Extra-pancreatic necrosis alone: Contours of an emerging entity

Nomenclature of Pancreatic Fluid Collections following Acute Pancreatitis: Need to Further Revise the Atlanta Classification System!

A better understanding of the disease pathophysiology, improved imaging modalities, and the development of minimally invasive interventions led to the revision of the Atlanta classification and new terminologies for the pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) occurring in acute pancreatitis. Peripancreatic necrosis (PPN) or extra-pancreatic necrosis (EPN) has been reported as a distinct morphological entity with a better outcome than combined pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis as well as pancreatic parenchymal necrosis alone and slightly worse than acute interstitial pancreatitis. In this news and views, we discuss a study that compared the morphological features and outcomes of endoscopic drainage of walled off necrotic collections developing after EPN alone with those developing after PN with or without EPN.

Accuracy of a CT density threshold enhancement in distinguishing pancreas parenchymal necrosis in cases of acute pancreatitis in the first week

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to identify attenuation threshold value on computed tomography (CT) that allowed discriminating between interstitial edematous pancreatitis (IEP) and necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) in patients with acute pancreatitis during the first week of the disease and evaluate interobserver reproducibility for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis category.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with acute pancreatitis who underwent CT examination of the abdomen between March 2015 and December 2019 were retrospectively included. Actual diagnosis of IEP or NP was based on final clinical report, follow-up evaluation, and complications. Six regions of interest were manually placed in the pancreatic gland and peripancreatic fat, and differences in CT attenuation values before contrast injection and during the portal venous phase of enhancement were computed. Performance in the diagnosis of AP category was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Interobserver agreement was estimated by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland Altman analysis was used to estimate reproducibility between pairs of observers.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients with NP (46 men, 20 women; mean age, 55 ± 17 [SD] years; age range: 20-89 years) and 70 patients with IEP (39 men, 31 women; mean age, 54 ± 18 [SD] years; age range: 21-87 years) were included. An enhancement value less than 30 Hounsfield units (HU) in the pancreatic gland during the portal phase compared to non-contrast phase, yielded 90.9% sensitivity (60/66; 95% CI: 81.3-96.6), 94.3% specificity (66/70; 95% CI: 86.0-98.4) and an area under curve of 0.958 (95% CI: 0.919-0.996) for the diagnosis of NP versus IEP. Interobserver reproducibility for pancreas enhancement was good using Bland Altman plot and ICC was excellent for pancreatic gland analysis (ICC 0.978; 95% CI: 0.961-0.988) but poor or moderate (ICC ≤0.634) regarding peripancreatic fat necrosis.

CONCLUSION

By using a pancreas enhancement threshold value of 30 HU, CT is accurate and reproducible for the diagnosis of NP during the first week of the disease.

MR Imaging for Early Extrapancreatic Necrosis in Acute Pancreatitis

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To study the MRI characteristics of early extrapancreatic necrosis and compare them with those of peripancreatic fluid collections in acute pancreatitis (AP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled 70 AP patients who had extrapancreatic collections visible on MRI within 1 week of onset. Extrapancreatic collections were divided into extrapancreatic necrosis and peripancreatic fluid collections based on follow-up MRI, CT, or pathology. The number and area of extrapancreatic collections, extrapancreatic inflammation on MRI (EPIM) score, MR severity index score and clinical characteristics were evaluated and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Of the seventy AP patients, 32 (45.7%) had extrapancreatic necrosis, and 38 (54.3%) had peripancreatic fluid collections. The number and area of extrapancreatic collections, MR severity index score, EPIM score, and prevalence of associated hemorrhage were significantly higher in extrapancreatic necrosis patients than in those with peripancreatic fluid collections (p < 0.001). Among the single indicators, the accuracy of the area of extrapancreatic collections (AUC = 0.871) was comparable to that of the EPIM score for predicting extrapancreatic necrosis and was significantly higher than that of the other two indicators. The combination of all indicators showed the highest predictive accuracy (AUC = 0.949), and combinations of two or more indicators demonstrated significantly higher predictive accuracy for extrapancreatic necrosis than any single indicator (p < 0.05) except for the area of extrapancreatic collections (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The MRI characteristics have the potential to differentiate early extrapancreatic necrosis from peripancreatic fluid collections and help indicate extrapancreatic necrosis.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Radiomics Models to Predict Early Extrapancreatic Necrosis in Acute Pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to investigate radiomics models based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for predicting early extrapancreatic necrosis (EXPN) in acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

Radiomics features were extracted from T2-weighted images of extrapancreatic collections and late arterial-phase images of the pancreatic parenchyma for 135 enrolled patients (94 in the primary cohort, including 47 EXPN patients and 41 in the validation cohort, including 20 EXPN patients). The optimal features after dimension reduction were used for radiomics modeling through a support vector machine. A clinical model, the MR severity index score, and extrapancreatic inflammation on MRI were evaluated.

RESULTS

Twelve optimal features from the extrapancreatic collection images and 10 from the pancreatic parenchyma images were selected for modeling. The pancreatic parenchyma-based and extrapancreatic collection-based radiomics models showed good predictive accuracy in both the training and validation cohorts. The areas under the curve of the extrapancreatic collection-based radiomics model (0.969 and 0.976) were consistent with those of the pancreatic parenchyma-based model (0.931 and 0.921) for both cohorts and better than those of the clinical model and imaging scores for both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

The MRI-based radiomics models of both the extrapancreatic collections and the pancreatic parenchyma had excellent predictive performance for early EXPN.

Radiology of acute pancreatitis today: the Atlanta classification and the current role of imaging in its diagnosis and treatment

Acute pancreatitis is common and requires multidisciplinary management. The revised Atlanta classification, published in 2012, defines the terminology necessary to enable specialists from different backgrounds to discuss the morphological and clinical types of acute pancreatitis. Radiologists' role depends fundamentally on computed tomography (CT), which makes it possible to classify the morphology of this disease and to predict its clinical severity by applying imaging severity indices. Furthermore, CT- or ultrasound-guided drainage is, together with endoscopy, the current technique of choice in the initial approach to collections that appear as a complication. This paper aims to disseminate the concepts coined in the revised Atlanta classification and to describe the current role of radiologists in the diagnosis and treatment of acute pancreatitis.

Impact of the site of necrosis on outcome of acute pancreatitis

Objecives

To compare the clinical outcome of patients with extrapancreatic necrosis (EXPN) alone with that of acute interstitial pancreatitis (AIP), pancreatic parenchymal necrosis (PPN) alone, and combined PPN and EXPN.

Background

There are only a few studies in the literature in which EXPN has been recently recognized as a subtype of acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP), with a better prognosis.

Methods

We analyzed clinical data and outcome variables of 411 consecutive acute pancreatitis (AP) patients between January 2012 and December 2014. Contrast‐enhanced computed tomography (CECT) images of each patient were reviewed and characterized as AIP or ANP. Patients with ANP were divided into EXPN alone, PPN alone, and combined PPN and EXPN. Outcome variables were then compared between these groups.

Results

Of the 411 patients, 74 (18%) had AIP, and 337 (82%) had ANP. Patients with EXPN alone (n = 40; 11.8%) had similar outcomes as patients with PPN alone (n = 12; 3.5%); however, their outcome was worse than that of patients with AIP, with a higher frequency of persistent organ failure (POF), need for percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD), and longer length of hospitalization (LOH). Patients with combined PPN and EXPN (n = 285; 84.7%) had the worst clinical course, with higher frequency of POF, infected necrosis, intervention requirement, and longer LOH.

Conclusion

Patients with combined PPN and EXPN have a severe disease course with the worst clinical outcomes; patients with AIP patients have the most benign course, while patients with EXPN alone stand between the two extremes of disease course with an intermediate grade of severity.