Direct endoscopic necrosectomy: a minimally invasive endoscopic technique for the treatment of infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis and infected pseudocysts with solid debris

Massive infected pancreatic necrosis in an 8-year-old: Endoscopic management

Pancreatitis is a condition much more commonly found in adults, but when diagnosed in the pediatric population, is often due to medications, congenital pathology, and critical illness. This patient had previously undergone treatment with 6-mercaptopurine and presented with pancreatitis that eventually worsened to a walled-off necrotic collection with paracolic extensions reaching the pelvis. Given clinical worsening with development of shock, procedural options for source control were weighed with gastroenterology, pediatric surgery, and interventional radiology, before pancreatic necrosectomy was determined to be the treatment of choice, given the adjacency of the collection to the stomach. A total of three separate endoscopic pancreatic necrosectomy procedures were performed and the patient s clinical status improved greatly, with vast improvement later seen on outpatient imaging. This successful treatment course argues for the efficacy of pancreatic necrosectomy even in very large walled off collections, and most importantly, lead to a positive outcome in this young patient.

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.

Management of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: An Evidence-based Approach

Managing pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) remains a challenge for many clinicians. Recently, significant progress has been made in the therapy of PFCs, including improvements in technology and devices, as well as in the development of minimally invasive endoscopic techniques, many of which are proven less traumatic when compared with surgical options and more efficacious when compared with percutaneous techniques. This review will explore latest developments in the management of PFCs and how they incorporate into the current treatment algorithm.

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

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

Management of (Peri)Pancreatic Collections in Acute Pancreatitis

The development of (peri)pancreatic fluid collections are frequent local complications in acute pancreatitis. These collections are classified as early (acute peripancreatic fluid collection or acute necrotic collection) or late (walled-off necrosis or pseudocyst). The majority of pancreatic fluid collections resolve spontaneously and do not require intervention. However, infection may require intervention. Interventions may include endoscopic or percutaneous catheter drainage, or in a next step endoscopic or surgical necrosectomy, minimally invasive or open. The best timing for the first intervention is still under investigation. Whereas some use antibiotics to postpone intervention until the stage of walled-off necrosis, others drain earlier. Endoscopic drainage of (peri)pancreatic fluid collections is now the preferred approach of drainage due to reduced morbidity as compared to surgical or percutaneous drainage. However, each collection must be treated according to a tailored approach. The final treatment should take into consideration anatomic characteristics, patient preference, comorbidity profile of the patient, and physician discretion. This review summarizes the current evidence on the treatment of (peri)pancreatic fluid collections.

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

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

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 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.

Diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts by endoscopy and laparoscopy: Our experience with 56 cases

AIM: To investigate the choice of minimally invasive treatments for pancreatic pseudocysts (PPC).

METHODS: Clinical data for 56 patients with PPC were retrospectively analyzed. The method of treatment was selected based on etiology, cyst formation time, adjacent organ position, and presence of intracystic infection or not.

RESULTS: Of 34 cases treated by endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided gastric or duodenal drainage, 33 were successful and 1 developed stent migration and underwent laparoscopic cyst drainage. Four cases were confirmed to have communication between cyst and the main pancreatic duct by ERCP, and two of them underwent pancreatic duct stent placement (ERPD). Of 9 cases undergoing laparoscopic cyst-jejunum Roux-en-Y anastomosis, 7 were successful and 2 were converted to open surgery. Four cases underwent laparoscopic cyst excision because cyst was too small and could not be distinguished from pancreatic cystadenoma preoperatively, and one patient developed postoperative pancreatic leakage. Four patients underwent CT-guided puncture and external drainage of cyst.

CONCLUSION: Treatments for PPC are diverse, and selection of appropriate treatment based on the patient's situation is key to the treatment of PPC. With the development of endoscopic and laparoscopic technologies, traditional treatment methods will be gradually replaced by minimally invasive treatments.