Decompressive laparotomy with temporary abdominal closure versus percutaneous puncture with placement of abdominal catheter in patients with abdominal compartment syndrome during acute pancreatitis: background and design of multicenter, randomised, controlled study

Surgical decompression for the management of abdominal compartment syndrome with severe acute pancreatitis: A narrative review

Intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) play a pivotal role in the pathophysiology of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) and contribute to new-onset and persistent organ failure. The optimal management of ACS involves a multi-disciplinary approach, from its early recognition to measures aiming at an urgent reduction of intra-abdominal pressure (IAP). A targeted literature search from January 1, 2000, to November 30, 2022, revealed 20 studies and data was analyzed on the type and country of the study, patient demographics, IAP, type and timing of surgical procedure performed, post-operative wound management, and outcomes of patients with ACS. There was no randomized controlled trial published on the topic. Decompressive laparotomy is effective in rapidly reducing IAP (standardized mean difference = 2.68, 95% confidence interval: 1.19-1.47, P < 0.001; 4 studies). The morbidity and complications of an open abdomen after decompressive laparotomy should be weighed against the inadequately treated but, potentially lethal ACS. Disease-specific patient selection and the role of less-invasive decompressive measures, like subcutaneous linea alba fasciotomy or component separation techniques, is lacking in the 2013 consensus management guidelines by the Abdominal Compartment Society on IAH and ACS. This narrative review focuses on the current evidence regarding surgical decompression techniques for managing ACS in patients with SAP. However, there is a lack of high-quality evidence on patient selection, timing, and modality of surgical decompression. Large prospective trials are needed to identify triggers and effective and safe surgical decompression methods in SAP patients with ACS.

Abdominal Compartment Syndrome-When Is Surgical Decompression Needed?

Compartment syndrome occurs when increased pressure inside a closed anatomical space compromises tissue perfusion. The sudden increase in pressure inside these spaces requires rapid decompression by means of surgical intervention. In the case of abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS), surgical decompression consists of a laparostomy. The aim of this review is to identify the landmarks and indications for the appropriate moment to perform decompression laparotomy in patients with ACS based on available published data. A targeted literature review was conducted on indications for decompression laparotomy in ACS. The search was focused on three conditions characterized by a high ACS prevalence, namely acute pancreatitis, ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm and severe burns. There is still a debate around the clinical characteristics which require surgical intervention in ACS. According to the limited data published from observational studies, laparotomy is usually performed when intra-abdominal pressure reaches values ranging from 25 to 36 mmHg on average in the case of acute pancreatitis. In cases of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, there is a higher urgency to perform decompression laparotomy for ACS due to the possibility of continuous hemorrhage. The most conflicting recommendations on whether surgical treatment should be delayed in favor of other non-surgical interventions come from studies involving patients with severe burns. The results of the review must be interpreted in the context of the limited available robust data from observational studies and clinical trials.

Intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome in critically ill patients: A narrative review of past, present, and future steps

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Intra-abdominal hypertension is frequently present in critically ill patients and is an independent predictor for mortality. In this narrative review, we aim to provide a comprehensive overview of current insights into intra-abdominal pressure monitoring, intra-abdominal hypertension, and abdominal compartment syndrome. The focus of this review is on the pathophysiology, risk factors and outcome of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome, and on therapeutic strategies, such as non-operative management, surgical decompression, and management of the open abdomen. Finally, future steps are discussed, including propositions of what a future guideline should focus on.

CONCLUSIONS

Pathological intra-abdominal pressure is a continuum ranging from mild intra-abdominal pressure elevation without clinically significant adverse effects to substantial increase in intra-abdominal pressure with serious consequences to all organ systems. Intra-abdominal pressure monitoring should be performed in all patients at risk of intra-abdominal hypertension. Although continuous intra-abdominal pressure monitoring is feasible, this is currently not standard practice. There are a number of effective non-operative medical interventions that may be performed early in the patient's course to reduce intra-abdominal pressure and decrease the need for surgical decompression. Abdominal decompression can be life-saving when abdominal compartment syndrome is refractory to non-operative treatment and should be performed expeditiously. The objectives of open abdomen management are to prevent fistula and to achieve delayed fascial closure at the earliest possible time. There is still a lot to learn and change. The 2013 World Society of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome guidelines should be updated and multicentre studies should evaluate the effect of intra-abdominal hypertension treatment on patient outcome.

Abdominal Compartment Syndrome is an Early, Lethal Complication of Acute Pancreatitis

Data defining the optimal management of abdominal compartment syndrome resulting from acute pancreatitis are lacking. We investigated the outcomes of patients with acute pancreatitis who underwent surgery for treatment of abdominal compartment syndrome at a tertiary referral center. An electronic database was searched to identify patients with acute pancreatitis who underwent laparotomy between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2009, for treatment of abdominal compartment syndrome. Twelve patients underwent decompressive laparotomy for abdominal compartment syndrome. The median interval between onset of pancreatitis and laparotomy was 4.5 days. Nine patients underwent a laparotomy within seven days of onset of pancreatitis. As a result of cardiopulmonary instability, four decompressive laparotomies were performed in the intensive care unit. In 11 patients, cardiopulmonary improvement was observed. Statistically significant improvements were seen across multiple physiologic parameters. Despite this initial improvement, six patients (50%) died from multisystem organ failure. Two patients survived without need for pancreatic débridement. Abdominal compartment syndrome is an uncommon but likely underrecognized and highly lethal complication of acute pancreatitis that should be considered in patients who become critically ill early in the course of their pancreatitis. Prompt recognition and decompressive laparotomy may rescue some of these patients and does not mandate future débridement.

2019 WSES guidelines for the management of severe acute pancreatitis

Although most patients with acute pancreatitis have the mild form of the disease, about 20-30% develops a severe form, often associated with single or multiple organ dysfunction requiring intensive care. Identifying the severe form early is one of the major challenges in managing severe acute pancreatitis. Infection of the pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis occurs in about 20-40% of patients with severe acute pancreatitis, and is associated with worsening organ dysfunctions. While most patients with sterile necrosis can be managed nonoperatively, patients with infected necrosis usually require an intervention that can be percutaneous, endoscopic, or open surgical. These guidelines present evidence-based international consensus statements on the management of severe acute pancreatitis from collaboration of a panel of experts meeting during the World Congress of Emergency Surgery in June 27-30, 2018 in Bertinoro, Italy. The main topics of these guidelines fall under the following topics: Diagnosis, Antibiotic treatment, Management in the Intensive Care Unit, Surgical and operative management, and Open abdomen.

Evaluation and management of acute pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is one of the most common gastrointestinal causes for hospi-talization in the United States. In 2015, AP accounted for approximately 390000 hospitalizations. The burden of AP is only expected to increase over time. Despite recent advances in medicine, pancreatitis continues to be associated with a substantial morbidity and mortality. The most common cause of AP is gallstones, followed closely by alcohol use. The diagnosis of pancreatitis is established with any two of three following criteria: (1) Abdominal pain consistent with that of AP; (2) Serum amylase and/or lipase greater than three times the upper limit of normal; and (3) Characteristics findings seen in cross-sectional abdominal imaging. Multiple criteria and scoring systems have been established for assessing severity of AP. The cornerstones of management include aggressive intravenous hydration, appropriate nutrition and pain management. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and surgery are important aspects in management of acute gallstone pancreatitis. We provide a comprehensive review of evaluation and management of AP.

Tension pneumoperitoneum: Case report of a rare form of acute abdominal compartment syndrome

•

Pneumoperitoneum is a rare cause of ACS.

•

A defined approach has not been established.

•

Whenever possible a minimally invasive approach should be attempted.

•

Avoiding laparotomy may benefit certain patients.

•

Reports are important in order to establish a treatment protocol.

Introduction: Tension pneumoperitoneum is a severe and rare form of pneumoperitoneum with concomitant hemodynamic instability and respiratory failure. It is a variant of abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) causing an abrupt increase in intra-abdominal pressure.

Presentation of case: We present a case of pneumoperitoneum, after an endoscopic mucosal resection with the development of ACS. The patient was successfully treated with percutaneous decompression.

Discussion: Decompressive laparotomy is the first treatment option for both most forms of pneumoperitoneum and ACS; nevertheless, this issue is controversial. Recent reports have shown that some patients may be candidates for a minimally invasive catheter decompression avoiding major decompressive surgery. Identifying these patients is vital to avoiding unnecessary surgeries.

Conclusions: Tension pneumoperitoneum is a life-threatening event, early detection and intervention is critical in order to provide prompt and optimal treatment approaches.

Interventions for necrotising pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Acute necrotising pancreatitis carries significant mortality, morbidity, and resource use. There is considerable uncertainty as to how people with necrotising pancreatitis should be treated.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of different interventions in people with acute necrotising pancreatitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2015, Issue 4), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and trials registers to April 2015 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCT). We also searched the references of included trials to identify further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only RCTs performed in people with necrotising pancreatitis, irrespective of aetiology, presence of infection, language, blinding, or publication status for inclusion in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified trials and extracted data. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and mean difference with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using Review Manager 5 based on an available-case analysis using fixed-effect and random-effects models. We planned a network meta-analysis using Bayesian methods, but due to sparse data and uncertainty about the transitivity assumption, performed only indirect comparisons and used Frequentist methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCTs with 311 participants in this review. After exclusion of five participants, we included 306 participants in one or more outcomes. Five trials (240 participants) investigated the three main treatments: open necrosectomy (121 participants), minimally invasive step-up approach (80 participants), and peritoneal lavage (39 participants) and were included in the network meta-analysis. Three trials (66 participants) investigated the variations in the main treatments: early open necrosectomy (25 participants), delayed open necrosectomy (11 participants), video-assisted minimally invasive step-up approach (12 participants), endoscopic minimally invasive step-up approach (10 participants), minimally invasive step-up approach (planned surgery) (four participants), and minimally invasive step-up approach (continued percutaneous drainage) (four participants). The trials included infected or sterile necrotising pancreatitis of varied aetiology.All the trials were at unclear or high risk of bias and the overall quality of evidence was low or very low for all the outcomes. Overall, short-term mortality was 30% and serious adverse events rate was 139 serious adverse events per 100 participants. The differences in short-term mortality and proportion of people with serious adverse events were imprecise in all the comparisons. The number of serious adverse events and adverse events were fewer in the minimally invasive step-up approach compared to open necrosectomy (serious adverse events: rate ratio 0.41, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.68; 88 participants; 1 study; adverse events: rate ratio 0.41, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.68; 88 participants; 1 study). The proportion of people with organ failure and the mean costs were lower in the minimally invasive step-up approach compared to open necrosectomy (organ failure: OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.60; 88 participants; 1 study; mean difference in costs: USD -11,922; P value < 0.05; 88 participants; 1 studies). There were more adverse events with video-assisted minimally invasive step-up approach group compared to endoscopic-assisted minimally invasive step-up approach group (rate ratio 11.70, 95% CI 1.52 to 89.87; 22 participants; 1 study), but the number of interventions per participant was less with video-assisted minimally invasive step-up approach group compared to endoscopic minimally invasive step-up approach group (difference in medians: 2 procedures; P value < 0.05; 20 participants; 1 study). The differences in any of the other comparisons for number of serious adverse events, proportion of people with organ failure, number of adverse events, length of hospital stay, and intensive therapy unit stay were either imprecise or were not consistent. None of the trials reported long-term mortality, infected pancreatic necrosis (trials that included participants with sterile necrosis), health-related quality of life at any time frame, proportion of people with adverse events, requirement for additional invasive intervention, time to return to normal activity, and time to return to work.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low to very low quality evidence suggested that the minimally invasive step-up approach resulted in fewer adverse events, serious adverse events, less organ failure, and lower costs compared to open necrosectomy. Very low quality evidence suggested that the endoscopic minimally invasive step-up approach resulted in fewer adverse events than the video-assisted minimally invasive step-up approach but increased the number of procedures required for treatment. There is currently no evidence to suggest that early open necrosectomy is superior or inferior to peritoneal lavage or delayed open necrosectomy. However, the CIs were wide and significant benefits or harms of different treatments cannot be ruled out. The TENSION trial currently underway in Netherlands is assessing the optimal way to perform the minimally invasive step-up approach (endoscopic drainage followed by endoscopic necrosectomy if necessary versus percutaneous drainage followed by video-assisted necrosectomy if necessary) and is assessing important clinical outcomes of interest for this review. Implications for further research on this topic will be determined after the results of this RCT are available.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Interventional Treatment of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome during Severe Acute Pancreatitis: Current Status and Historical Perspective

Abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) in patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is a marker of severe disease. It occurs as combination of inflammation of retroperitoneum, visceral edema, ascites, acute peripancreatic fluid collections, paralytic ileus, and aggressive fluid resuscitation. The frequency of ACS in SAP may be rising due to more aggressive fluid resuscitation, a trend towards conservative treatment, and attempts to use a minimally invasive approach. There remains uncertainty about the most appropriate surgical technique for the treatment of ACS in SAP. Some unresolved questions remain including medical treatment, indications, timing, and interventional techniques. This review will focus on interventional treatment of this serious condition. First line therapy is conservative treatment aiming to decrease IAP and to restore organ dysfunction. If nonoperative measures are not effective, early abdominal decompression is mandatory. Midline laparostomy seems to be method of choice. Since it carries significant morbidity we need randomized studies to establish firm advantages over other described techniques. After ACS resolves efforts should be made to achieve early primary fascia closure. Additional data are necessary to resolve uncertainties regarding ideal timing and indication for operative treatment.

[Recent Advances in Management of Acute Pancreatitis]

Acute pancreatitis is common but remains a condition with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite a better understanding of the pathophysiology of acute pancreatitis achieved during the past few decades, there is no specific pharmacologic entity available. Therefore, supportive care is still the mainstay of treatment. Recently, novel interventions for increasing survival and minimizing morbidity have been investigated, which are highlighted in this review.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

Review of English-language literature.

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Surgery for Acute Pancreatitis

Surgery for acute pancreatitis has undergone significant changes over the last 3 decades. A better understanding of the pathophysiology has contributed to this, but the greatest driver for change has been the rise of less invasive interventions in the fields of laparoscopy, endoscopy and radiology. Surgery has a very limited role in the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. The most common indication for intervention in acute pancreatitis is for the treatment of complications and most notably the treatment of infected walled off necrosis. Here, the step-up approach has become established, with prior drainage (either endoscopic or percutaneous) followed by delay for maturing of the wall and then debridement by endoscopic or minimally invasive surgical methods. Open surgery is only indicated when this approach fails. Other indications for surgery in acute pancreatitis are for the treatment of acute compartment syndrome, non-occlusive intestinal ischaemia and necrosis, enterocutaneous fistulae, vascular complications and pseudocyst. Surgery also has a role in the prevention of recurrent acute pancreatitis by cholecystectomy. Despite the more restricted role, surgeons have an important contribution to make in the multidisciplinary care of patients with complicated acute pancreatitis.

Study on acute recent stage pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is an inflammatory disease of the pancreas which involves the pancreas and surrounding tissue, and systemic inflammation with a characteristic systemic increase of vascular permeability and increased risk of multiple organ dysfunction. Currently, the pathogenesis of AP is fuzzy, and the diagnosis and treatment need to be standardized. Nevertheless, increased knowledge of AP may achieve more thorough understanding of the pathogenesis. The use of further advanced diagnostic tools and superior treatment, potentially will help clinicians to manage AP at an appropriate stage. However, in view of the multi factorial disease and the complex clinical manifestations, the management of patients with AP is also remaining areas for improvement.

Abdominal compartment syndrome in severe acute pancreatitis treated with percutaneous catheter drainage

Acute pancreatitis is one of the main causes of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH). IAH contributes to multiple physiologic alterations and leads to the development of abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) that induces multiorgan failure. We report a case of ACS in a patient with severe acute pancreatitis. A 44-year-old man who was admitted in a drunk state was found to have severe acute pancreatitis. During management with fluid resuscitation in an intensive care unit, drowsy mentality, respiratory acidosis, shock requiring inotropes, and oliguria developed in the patient, with his abdomen tensely distended. With a presumptive diagnosis of ACS, abdominal decompression through percutaneous catheter drainage was performed immediately. The intraperitoneal pressure measured with a drainage catheter was 31 mm Hg. After abdominal decompression, the multiorgan failure was reversed. We present a case of ACS managed with percutaneous catheter decompression.

Abdominal compartment syndrome in acute pancreatitis: a systematic review

Abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) is a lethal complication of acute pancreatitis. We performed a systematic review to assess the treatment and outcome of these patients.A systematic literature search for cohorts of patients with acute pancreatitis and ACS was performed. The main outcomes were number of patients with ACS, radiologic and surgical interventions, morbidity, mortality, and methodological quality.After screening 169 articles, 7 studies were included. Three studies were prospective and 4 studies were retrospective. The overall methodological quality of the studies was moderate to low. The pooled data consisted of 271 patients, of whom 103 (38%) developed ACS. Percutaneous drainage of intraabdominal fluid was reported as first intervention in 11 (11%) patients. Additional decompressive laparotomy was performed in 8 patients. Decompressive laparotomy was performed in a total of 76 (74%) patients. The median decrease in intraabdominal pressure was 15 mm Hg (range, 33-18 mm Hg). Mortality in acute pancreatitis patients with ACS was 49% versus 11% without ACS. Morbidity ranged from 17% to 90%.Abdominal compartment syndrome during acute pancreatitis is associated with high mortality and morbidity. Studies are relatively small and have methodological shortcomings. The optimal timing and method of invasive interventions, as well as their effect on clinical outcomes, should be further evaluated.

Current concepts of the role of abdominal compartment syndrome in acute pancreatitis - an opportunity or merely an epiphenomenon

The association of acute pancreatitis (AP) with intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) has only recently been recognized. The detrimental effects of raised intra-abdominal pressure in cardiovascular, pulmonary and renal systems have been well established. Although IAH was associated with a higher APACHE II score and multi-organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) in severe acute pancreatitis, a causal relationship between ACS and MODS in SAP is yet to be established. It is therefore debatable whether IAH is a phenomenon causative of organ failure or an epiphenomenon seen in conjunction with other organ dysfunction. This review systemically examines the pathophysiological basis and clinical relevance of ACS in AP and summarizes all the available evidence in its management.

Acute inflammatory surgical disease

Infectious and inflammatory diseases comprise some of the most common gastrointestinal disorders resulting in hospitalization in the United States. Accordingly, they occupy a significant proportion of the workload of the acute care surgeon. This article discusses the diagnosis, management, and treatment of appendicitis, acute cholecystitis/cholangitis, acute pancreatitis, diverticulitis, and Clostridium difficile colitis.

Staged multidisciplinary step-up management for necrotizing pancreatitis

Background

Some 15 per cent of all patients with acute pancreatitis develop necrotizing pancreatitis, with potentially significant consequences for both patients and healthcare services.

Methods

This review summarizes the latest insights into the surgical and medical management of necrotizing pancreatitis. General management strategies for the treatment of complications are discussed in relation to the stage of the disease.

Results

Frequent clinical evaluation of the patient's condition remains paramount in the first 24–72 h of the disease. Liberal goal-directed fluid resuscitation and early enteral nutrition should be provided. Urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is indicated when cholangitis is suspected, but it is unclear whether this is appropriate in patients with predicted severe biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis. Antibiotic prophylaxis does not prevent infection of necrosis and antibiotics are not indicated as part of initial management. Bacteriologically confirmed infections should receive targeted antibiotics. With the more conservative approach to necrotizing pancreatitis currently advocated, fine-needle aspiration culture of pancreatic or extrapancreatic necrosis will less often lead to a change in management and is therefore indicated less frequently. Optimal treatment of infected necrotizing pancreatitis consists of a staged multidisciplinary ‘step-up’ approach. The initial step is drainage, either percutaneous or transluminal, followed by surgical or endoscopic transluminal debridement only if needed. Debridement is delayed until the acute necrotic collection has become ‘walled-off’.

Conclusion

Outcome following necrotizing pancreatitis has improved substantially in recent years as a result of a shift from early surgical debridement to a staged, minimally invasive, multidisciplinary, step-up approach.

Early management of acute pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis is the most common gastro-intestinal indication for acute hospitalization and its incidence continues to rise. In severe pancreatitis, morbidity and mortality remains high and is mainly driven by organ failure and infectious complications. Early management strategies should aim to prevent or treat organ failure and to reduce infectious complications. This review addresses the management of acute pancreatitis in the first hours to days after onset of symptoms, including fluid therapy, nutrition and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography. This review also discusses the recently revised Atlanta classification which provides new uniform terminology, thereby facilitating communication regarding severity and complications of pancreatitis.

Effect of obesity and decompressive laparotomy on mortality in acute pancreatitis requiring intensive care unit admission

Background

Controversy still exists on the effect that obesity has on the morbidity and mortality in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). The primary purpose of this study was to compare the mortality rate of obese versus nonobese patients admitted to the ICU for SAP. Secondary goals were to assess the potential risk factors for abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) and to investigate the performance of validated scoring systems to predict ACS and in-hospital mortality.

Methods

A retrospective cohort of adults admitted to the ICU for SAP was stratified by their body mass index (BMI) as obese and nonobese. The rates of morbidity, mortality, and ACS were compared by univariate and multivariate regression analyses. Areas under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the discriminating performance of severity scores and other selected variables to predict mortality and the risk of ACS.

Result

Forty-five patients satisfied the inclusion criteria and 24 (53 %) were obese with similar characteristics to nonobese patients. Among all the subjects, 11 (24 %) died and 16 (35 %) developed ACS. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower for obese patients (12.5 vs. 38 %; P = 0.046) even though they seemed to develop ACS more frequently (41 vs. 28 %; P = 0.533). At multivariable analysis, age was the most significant factor associated with in-hospital mortality (odds ratio (OR) = 1.273; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.052–1.541; P = 0.013) and APACHE II and Glasgow-Imrie for the development of ACS (OR = 1.143; 95 % CI 1.012–1.292; P = 0.032 and OR = 1.221; 95 % CI 1.000–1.493; P = 0.05) respectively. Good discrimination for in-hospital mortality was observed for patients’ age (AUC = 0.846) and number of comorbidities (AUC = 0.801). ACS was not adequately predicted by any of the clinical severity scores (AUC = 0.548–0.661).

Conclusions

Patients’ age was the most significant factor associated with mortality in patients affected by SAP. Higher APACHE II and Glasgow-Imrie scores were associated with the development of ACS, but their discrimination performance was unsatisfactory.

The importance of timing of decompression in severe acute pancreatitis combined with abdominal compartment syndrome

BACKGROUND

Surgical decompression is widely considered as an important treatment in patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). Until now, the indication and optimal time of decompression remain unknown, and no experimental data exist, although extremely high mortality has been repeatedly reported in these patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of three different time points for decompression in a 24-hour lasting porcine model.

METHODS

Following baseline registrations, 32 animals were divided into four groups (8 animals each group) as follows: one SAP-alone group and three SAP + ACS groups, which received decompression at 6, 9, and 12 hours. We used a N2 pneumoperitoneum to increase the intra-abdominal pressure to 25 mm Hg and retrograde intra-ductal infusion of sodium taurocholate to induce SAP. Global hemodynamic profiles, urine output, systemic oxygenation, and serum biochemical parameters of the animals were studied. At the end of the experiment, histologic examination of the intestine and lung was performed.

RESULTS

The survival time of the 12-hour group was significantly shortened (p = 0.037 vs. 9 hours and p = 0.008 vs. 6 hours). In SAP + ACS animals, decompression at 6 hours restored systemic hemodynamics, oxygen-derived parameters, organ function, and inflammatory intensity to a level comparable with that of the SAP-alone group. In contrast, animals in the 9 hours and 12 hours developed more severe hemodynamic and organ dysfunction. The histopathologic analyses also revealed higher grade injury of the intestine and lung in animals receiving delayed decompression.

CONCLUSION

Well-timed decompression in a porcine model of SAP incorporating 25-mm Hg intra-abdominal hypertension/ACS was associated with significantly reduced mortality, improved systemic hemodynamics and organ function, as well as alleviated histologic injury and inflammatory intensity. According to our results and previous reports, both too early and too late decompression should be avoided owing to significant morbidity for the former and unfavorable outcomes for the latter.

SEMICYUC 2012. Recommendations for intensive care management of acute pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

Significant changes in the management of acute pancreatitis have taken place since the 2004 Pamplona Consensus Conference. The objective of this conference has been the revision and updating of the Conference recommendations, in order to unify the integral management of potentially severe acute pancreatitis in an ICU.

PARTICIPANTS

Spanish and international intensive medicine physicians, radiologists, surgeons, gastroenterologists, emergency care physicians and other physicians involved in the treatment of acute pancreatitis. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE AND GRADES OF RECOMMENDATION: The GRADE method has been used for drawing them up. DRAWING UP THE RECOMMENDATIONS: The selection of the committee members was performed by means of a public announcement. The bibliography has been revised from 2004 to the present day and 16 blocks of questions on acute pancreatitis in a ICU have been drawn up. Firstly, all the questions according to groups have been drawn up in order to prepare one document. This document has been debated and agreed upon by computer at the SEMICYUC Congress and lastly at the Consensus Conference which was held with the sole objective of drawing up these recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Eighty two recommendations for acute pancreatitis management in an ICU have been presented. Of these 84 recommendations, we would emphasize the new determinants-based classification of acute pancreatitis severity, new surgical techniques and nutritional recommendations. Note. This summary only lists the 84 recommendations of the 16 questions blocks except blocks greater relevance and impact of its novelty or because they modify the current management.

[Abdominal compartment syndrome in severe acute pancreatitis -- literature review]

The incidence of intraabdominal hypertension or abdominal compartment syndrome, as the more severe form is called, is relatively high in patients with severe acute pancreatitis, and therefore more attention is needed to the topic. If conservative treatment fails, immediate surgical decompression is indicated. The most commonly used operation is a full thickness median laparotomy, but a transversal laparotomy may also be effective. Although subcutaneous linea alba, or bilateral anterior rectus fasciotomy is safe and effective, decompressive laparotomy is indicated in failure of these methods. The open abdomen therapy is not advised due to high morbidity. Primary closure of the abdomen is preferable.