EUS-guided endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy in patients with infected necrosis in acute pancreatitis

Endoscopic necrosectomy of infected WON in acute necrotising pancreatitis - Development of an effective therapeutic algorithm based on a single-center consecutive patient cohort

OBJECTIVE

Development of an effective therapeutic algorithm for interventional (minimally invasive) approach to infected walled-off necrosis (WON) in patients with necrotising pancreatitis reflecting real-word data.

MATERIAL/METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic necrosectomy for necrotising pancreatitis through a defined study period were enclosed in this retrospective observational case study. The therapeutic approach was analysed for clinical success rate, complication spectrum and rate as well as mortality and compared with data from the literature. Finally, a therapeutic algorithm was derived.

RESULTS

From 2004 to 2019, 126 patients with necrotising pancreatitis (median of APACHE II score, 10.5 points) were treated. In 92.9 % of cases (n=117), an infected WON with microbial pathogen detection was found. After a median of 18 days from symptom onset, first intervention was performed (53.2 % as percutaneous drainage with programmed rinsing, 29.4 % as EUS-guided internal drainage). From 2004 to 2010, double pigtail stents were used. Later, lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) such as AXIOS^TM stent (Boston Scientific, Ratingen, Germany) was preferred. The combined percutaneous and internal drainage was performed in approximately 50 % of subjects.Endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy was performed in 123 patients (97.6 %) at a median of 33 days from symptom onset. Endoscopic percutaneous necrosectomy was conducted in 11.1 % of the individuals. A median number of two endoscopic necrosectomy sessions per patient was necessary for the therapy. The clinical success rate (discharge without surgical intervention) was 82.5 %. The complication rate (bleeding and perforation) and the need for surgery were both 9.5 %. The overall mortality was 8.7 %.

CONCLUSION

Therapy of necrotising pancreatitis with infected WON consists of early calculated antibiotic therapy with adequate drainage. Combined external and internal drainages with programmed rinsing seem to improve prognosis, as well as minimise I) : the need for forced necrosectomies (mainly via a transluminal access site) and II) : complication rate as well as, thus, improve outcome.

Infected pancreatic necrosis: outcomes and clinical predictors of mortality. A post hoc analysis of the MANCTRA-1 international study

The identification of high-risk patients in the early stages of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) is critical, because it could help the clinicians to adopt more effective management strategies. We conducted a post hoc analysis of the MANCTRA-1 international study to assess the association between clinical risk factors and mortality among adult patients with IPN. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify prognostic factors of mortality. We identified 247 consecutive patients with IPN hospitalised between January 2019 and December 2020. History of uncontrolled arterial hypertension (p = 0.032; 95% CI 1.135-15.882; aOR 4.245), qSOFA (p = 0.005; 95% CI 1.359-5.879; aOR 2.828), renal failure (p = 0.022; 95% CI 1.138-5.442; aOR 2.489), and haemodynamic failure (p = 0.018; 95% CI 1.184-5.978; aOR 2.661), were identified as independent predictors of mortality in IPN patients. Cholangitis (p = 0.003; 95% CI 1.598-9.930; aOR 3.983), abdominal compartment syndrome (p = 0.032; 95% CI 1.090-6.967; aOR 2.735), and gastrointestinal/intra-abdominal bleeding (p = 0.009; 95% CI 1.286-5.712; aOR 2.710) were independently associated with the risk of mortality. Upfront open surgical necrosectomy was strongly associated with the risk of mortality (p < 0.001; 95% CI 1.912-7.442; aOR 3.772), whereas endoscopic drainage of pancreatic necrosis (p = 0.018; 95% CI 0.138-0.834; aOR 0.339) and enteral nutrition (p = 0.003; 95% CI 0.143-0.716; aOR 0.320) were found as protective factors. Organ failure, acute cholangitis, and upfront open surgical necrosectomy were the most significant predictors of mortality. Our study confirmed that, even in a subgroup of particularly ill patients such as those with IPN, upfront open surgery should be avoided as much as possible. Study protocol registered in ClinicalTrials.Gov (I.D. Number NCT04747990).

Pancreatic necrosis: Complications and changing trend of treatment

Incidence of acute pancreatitis seems to be increasing in the Western countries and has been associated with significantly increased morbidity. Nearly 80% of the patients with acute pancreatitis undergo resolution; some develop complications including pancreatic necrosis. Infection of pancreatic necrosis is the leading cause of death in these patients. A significant portion of these patients needs surgical interventions. Traditionally, the “gold standard” procedure has been the open surgical necrosectomy, which is now being completed by the relatively lesser invasive interventions. Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) procedures include endoscopic drainage, percutaneous image-guided catheter drainage, and retroperitoneal drainage. This review article discusses the open and MIS interventions for pancreatic necrosis with each having its own respective benefits and disadvantages are covered.

Endotherapy for pancreatic necrosis: An update

Approximately 20% of patients with acute pancreatitis develop pancreatic necrosis. The presence of necrosis in a pancreatic collection significantly worsens the prognosis. Pancreatic necrosis is associated with high mortality and morbidity. In the last few decades, there has been a significant revolution in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis. A step‐up approach has been proposed, from less invasive procedures to the operative intervention. Minimally invasive treatment modalities such as endoscopic drainage and necrosectomy, percutaneous drainage, and minimally invasive surgery have recently replaced open surgical necrosectomy as the first‐line treatment option. Endoscopic intervention for pancreatic necrosis is being increasingly performed with good success and a lower complication rate. However, techniques of endotherapy are still not uniform and vary as per local expertise, and there are still many unresolved questions with regard to the interventions in patients with pancreatic necrosis. The objective of this paper is to critically review the literature and update the concepts of endoscopic interventional therapy of pancreatic necrosis.

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.

The outcomes of initial endoscopic transluminal drainage are superior to percutaneous drainage for patients with infected pancreatic necrosis: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM

The commonly used minimally invasive methods for patients with infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) are initial endoscopic transluminal drainage (ETD) and percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD), which are followed, if necessary, by endoscopic or surgical necrosectomy. This study intends to explore which of the two minimally invasive treatments leads to a better prognosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with IPN and an indication for intervention were prospectively enrolled and underwent either initial ETD or PCD followed, if necessary, by endoscopic or surgical necrosectomy.

RESULTS

Initial treatment success occurred in 8 of 11 patients after ETD (72.7%) and in 3 of 13 patients after PCD (30.8%) (risk ratio [RR] with ETD, 2.36; 95% CI 0.97-5.77; P = 0.04). After 1 year of follow-up, 72.7% of patients survived with ETD, and 69.2% survived with PCD (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.63-1.75; P = 0.85). Intestinal fistula seems to have occurred less in the patients who received initial ETD rather than PCD therapy (9.1 vs. 38.5%; RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.03-1.73; P = 0.098). Fewer patients who underwent an initial ETD were transferred to surgery (9.1 vs. 46.2%; RR 0.20; 95% CI 0.03-1.40; P = 0.047). A higher rate of new-onset diabetes (3 cases) or impaired glucose tolerance (1 case) occurred in initial PCD compared to ETD (40 vs. 0%, P = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

The outcomes of initial endoscopic transluminal drainage are superior to percutaneous drainage for patients with infected pancreatic necrosis (ChiCTR-ONRC-13003653).

Comparison between minimally invasive and open surgical treatment in necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Minimal access techniques have gained popularity for the management of necrotizing pancreatitis, but only a few studies compared open necrosectomy with a less invasive treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of minimally invasive treatment for necrotizing pancreatitis in comparison with open necrosectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 70 patients who underwent minimally invasive intervention or open surgical debridement for necrotizing pancreatitis between January 2007 and December 2014. Data were analyzed for postoperative morbidity and outcome.

RESULTS

Of 70 patients, 22 patients underwent primary open necrosectomy and 48 patients were treated with minimally invasive techniques. Percutaneous and endoscopic drainage were successful in 34.9% and 75.0% of patients, respectively. The rates of postoperative new-onset organ failure and intensive care unit stay were significantly lower in the minimally invasive group (25.0% versus 54.5%; P = 0.016, and 29.2% versus 54.5%; P = 0.041, respectively). Gastrointestinal fistulas occurred more frequently after primary open necrosectomy (36.4% versus 10.4%; P = 0.009). Mortality was comparable in both groups (18.6% versus 27.3%; P = 0.420). Mortality for salvage open necrosectomy was similar to that for primary open debridement (28.6% versus 27.3%; P = 0.924). The independent risk factors for major postoperative complications were primary open necrosectomy (P = 0.028) and shorter interval to first intervention (P = 0.020). Mortality was independently associated only with older age (P = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive treatment should be preferred over open necrosectomy for initial management of necrotizing pancreatitis.

Consensus guidelines on severe acute pancreatitis

This Position Paper contains clinically oriented guidelines by the Italian Association for the Study of the Pancreas (AISP) for the diagnosis and treatment of severe acute pancreatitis. The statements were formulated by three working groups of experts who searched and analysed the most recent literature; a consensus process was then performed using a modified Delphi procedure. The statements provide recommendations on the most appropriate definition of the complications of severe acute pancreatitis, the diagnostic approach and the timing of conservative as well as interventional endoscopic, radiological and surgical treatments.

Endoscopic, transmural drainage and necrosectomy for walled-off pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis is associated with low mortality--a single-center experience

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic transmural drainage and necrosectomy (ETDN) is a promising alternative to percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention in the treatment of walled-off pancreatic and peripancreatic necroses (WONs). We assessed the outcome and safety profile of ETDN in a single-center patient cohort.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In November 2005, ETDN for WON was introduced in our tertiary referral center. During a 6-year period (Nov 2005-Nov 2011), we retrospectively collected data on all patients who underwent ETDN.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients were treated with ETDN (median age 54, 52 men). Gallstones were the predominant etiology of pancreatitis (41%), followed by alcohol (33%). Median time from debut of symptoms to first endoscopic treatment was 44 (9-246) days. Culture-proven infected necrosis was found in 71% of the cases. Twenty-three patients (28%) required admission in intensive care unit. The technical and clinical success rates were 99% and 89%, respectively. Procedure-related complications occurred in 10 (12%) patients, of which 1 was procedure-related death. In-hospital mortality was 11%.

CONCLUSION

ETDN in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis and infected necrosis performed in a single, high-volume center has an acceptable safety profile and is associated with a low mortality.

Minimally invasive treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis

Infected pancreatic necrosis is a challenging complication that worsens prognosis in acute pancreatitis. For years, open necrosectomy has been the mainstay treatment option in infected pancreatic necrosis, although surgical debridement still results in high morbidity and mortality rates. Recently, many reports on minimally invasive treatment in infected pancreatic necrosis have been published. This paper presents a review of minimally invasive techniques and attempts to define their role in the management of infected pancreatic necrosis.

Resolution of walled-off pancreatic necrosis by EUS-guided drainage when using a fully covered through-the-scope self-expandable metal stent in a single procedure (with video)

BACKGROUND

Walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) is effectively managed with percutaneous and endoscopic techniques such as direct endoscopic necrosectomy. However, they require repeat interventions and lengthy hospital stays.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a new platform to manage WOPNs by using a large-bore, through-the-scope, fully covered, self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) to overcome the need for repeat interventions and extended hospital stays.

DESIGN

Retrospective, single-center study.

SETTING

Academic tertiary care center.

PATIENTS

Five consecutive patients with symptomatic WOPN underwent EUS-guided drainage of WOPN by using a large-bore FCSEMSs.

INTERVENTIONS

EUS-guided transgastric drainage of WOPN by using a large-bore FCSEMS. Cross-sectional imaging was repeated at 6- to 8-week intervals. The FCSEMS was removed after WOPN resolution.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Clinical success, number of repeat interventions, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Five patients (mean age 60 years) with WOPN (mean diameter, 12.3 cm; range 9.8-14.3 cm) underwent drainage with the described technique. Technical and clinical success was achieved in 100% of patients. Direct endoscopic necrosectomy was not required in any patient. The median number of endoscopic procedures was 1. The median length of hospital stay was 1 day. There were no adverse events.

LIMITATIONS

Small, retrospective study.

CONCLUSIONS

The described novel platform facilitates resolution of WOPN with a single procedure, avoiding the need for repeat interventions and lengthy hospital stays.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided treatments: are we getting evidence based--a systematic review

The continued need to develop less invasive alternatives to surgical and radiologic interventions has driven the development of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided treatments. These include EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections, EUS-guided necrosectomy, EUS-guided cholangiography and biliary drainage, EUS-guided pancreatography and pancreatic duct drainage, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage, EUS-guided drainage of abdominal and pelvic fluid collections, EUS-guided celiac plexus block and celiac plexus neurolysis, EUS-guided pancreatic cyst ablation, EUS-guided vascular interventions, EUS-guided delivery of antitumoral agents and EUS-guided fiducial placement and brachytherapy. However these procedures are technically challenging and require expertise in both EUS and interventional endoscopy, such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and gastrointestinal stenting. We undertook a systematic review to record the entire body of literature accumulated over the past 2 decades on EUS-guided interventions with the objective of performing a critical appraisal of published articles, based on the classification of studies according to levels of evidence, in order to assess the scientific progress made in this field.

Endoscopic interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis

Interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis have undergone a paradigm shift away from open surgical necrosectomy and toward minimally invasive techniques, with endoscopic transmural drainage (ETD) and necrosectomy emerging as principle forms of treatment. Recent multicenter studies, randomized trials, evidence-based guidelines, and consensus statements have endorsed the safety and efficacy of endoscopic and other minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of walled-off necrosis. A comprehensive review of indications, standard and novel approaches, outcomes, complications, and controversies regarding ETD and necrosectomy is presented. Given the inherent challenges and associated risks, endoscopic techniques for the management of necrotizing pancreatitis should be performed at specialized multidisciplinary centers by expert endoscopists well versed in the management of necrotizing pancreatitis.

Role of diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic ultrasonography in benign pancreatic diseases

Standard imaging of pancreas is generally obtained by computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. However endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become an indispensable tool for the diagnosis of various pancreatic diseases. Because of the close proximity of the EUS probe to the pancreas, EUS provides excellent images of the pancreas. In this review, we discuss the role of EUS in the clinical management of patients with benign pancreatic diseases, i.e., various forms of pancreatitis.

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.

Transluminal endoscopic step-up approach versus minimally invasive surgical step-up approach in patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis (TENSION trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN09186711]

Background

Infected necrotising pancreatitis is a potentially lethal disease that nearly always requires intervention. Traditionally, primary open necrosectomy has been the treatment of choice. In recent years, the surgical step-up approach, consisting of percutaneous catheter drainage followed, if necessary, by (minimally invasive) surgical necrosectomy has become the standard of care. A promising minimally invasive alternative is the endoscopic transluminal step-up approach. This approach consists of endoscopic transluminal drainage followed, if necessary, by endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy. We hypothesise that the less invasive endoscopic step-up approach is superior to the surgical step-up approach in terms of clinical and economic outcomes.

Methods/Design

The TENSION trial is a randomised controlled, parallel-group superiority multicenter trial. Patients with (suspected) infected necrotising pancreatitis with an indication for intervention and in whom both treatment modalities are deemed possible, will be randomised to either an endoscopic transluminal or a surgical step-up approach. During a 4 year study period, 98 patients will be enrolled from 24 hospitals of the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. The primary endpoint is a composite of death and major complications within 6 months following randomisation. Secondary endpoints include complications such as pancreaticocutaneous fistula, exocrine or endocrine pancreatic insufficiency, need for additional radiological, endoscopic or surgical intervention, the need for necrosectomy after drainage, the number of (re-)interventions, quality of life, and total direct and indirect costs.

Discussion

The TENSION trial will answer the question whether an endoscopic step-up approach reduces the combined primary endpoint of death and major complications, as well as hospital stay and related costs compared with a surgical step-up approach in patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis.

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.

The efficiency of continuous regional intra-arterial infusion in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to investigate the efficiency of continuous regional intra-arterial infusion (CRAI) with antisecretory agents and antibiotics in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CRAI was used as a new clinical technique to treat acute pancreatitis patients during a 4-year period at the First Affiliated Hospital, Wenzhou Medical College, China. In this retrospective study, thirty-four patients with proven infected pancreatic necrosis were included. Twelve patients were treated with CRAI, and were matched according to age, sex, APACHE II scores, Ranson scores and remote organ dysfunction, with 22 patients with IPN treated surgically. The clinical outcome following surgery and CRAI were compared.

RESULTS

No difference was found between the two groups when comparing age, gender, APACHE II scores, Ranson scores and remote organ dysfunction (p > 0.05). The patients treated with CRAI had a lower incidence of complications (33.3% vs 72.7%), duration of hospitalization (27.1 ± 4.7 days vs 43.0 ± 12.0 days) and cost of hospitalization (4.09 ± 1.64 thousand RMB vs 8.77 ± 3.74 thousand RMB) as compared to patients treated with surgery (p < 0.05). The survival rate was significantly higher in the CRAI group as compared to the surgical group (91.7% vs 63.6%; p < 0.01). However, the two groups had similar rates of concomitant operative treatment and incidence of remote organ dysfunction (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

CRAI or CRAI in combination with abscess drainage seemingly improve the clinical outcome in patients with infected pancreatic necrosis. Further confirmative prospective randomized multicenter studies are warranted prior to broad introduction of the CRAI concept.

Surgical indications in acute pancreatitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides an update on the surgical management of acute pancreatitis, with a focus on evidence accumulated over the past year regarding the optimal approach to pancreatic debridement in the critically ill patient.

RECENT FINDINGS

Infected pancreatic necrosis remains the primary indication for surgery in patients with acute pancreatitis. Up to a quarter of patients with acute pancreatitis develop early bacteremia and pneumonia, and assessment of patients for surgery should include a thorough search for nonpancreatic sources of infection. Retroperitoneal, percutaneous and endoscopic approaches to pancreatic debridement can be used with success in appropriately selected critically ill patients. All minimally invasive approaches to necrosectomy are evolving, and there is currently insufficient evidence to advocate one approach over another. Management of patients with acute pancreatitis at high-volume centers appears to be associated with a survival benefit.

SUMMARY

The existing evidence demonstrates that control of infected pancreatic necrosis without laparotomy is possible with appropriate patient selection. Evidence regarding minimally invasive approaches to pancreatic debridement remains of limited quality.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) develop secondary to either fluid leakage or liquefaction of pancreatic necrosis following acute pancreatitis, chronic pancreatitis, surgery or abdominal trauma. Pancreatic fluid collections include acute fluid collections, acute and chronic pancreatic pseudocysts, pancreatic abscesses and pancreatic necrosis. Before the introduction of linear endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the 1990s and the subsequent development of endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUS-GD) procedures, the available options for drainage in symptomatic PFCs included surgical drainage, percutaneous drainage using radiological guidance and conventional endoscopic transmural drainage. In recent years, it has gradually been recognized that, due to its lower morbidity rate compared to the surgical and percutaneous approaches, endoscopic treatment may be the preferred first-line approach for managing symptomatic PFCs. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage has the following advantages, when compared to other alternatives such as surgical, percutaneous and non-EUS-guided endoscopic drainage. EUS-GD is less invasive than surgery and therefore does not require general anesthesia. The morbidity rate is lower, recovery is faster and the costs are lower. EUS-GD can avoid local complications related to percutaneous drainage. Because the endoscope is placed adjacent to the fluid collection, it can have direct access to the fluid cavity, unlike percutaneous drainage which traverses the abdominal wall. Complications such as bleeding, inadvertent puncture of adjacent viscera, secondary infection and prolonged periods of drainage with resultant pancreatico-cutaneous fistulae may be avoided. The only difference between EUS and non-EUS drainage is the initial step, namely, gaining access to the pancreatic fluid collection. All the subsequent steps are similar, i.e., insertion of guide-wires with fluoroscopic guidance, balloon dilatation of the cystogastrostomy and insertion of transmural stents or nasocystic catheters. With the introduction of the EUS-scope equipped with a large operative channel which permits drainage of the PFCs in “one step”, EUS-GD has been increasingly carried out in many tertiary care centers and has expanded the safety and efficacy of this modality, allowing access to and drainage of overly challenging fluid collections. However, the nature of the PFCs determines the outcome of this procedure. The technique and review of current literature regarding EUS-GD of PFCs will be discussed.

Treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis is a common and potentially lethal disease. It is associated with significant morbidity and consumes enormous health care resources. Over the last 2 decades, the treatment of acute pancreatitis has undergone fundamental changes based on new conceptual insights and evidence from clinical studies. The majority of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis have sterile necrosis, which can be successfully treated conservatively. Emphasis of conservative treatment is on supportive measures and prevention of infection of necrosis and other complications. Patients with infected necrosis generally need to undergo an intervention, which has shifted from primary open necrosectomy in an early disease stage to a step-up approach, starting with catheter drainage if needed, followed by minimally invasive surgical or endoscopic necrosectomy once peripancreatic collections have sufficiently demarcated. This review provides an overview of current standards for conservative and invasive treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis.

Pancreatico-biliary endoscopic ultrasound: A systematic review of the levels of evidence, performance and outcomes

Our aim was to record pancreaticobiliary endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) literature of the past 3 decades and evaluate its role based on a critical appraisal of published studies according to levels of evidence (LE). Original research articles (randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective studies), meta-analyses, reviews and surveys pertinent to gastrointestinal EUS were included. All articles published until September 2011 were retrieved from PubMed and classified according to specific disease entities, anatomical subdivisions and therapeutic applications of EUS. The North of England evidence-based guidelines were used to determine LE. A total of 1089 pertinent articles were reviewed. Published research focused primarily on solid pancreatic neoplasms, followed by disorders of the extrahepatic biliary tree, pancreatic cystic lesions, therapeutic-interventional EUS, chronic and acute pancreatitis. A uniform observation in all six categories of articles was the predominance of LE III studies followed by LE IV, IIb, IIa, Ib and Ia, in descending order. EUS remains the most accurate method for detecting small (< 3 cm) pancreatic tumors, ampullary neoplasms and small (< 4 mm) bile duct stones, and the best test to define vascular invasion in pancreatic and peri-ampullary neoplasms. Detailed EUS imaging, along with biochemical and molecular cyst fluid analysis, improve the differentiation of pancreatic cysts and help predict their malignant potential. Early diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis appears feasible and reliable. Novel imaging techniques (contrast-enhanced EUS, elastography) seem promising for the evaluation of pancreatic cancer and autoimmune pancreatitis. Therapeutic applications currently involve pancreaticobiliary drainage and targeted fine needle injection-guided antitumor therapy. Despite the ongoing development of extra-corporeal imaging modalities, such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography, EUS still holds a leading role in the investigation of the pancreaticobiliary area. The major challenge of EUS evolution is its expanding therapeutic potential towards an effective and minimally invasive management of complex pancreaticobiliary disorders.

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

BACKGROUND

A "step-up" approach is currently the treatment of choice for acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Our aim was to evaluate the outcome of minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy (MINE) and endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy (ETG) and to compare it to open necrosectomy (ONE).

METHODS

Patients with acute pancreatitis admitted to our institution from 1998 to 2010 (n = 334) were identified. From these, patients who underwent either ONE, MINE, or ETG were selected for further analysis. Statistical analysis employed 2-sided Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U-test.

RESULTS

From 2002 to 2010, 32 patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis were treated by minimally invasive procedures including MINE (n = 14) and ETG (n = 18) or with the classic technique of ONE (n = 30). Time from onset of symptoms to intervention was less for ONE than for MINE or ETG (median, 11 vs 39 vs 54 days; P < .05). The rate of critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock was greatest in ONE (93%) and MINE (71%) compared with ETG (17%; P < .05). Problems after ONE and MINE were ongoing sepsis (ONE 73% vs MINE 29% vs ETG 11%) and bleeding requiring intervention (ONE 26% vs MINE 21% vs ETG 17%). A specific complication of ETG was gastric perforation into the peritoneal cavity during the procedure (28%), requiring immediate open pseudocystogastrostomy. Laparotomy was necessary in 21% after MINE and 28% after ETG owing to specific complications or persistent infected necrosis. Overall mortality was greatest after ONE (ONE 63% vs MINE 21% vs ETG 6%; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Morbidity and mortality remains high in acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Operative procedures should be delayed as long as possible to decrease morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive procedures can avoid laparotomy, but also introduce specific complications requiring immediate or secondary open operative treatment. Minimally invasive procedures require unique expertise and therefore should only be performed at specialized centers.

Endoscopic ultrasound criteria to predict the need for intervention in pancreatic necrosis

Background

The natural course and treatment strategies for asymptomatic or oligosymptomatic pancreatic necrosis are still poorly defined. The aim of this retrospective study was to establish criteria for the need of intervention in patients with pancreatic necrosis.

Methods

A total of 31 consecutive patients (18 male, median age 58 yrs.) diagnosed with pancreatic necrosis by endoscopic ultrasound, in whom a decision for initial conservative treatment was made, were followed for the need of interventions such as endoscopic or surgical intervention, or death.

Results

After a median follow-up of 243 days, 21 patients remained well without intervention and in 10 patients an endpoint event occurred. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis of the clinical and endosonographic parameters, liquid content was the single independent predictor for intervention (p = 0.0006). The presence of high liquid content in the pancreatic necrosis resulted in a 64% predicted endpoint risk as compared to 2% for solid necrosis.

Conclusions

Pancreatic necrotic cavities with high liquid content are associated with a high risk of complications. Therefore, close clinical monitoring is needed and early elective intervention might be considered in these patients.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided endoscopic necrosectomy of the pancreas: is irrigation necessary?

BACKGROUND

Findings have shown endoscopic necrosectomy to be beneficial for patients with symptomatic pancreatic necrosis accessible for an endoscopic approach. The available studies show that endoscopic necrosectomy requires a multitude of subsequent procedures including repeat irrigation for removal of the necrotic material. This study aimed to investigate the need for additional irrigation in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis treated by endoscopic necrosectomy.

METHODS

The study enrolled 35 consecutive patients (27 men) with a median age of 59 years who had pancreatic necrosis treated with endoscopic necrosectomy. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided internal drainage and consecutive endoscopic necrosectomy was combined with interval multistenting of the cavity. Neither endoscopic nor external irrigation was part of the procedure.

RESULTS

An average of 6.2 endoscopy sessions per patient were needed for access, necrosectomy, and stent management. The in-hospital mortality rate was 6% (2/35), including one procedure-related death resulting from postinterventional aspiration. The immediate morbidity rate was 9% (3/35). It was possible to achieve clinical remission for all the surviving patients with no additional surgery needed for management of the necroses. The median follow-up period was 23 months.

CONCLUSION

Neither endoscopic nor external flushing is needed for successful endoscopic treatment of symptomatic necroses. Even without irrigation, the outcome for patients treated with endoscopic necrosectomy is comparable to that described in the published data.

Endoscopic necrosectomy of pancreatic necrosis: a systematic review

AIM

To review the current status of the novel technique of endoscopic necrosectomy in the management of pancreatic necrosis after acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

Studies were identified by searching Medline, PubMed and Embase databases for articles from January 1990 to December 2009 using the keywords "acute pancreatitis", "pancreatic necrosis" and "endoscopy". Additional papers were identified by a manual search of the references from the key articles. Case series of fewer than five patients and case reports were excluded.

RESULTS

Indications, techniques and outcomes of endoscopic necrosectomy were analysed. There were no randomised controlled trials identified. Ten case series were included in this analysis. There were a total of more than 1,100 endoscopic necrosectomy procedures in 260 patients with pancreatic necrosis. One hundred fifty-five were proven to be infected necrosis on culture. The overall mortality rate was 5%. The mean procedure-related morbidity rate was 27%. The rate of complete resolution of pancreatic necrosis with the endoscopic method alone was 76%.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic necrosectomy is a safe and effective treatment option in selected patients with pancreatic necrosis after acute pancreatitis. Future studies will be required to further define the selection criteria and the techniques for the endoscopic procedure.

Bedside Endoscopic Ultrasound in Critically Ill patients

Background. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role and impact of EUS in the management of critically ill patients. Methods. We retrospectively identified all patients at our institution over a 68-month period in whom bedside inpatient EUS was performed. EUS was considered to have a significant impact if a new diagnosis was established and/or the findings altered subsequent clinical management. Results. Fifteen patients (9 male; mean age 58 ± 15 years) underwent bedside EUS without complications. EUS-FNA (median 4 passes; range 2-7) performed in 12 (80%) demonstrated a malignant mediastinal mass/lymph node (5), pancreatic abscess (1), excluded a pelvic abscess (1), established enlarged gastric folds as benign (1) and excluded malignancy in enlarged mediastinal (1) and porta hepatis adenopathy (1). In two patients, EUS-FNA failed to diagnose mediastinal histoplasmosis (1) and a hemorrhagic pancreatic pseudocyst (1). In three diagnostic exams without FNA, EUS correctly excluded choledocholithaisis (n = 1) and cholangiocarcinoma (1), and found gastric varices successfully thrombosed after previous cyanoacrylate injection (1). EUS was considered to have an impact in 13/15 (87%) patients. Conclusions. In this series, bedside EUS in critically ill patients was technically feasible, safe and had a major impact on the majority of patients.

[Pancreatic necrosis: pro-endoscopic therapy]

The transmural endoscopic debridement and other minimally invasive therapies of infected postpancreatic necroses have been developed over the last decade as alternatives to open surgery. In several clinical centers the endoscopic approach has become standard therapy. The mortality rate in published series is in the range 0-15% and additional surgery is needed in 0-40%.Out of 73 own patients treated endoscopically between 2006 and 2010, 4 were operated because of bleeding, 2 with an acute abdomen and 3 with sepsis. Of the patients 6 died because of multi-organ failure and in 3 cases despite surgery. Main complications such as bleeding (n=20) and acute abdomen (n=7) were mostly treated conservatively. There was no procedure-related mortality. The endoscopic therapy was successful in 59 patients (80%) of whom 7 required further transmural endoscopic interventions for cystic relapses.At present, finding the best combination of endoscopic-transmural, percutaneous, laparoscopic and sometimes finally open surgical therapy remains an interdisciplinary challenge. The only randomized study published in this context clearly indicates that such a step-up approach is the most favorable.

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.

Combined endoscopic and percutaneous drainage of organized pancreatic necrosis

BACKGROUND

Severe acute pancreatitis is often complicated by organized necrosis, which can lead to abscess formation and clinical deterioration. We sought to devise a combined endoscopic and percutaneous approach to drainage of organized pancreatic necrosis, with the primary goal of preventing the formation of chronic pancreaticocutaneous fistulae, and secondary goals of avoiding the need for surgical necrosectomy and reducing endoscopic resource utilization.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of an institutional review board-approved database.

SETTING

Single North American tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients with severe acute pancreatitis complicated by organized necrosis requiring drainage.

INTERVENTIONS

CT-guided percutaneous drain, followed immediately by endoscopic transenteric drainage.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Development of chronic pancreaticocutaneous fistulae, number of endoscopic procedures requiring follow-up drainage, need for surgical necrosectomy, procedure-related morbidity, and mortality.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (12 males, 3 females; mean age, 58 years) underwent combined modality drainage. All procedures were technically successful. Immediate complications included fever and hypotension (n = 2); late complications included parenchymal infection after drain removal (n = 1). Twenty-five total endoscopies (4 for drain manipulation) were performed in the cohort subsequent to the initial drainage. After a median duration of follow-up of 189 days, percutaneous drains were removed in all 13 patients in whom this was attempted; no patients had development of chronic pancreaticocutaneous fistulae. There were no deaths, and no patients required surgery.

LIMITATIONS

Highly selected patient population, lack of comparison group, single-center experience.

CONCLUSIONS

In some highly selected patients with infected or symptomatic organized pancreatic necrosis, combined modality drainage results in favorable clinical outcomes with low associated, procedure-related morbidity. Pancreaticocutaneous fistulae and surgical necrosectomy were avoided with minimal endoscopic resource utilization.

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.

A comparison of direct endoscopic necrosectomy with transmural endoscopic drainage for the treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic therapy of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) via direct intracavitary debridement is described.

OBJECTIVE

To compare direct endoscopic necrosectomy with conventional transmural endoscopic drainage for the treatment of WOPN.

DESIGN

Retrospective, comparative study.

SETTING

Academic tertiary-care center.

PATIENTS

Patients referred to Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, since April 1998 for endoscopic drainage of WOPN.

INTERVENTIONS

Each patient underwent standard endoscopic drainage that consisted of transmural cavity puncture, dilation of the fistula tract, and placement of a large-bore stent(s). Patients were classified into the direct endoscopic necrosectomy group if, during any of their procedures, adjunctive direct endoscopic necrosectomy was performed; all others were in the standard drainage group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Success was defined as resolution of the necrotic cavity without the need for operative or percutaneous intervention.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were identified who met study criteria: 25 underwent direct endoscopic necrosectomy, and 20 underwent standard endoscopic drainage. There were no differences in baseline patient or cavity characteristics. Successful resolution was accomplished in 88% who underwent direct endoscopic necrosectomy versus 45% who received standard drainage (P < .01), without a change in the total number of procedures. The maximum size of tract dilation was larger in the direct endoscopic necrosectomy group (17 mm vs 14 mm, P < .02). Complications were limited to mild periprocedural bleeding with equivalent rates between groups.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, referral bias, single center.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct endoscopic necrosectomy achieves higher rates of resolution, without a concomitant change in the number of endoscopic procedures, complication rate, or time to resolution compared with standard endoscopic drainage for WOPN. The need for fewer postprocedural inpatient hospital days and a decrease in the rate of cavity recurrence are also likely benefits of this technique.

Prevention, detection, and management of infected necrosis in severe acute pancreatitis

The management of infected peripancreatic or pancreatic necrosis in patients with severe pancreatitis has changed considerably in recent years. This review discusses the recent literature on prevention, detection, and management of infected necrosis. Though antibiotics, probiotics, and enteral nutrition have been tried to prevent infected necrosis, only enteral nutrition has consistently proven to be effective. Antibiotics and probiotics have not shown a consistent beneficial effect on outcome. Enteral nutrition reduced infectious complications and mortality in severe pancreatitis, compared with parenteral nutrition. The detection of infection of pancreatic necrosis is important for clinical decision making. Fine-needle aspiration may be used to confirm suspected infection, but if its results will not change clinical decisions, it should be omitted, as it may even introduce infection. Minimally invasive surgical, radiologic, or endoscopic intervention is increasingly being applied. In the absence of level 1 evidence, local expertise dictates which type of intervention is applied.