups was sixteen and thirteen, respectively.

RESULTS

Four patients (8.2%) in the conservative therapy group died, five patients (31.3%) in surgery group with a CTSI > 8.0 died, and all patients in the PCD group survived. The mortality rate was lower in the PCD group than in the surgery group (P = 0.048). The serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level recovered more quickly in patients in the PCD group compared to those in the surgery group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with SAP and a CTSI < or = 8.0 could be treated with conservative therapy, while patients with a CTSI > 8.0 should be treated with surgery or PCD therapy if the life-threatening complications of extensive fluid collection or necrosis are a factor. However, PCD therapy used in a timely manner for drainage may decrease mortality in patients with SAP, decrease inflammatory mediator release, and avoid incidence of severe sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and emergency surgery.

Percutaneous "stepped" drainage technique for infected pancreatic necrosis

INTRODUCTION

Aggressive surgical pancreatic debridement remains the standard of care, may require multiple abdominal explorations and is associated with high mortality. We have introduced the stepped technique of percutaneous treatment of infected peripancreatic fluid collections.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients with severe infected necrotizing pancreatitis who were managed percutaneously. Culture results, number of radiological interventions, length of stay, and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

There were 8 patients with a median number of Ranson's criteria of 4.5. Sixty invasive procedures were performed. A median number of two separate catheter sites per patient were necessary for the removal of necrotic material. Median duration of percutaneous intervention was 71.5 days with complete removal of necrotic material and resolution of infected collections in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons and interventional radiologists should be familiar with this evolving technique which is less invasive then surgery, but may prolong the time necessary for complete resolution.

Minimally invasive techniques in pancreatic necrosis

Traditional open surgical necrosectomy for treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis is associated with high morbidity and mortality, leading to a shift toward minimally invasive endoscopic, radiologic, and laparoscopic approaches. Percutaneous drainage is useful as a temporizing method to control sepsis and as an adjunctive treatment to surgical intervention. It is limited because of the requirement for frequent catheter care and the need for repeated procedures. Endoscopic transgastric or transduodenal therapies with endoscopic debridement/necrosectomy have recently been described and are highly successful in carefully selected patients. It avoids the need for open necrosectomy and can be used in poor operative candidates. Laparoscopic necrosectomy is also promising for treatment of pancreatic necrosis. However, the need for inducing a pneumoperitoneum and the potential risk of infection limit its usefulness in patients with critical illness. Retroperitoneal access with a nephroscope is used to directly approach the necrosis with complete removal of a sequestrum. Retroperitoneal drainage using the delay-until-liquefaction strategy also appears to be successful to treat pancreatic necrosis. The anatomic location of the necrosis, clinical comorbidities, and operator experience determine the best approach for a particular patient. Tertiary care centers with sufficient expertise are increasingly using minimally invasive procedures to manage pancreatic necrosis.

Acute pancreatitis at the beginning of the 21st century: the state of the art

Acute pancreatitis is an acute inflammatory disease of the pancreas which can lead to a systemic inflammatory response syndrome with significant morbidity and mortality in 20% of patients. Gallstones and alcohol consumption are the most frequent causes of pancreatitis in adults. The treatment of mild acute pancreatitis is conservative and supportive; however severe episodes characterized by necrosis of the pancreatic tissue may require surgical intervention. Advanced understanding of the pathology, and increased interest in assessment of disease severity are the cornerstones of future management strategies of this complex and heterogeneous disease in the 21st century.

Acute pancreatitis at the beginning of the 21st century: The state of the art

Acute pancreatitis is an acute inflammatory disease of the pancreas which can lead to a systemic inflammatory response syndrome with significant morbidity and mortality in 20% of patients. Gallstones and alcohol consumption are the most frequent causes of pancreatitis in adults. The treatment of mild acute pancreatitis is conservative and supportive; however severe episodes characterized by necrosis of the pancreatic tissue may require surgical intervention. Advanced understanding of the pathology, and increased interest in assessment of disease severity are the cornerstones of future management strategies of this complex and heterogeneous disease in the 21st century.

Outcome of patients with acute, necrotizing pancreatitis requiring drainage-does drainage size matter?

AIM: To assess the outcome of patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis treated by percutaneous drainage with special focus on the influence of drainage size and number.

METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 80 patients with acute pancreatitis requiring percutaneous drainage therapy for infected necroses. Endpoints were mortality and length of hospital stay. The influence of drainage characteristics such as the median drainage size, the largest drainage size per patient and the total drainage plane per patient on patient outcome was evaluated.

RESULTS: Total hospital survival was 66%. Thirty-four patients out of all 80 patients (43%) survived acute necrotizing pancreatitis with percutaneous drainage therapy only. Eighteen patients out of all 80 patients needed additional percutaneous necrosectomy (23%). Ten out of these patients required surgical necrosectomy in addition, 6 patients received open necrosectomy without prior percutaneous necrosectomy. Elective surgery was performed in 3 patients receiving cholecystectomy and one patient receiving resection of the parathyroid gland. The number of drainages ranged from one to fourteen per patient. The drainage diameter ranged from 8 French catheters to 24 French catheters. The median drainage size as well as the largest drainage size used per patient and the total drainage area used per patient did not show statistically significant influence on mortality.

CONCLUSION: Percutaneous drainage therapy is an effective tool for treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis. Large bore drainages did not prove to be more effective in controlling the septic focus.

Severe acute pancreatitis: Clinical course and management

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) develops in about 25% of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). Severity of AP is linked to the presence of systemic organ dysfunctions and/or necrotizing pancreatitis pathomorphologically. Risk factors determining independently the outcome of SAP are early multi-organ failure, infection of necrosis and extended necrosis (>50%). Up to one third of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis develop in the late course infection of necroses. Morbidity of SAP is biphasic, in the first week strongly related to early and persistence of organ or multi-organ dysfunction. Clinical sepsis caused by infected necrosis leading to multi-organ failure syndrome (MOFS) occurs in the later course after the first week. To predict sepsis, MOFS or deaths in the first 48-72 h, the highest predictive accuracy has been objectified for procalcitonin and IL-8; the Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA)-score predicts the outcome in the first 48 h, and provides a daily assessment of treatment response with a high positive predictive value. Contrast-enhanced CT provides the highest diagnostic accuracy for necrotizing pancreatitis when performed after the first week of disease. Patients who suffer early organ dysfunctions or at risk of developing a severe disease require early intensive care treatment. Early vigorous intravenous fluid replacement is of foremost importance. The goal is to decrease the hematocrit or restore normal cardiocirculatory functions. Antibiotic prophylaxis has not been shown as an effective preventive treatment. Early enteral feeding is based on a high level of evidence, resulting in a reduction of local and systemic infection. Patients suffering infected necrosis causing clinical sepsis, pancreatic abscess or surgical acute abdomen are candidates for early intervention. Hospital mortality of SAP after interventional or surgical debridement has decreased in high volume centers to below 20%.

Severe acute pancreatitis: Clinical course and management

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) develops in about 25% of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). Severity of AP is linked to the presence of systemic organ dysfunctions and/or necrotizing pancreatitis pathomorphologically. Risk factors determining independently the outcome of SAP are early multi-organ failure, infection of necrosis and extended necrosis (> 50%). Up to one third of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis develop in the late course infection of necroses. Morbidity of SAP is biphasic, in the first week strongly related to early and persistence of organ or multi-organ dysfunction. Clinical sepsis caused by infected necrosis leading to multi-organ failure syndrome (MOFS) occurs in the later course after the first week. To predict sepsis, MOFS or deaths in the first 48-72 h, the highest predictive accuracy has been objectified for procalcitonin and IL-8; the Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA)-score predicts the outcome in the first 48 h, and provides a daily assessment of treatment response with a high positive predictive value. Contrast-enhanced CT provides the highest diagnostic accuracy for necrotizing pancreatitis when performed after the first week of disease. Patients who suffer early organ dysfunctions or at risk of developing a severe disease require early intensive care treatment. Early vigorous intravenous fluid replacement is of foremost importance. The goal is to decrease the hematocrit or restore normal cardiocirculatory functions. Antibiotic prophylaxis has not been shown as an effective preventive treatment. Early enteral feeding is based on a high level of evidence, resulting in a reduction of local and systemic infection. Patients suffering infected necrosis causing clinical sepsis, pancreatic abscess or surgical acute abdomen are candidates for early intervention. Hospital mortality of SAP after interventional or surgical debridement has decreased in high volume centers to below 20%.

Management of severe pancreatic necrosis

Pancreatic necrosis is a form of severe pancreatitis associated with high morbidity and mortality. In this condition there is necrosis of pancreatic tissue with pancreatic duct disruption leading to release and activation of pancreatic enzymes. This in turn causes peripancreatic necrosis and formation of fluid collections. The diagnosis of pancreatic necrosis is made by contrast-enhanced CT scan of the abdomen. The management of pancreatic necrosis is controversial. No randomized clinical trials are available for guidance in treatment of pancreatic necrosis. Experience, collaboration, and knowledge of the managing teams play a major role in successful treatment. Early percutaneous drainage with frequent monitoring of the catheters is the hallmark of our approach. Using this approach, it is possible to significantly decrease the rate of morbidity and mortality associated with this disease and its treatment.

New advances in pancreatic surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

New understanding of the dynamic of acute pancreatitis, the clinical impact of local pathology in chronic pancreatitis and cystic neoplastic lesions bearing high potential for malignant transformation has changed the management of pancreatic diseases.

RECENT FINDINGS

In acute pancreatitis, risk factors independently determining outcome in severe acute pancreatitis are early and persistent multiorgan failure, infected necrosis and extended sterile necrosis. The management of severe acute pancreatitis is based on early intensive-care treatment and late surgical debridement. In chronic pancreatitis, recent data from randomized controlled clinical trials have demonstrated duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection with an inflammatory mass of the head as superior to pylorus-preserving Whipple resection. Cystic neoplasms are local lesions of the pancreas with high malignant potential. Local organ-preserving resection techniques have been applied with low morbidity and mortality, replacing a Whipple-type resection. Resection of pancreatic cancer is ineffective to cure patients. After an R0-resection, a significant survival benefit has been achieved when adjuvant chemotherapy has additionally been applied.

SUMMARY

New knowledge about the nature of inflammatory diseases, cystic neoplastic lesions and malignant pancreatic tumours has changed the indication for surgical treatment and the application of organ-preserving surgical techniques.

Feasibility of minimally invasive approaches in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis

Background

Minimally invasive procedures to treat infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) are gaining popularity. The proportion of patients suitable for this approach remains unknown.

Methods

Preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans were reviewed from 106 consecutive patients who had surgery for INP between 2000 and 2003 in 11 Dutch hospitals. Collections related to the pancreas were classified according to their distance from the left abdominal wall. Five radiologists judged ‘accessibility’ for drain placement and the likelihood that there was a fluid component that would drain (‘drainability’). Agreement between radiologists was determined.

Results

CT scans of 80 (75 per cent) patients were available (59 men; age range 29–80 years). The median interval between hospital admission and preoperative CT scan was 20 days. In 55 (69 per cent) patients, the lateral border of the collection was less than 5 cm from the left abdominal wall. Placement of a drain was deemed feasible in 67 (84 (range 77–89) per cent) patients; mean(s.d.) kappa 0·428(0·096). In 45 (56 per cent) patients, a drain could be placed through the left retroperitoneum. In 43 (54 (range 49–82) per cent) patients, collections were judged to contain a drainable fluid component. Interobserver agreement on ‘drainability’ was poor, mean(s.d.) kappa 0·289(0·101).

Conclusion

Most peripancreatic collections in INP were considered accessible to a minimally invasive approach.

No debridement is necessary for symptomatic or infected acute necrotizing pancreatitis: delayed, mini-retroperitoneal drainage for acute necrotizing pancreatitis without debridement and irrigation

We sought to determine if necrosectomy can be omitted for complicated acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP). Since 1996, we prospectively performed retroperitoneal drainage by introducing a sump drain to the pancreatic head area via a small left flank incision without debridement and irrigation on 19 consecutive complicated ANP patients. We purposely delayed surgery until liquefaction of retroperitoneal tissue reached the left flank. Our patients had a mean Ranson's and APACHE II score of 5.9 (range, 4-8) and 20.1(range, 4-45), respectively. Sixteen available CT showed retroperitoneal liquefaction after 21.3 days (range, 14-26). Operations were delayed for 4.7 weeks (range, 1.3-9.0). No patient succumbed during this period. The indications were infected necrosis in 16 and severe abdominal pain/food intolerance in 3 patients. Average skin incision was 4.0 cm (range, 3-9). Fungi or bacteria were cultured in 15 patients (80.0%). The recovery courses were surprisingly uneventful. Oral intake began within 2.4 days (range, 1-5) and mean hospital stay (16 survivals) was 23.2 days (range, 4-120) after operation. Drains were completely removed 120.6 days (range, 60-250) later from these outpatients. One gastric perforation and one minor duodenal leak were the only procedure-related complications (10.5%). Three patients died (15.8%), although one had a healed ANP. In conclusion, this delay-until-liquefaction strategy without necrosectomy is an easy and effective treatment method.

Surgical intervention in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the various surgical strategies for treatment of (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) and patient referrals for this condition in the Netherlands.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all 106 consecutive patients who had surgical treatment for INP in the period 2000-2003 in one of eight Dutch university medical centres including three teaching hospitals. Surgical approaches included an open abdomen strategy, laparotomy with continuous postoperative lavage, minimally invasive procedures or laparotomy with primary abdominal closure. The National Hospital Registration System was searched to identify patients with acute pancreatitis who were admitted to the 90 Dutch hospitals that did not participate in the present study.

RESULTS

The overall mortality rate was 34.0 per cent, 70 per cent (16 of 23) for the open abdomen strategy, 25 per cent (13 of 53) for continuous peritoneal lavage, 11 per cent (two of 18) for minimally invasive procedures and 42 per cent (five of 12) for primary abdominal closure (P < 0.001). During the study interval, 44 (12.2 per cent) of 362 patients with acute pancreatitis who were likely to require surgical intervention had been referred to university medical centres.

CONCLUSION

Laparotomy with continuous postoperative lavage is the surgical strategy most often used in the Netherlands. The results of the open abdomen strategy are poor whereas a minimally invasive approach seems promising.

Minimally invasive 'step-up approach' versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (PANTER trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN13975868]

Background

The initial treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis is conservative. Intervention is indicated in patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis. In the Netherlands, the standard intervention is necrosectomy by laparotomy followed by continuous postoperative lavage (CPL). In recent years several minimally invasive strategies have been introduced. So far, these strategies have never been compared in a randomised controlled trial. The PANTER study (PAncreatitis, Necrosectomy versus sTEp up appRoach) was conceived to yield the evidence needed for a considered policy decision.

Methods/design

88 patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis will be randomly allocated to either group A) minimally invasive 'step-up approach' starting with drainage followed, if necessary, by videoscopic assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD) or group B) maximal necrosectomy by laparotomy. Both procedures are followed by CPL. Patients will be recruited from 20 hospitals, including all Dutch university medical centres, over a 3-year period. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients suffering from postoperative major morbidity and mortality. Secondary endpoints are complications, new onset sepsis, length of hospital and intensive care stay, quality of life and total (direct and indirect) costs. To demonstrate that the 'step-up approach' can reduce the major morbidity and mortality rate from 45 to 16%, with 80% power at 5% alpha, a total sample size of 88 patients was calculated.

Discussion

The PANTER-study is a randomised controlled trial that will provide evidence on the merits of a minimally invasive 'step-up approach' in patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis.

Pancreatic necrosis: paradigm of a multidisciplinary team

Although we recommend the team approach for the treatment of pancreatic necrosis, we cannot support our method with evidence-based medicine. The few reports available (presented in this article) suggest an improvement by avoiding surgery in many cases and with a low mortality. Two important prerequisites are necessary to begin this team method. First is the assembly of a team, which requires years of recruitment using influence and leadership at centers of expertise in the treatment of pancreatic necrosis. Second, and possibly just as difficult as team assembly, is the design and use of a common algorithm that allows the reporting of data supported with the "power of n."

Surgery in the treatment of acute pancreatitis--minimal access pancreatic necrosectomy

Between 5% and 10% of patients with acute pancreatitis will develop infected pancreatic necrosis. Traditional open surgery for this condition carries a mortality rate of up to 50%, and therefore a number of less invasive techniques have been developed, including radiological drainage and a minimal access retroperitoneal approach. No randomised controlled trials have been published which compare these techniques. Indications for minimal access surgery are the same as for open surgery, i.e. infected pancreatic necrosis or failure to improve with extensive sterile necrosis. Access is obtained to the pancreatic necrosis via the left loin and necrosectomy performed using an operating nephroscope, and this often requires several procedures to remove all necrotic tissue. The cavity is continuously irrigated on the ward in between procedures. The results of this approach are encouraging, with less systemic upset to the patient, a lower incidence of post-operative organ failure when compared with open surgery, and a reduced requirement for ITU support. There is also a trend towards a lower mortality rate, although this does not reach statistical significance on the data published so far. Current evidence suggests that a minimal access approach to pancreatic necrosis is feasible, well tolerated and beneficial for the patient when compared with open surgery.

[Percutaneous ultrasound-guided drainage in the surgical treatment of acute severe pancreatitis]

AIM OF THE STUDY

To report results of percutaneous ultrasound-guided drainage, performed by a surgeon, in the treatment of complications of acute pancreatitis (AP), and to determine the role of this technique in the therapeutic armamentarium of severe AP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 1986 to 2001, 59 patients were included in this retrospective study. All patients initially had severe necrotizing AP (mean Ranson score = 4.1 ; range : 2-7). Anatomical lesions included pancreatic abscess in 6 patients and necrosis in 53 (17 stage D and 36 stage E according to Balthazar's classification). Necrosis was infected in 42 and sterile in 11 respectively. Drainage was performed under ultrasound guidance and local anaesthesia using small-diameter drains (7-14 French).

RESULTS

Drainage was performed on average 23 days after onset of AP. Infection was proven by fine-needle aspiration in 47 (80 %) patients (41 infected necrosis and 6 localized abscess). In one patient, culture of aspirated fluid was negative but necrosis was infected (one false negative). Culture of aspirated fluid was negative and necrosis was sterile in 11 patients. Nineteen (32%) patients healed without subsequent surgery: 7 (16%) in the infected necrosis group, 6(55%) in the sterile necrosis group, and 6 (100%) in the abscess group. Forty (68%) patients had subsequent necrosectomy including 8 (14%) who died. Twenty (34 %) digestive fistulas healed spontaneously, except one treated by diversion stomia. Of the 16 (27 %) pancreatic fistulas, 6 needed subsequent interventional treatment.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, percutaneous drainage can represent an alternative to surgery with a 14% mortality rate. The high rate of subsequent necrosectomy suggests that drains with larger diameter, possibly associated with continuous irrigation, should be used.

Percutaneous video-assisted necrosectomy for infected pancreatic necrosis

AIMS OF THE STUDY

Percutaneous drainage of infected pancreatic necrosis is not always efficient and morbidity is high with open necrosectomy techniques. Minimally-invasive procedures have been developed to reduce this morbidity. We report our early experience with percutaneous video-assisted necrosectomy.

METHODS

Among 61 patients with acute pancreatitis treated between January 2001 and February 2003, seven developed infected pancreatic necrosis. Six of these seven patients underwent percutaneous video-assisted necrosectomy after failure of radio-guided percutaneous drainage.

RESULTS

One to four sessions of percutaneous video-assisted necrosectomy were required. There was no death. Sepsis control was achieved in all patients. One patient developed postoperative peritonitis due to intraoperative contamination of the peritoneal cavity. Eighteen months after the last necrosectomy, one patient developed a pseudocyst which was successfully cured by percutaneous drainage. One patient developed diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION

Early experience in six patients has shown that percutaneous video-assisted necrosectomy is feasible, safe and efficient, in accordance with reports in the literature. Further evaluation is necessary.

Acute biliary pancreatitis, endoscopy, and laparoscopy

Current practices for diagnosis and treatment of common bile duct stones are not evidence-based. Acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) is a specific situation in which endoscopic procedures are either overused or misused. Pancreatitis is a poor marker for choledocholithiasis. Prognostic systems are accurate to discern those patients with ABP who do not need aggressive procedures. Patients with a benign ABP do not need an endoscopic approach. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is an underrated treatment for patients with choledocholithiasis. Laparoscopic approach to infected necrotic collections and pseudocysts warrant further investigations.

[Surgical treatment of acute pancreatitic with infected necrosis by necrosectomy-pancreatostomy]

Technical modalities of surgical treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis remains controversial. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the results of necrosectomy associated by pancreatostomy using active drainage according Mikulicz, which is currently an unusual technique.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 1985 to 1997, 18 consecutive patients (median age = 63; range = 35-88 years) were operated on through laparotomy for infected necrosis and treated by necrosectomy combined with Mikulicz drainage. Fourteen patients were referred from another center, including 9 who had previous surgery. Necrosectomy was performed after a median delay of 22 days (1-45) after onset of pancreatitis, in all patients because of severe sepsis (including 12 patients with persisting shock) and presence at CT scan of necrotic collections containing gas bubbles (n = 15) and/or infection proven by percutaneous aspiration (n = 3).

RESULTS

After the first procedure, patients underwent between 2 and 25 (median: 5) additional necrosectomies through the pancreatostomy tract. Thirteen surgical complications were observed in 8 patients: digestive fistula (n = 7), intraabdominal bleeding (n = 3), gastrointestinal haemorrhage (n = 1), colic stenosis with colectasy (n = 1). Five patients, all referred from another center, died (28%) between the 47th and the 140th day from multiorgan failure (n = 4) or gastrointestinal haemorrhage (n = 1). The median hospital stay was 109 days (26-265) including 51 in intensive care unit (1-134). The 13 surviving patients were followed during an average of 2 years (4 months-7 years). All developed an incisional hernia of the pancreatostomy tract, which was surgically treated in 6 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Necrosectomy-pancreatostomy is an appropriate treatment of acute pancreatitis with infected necrosis, despite the usual need of additional but easy necrosectomies, and the frequent occurrence of incisional hernia. Results observed in patients referred to our center suggest that earlier diagnosis of necrosis infection using percutaneous aspiration could improve the prognosis.

Pancreatic sepsis: prevention and therapy

Except for a minority of early fatalities, most deaths in acute pancreatitis occur after the first 7 to 10 days due to infective complications, particularly infected necrosis. Hence, preventing this risk factor seems to represent a major step forward in the clinical management of severe pancreatitis. Consequently, antibiotics emerged as a cornerstone of the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis. The duration of such treatment, the route of administration and the substance(s) of choice need to be carefully selected. Surgical debridement is the treatment of choice of infected necrosis, while percutaneous drainage is successful in some patients.