A step-up approach or open necrosectomy for necrotizing pancreatitis

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.

Trends in worldwide volume and methodological quality of surgical randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess worldwide trends in volume and methodological quality of published surgical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) over the past decade.

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials are essential for clinical decision making. It has repeatedly been suggested that surgical RCTs are scarce and of mediocre quality.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed for surgical RCTs published in 1999 and 2009. Characteristics and risks of bias were extracted. Trials where compared between study years and geographical regions. Primary outcome was "low risk of bias," defined by all of the following: adequate allocation generation and concealment, intention-to-treat analysis, and adequate dropout handling.

RESULTS

The volume of published surgical RCTs increased by 50%, from 300 in 1999 to 450 in 2009. Volume increased in Europe (27% increase), Asia/Oceania (160% increase), and Africa/South America (416% increase) but decreased in North America (23% decrease), although the United States remained the country with the highest number of published RCTs. In 2009, methodological quality of surgical trials improved in terms of sample size calculation, adequate generation of randomization sequence, concealment of randomization sequence, and use of intention-to-treat analysis as compared with 1999 (P < 0.001 for all). The proportion of low risk of bias trials increased from 6% to 14% (prevalence ratio 2.59; 95% confidence interval 1.55-4.32). In 2009, the highest proportion of low risk of bias trials was from Europe (23%), whereas the lowest was from Asia/Oceania (5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Volume and quality of surgical RCTs improved although striking differences exist between continents and countries. Structured education in trial methodology, enforced adherence to existing guidelines, and improved research infrastructure may guide further improvements.

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.

Five-year cohort study of open pancreatic necrosectomy for necotizing pancreatitis suggests it is a safe and effective operation

INTRODUCTION

Despite advances in the management of necrotizing pancreatitis, open necrosectomy remains an important management option for necrotizing pancreatitis, and patients undergoing necrosectomy suffer significant morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to report the outcomes of open necrosectomy from a recent large cohort of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis.

METHODS

Data are reported from a cohort of 276 consecutive patients with necrotizing pancreatitis who underwent open surgical debridement. Nutritional status, nutritional methods, bleeding, infection, demarcation of necrotic tissues, and time from onset of disease were scored. Scores ≥ 10 were considered as an indication for debridement.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-two (58.7%) and 52 (18.8%) patients underwent minimally invasive peritoneal and retroperitoneal drainage, respectively, before necrosectomy. Median delay from disease onset to debridement was 48 days. Fifty-five patients (19.9%) underwent more than one operation; 352 operations were performed in total. There were 17 deaths (6.2%) postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the results for open debridement in a recent large cohort of patients. Although minimally invasive necrosectomy has been developed in recent years, open necrosectomy remains an important approach for the debridement of necrotizing pancreatitis effectively and safely.

Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis: more arguments to change the paradigm

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare primary surgical versus nonsurgical treatment in a series of patients with infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) and to investigate whether the success of nonsurgical approach is related to a less severe disease.

METHODS

Thirty-nine consecutive patients with IPN have been included and further subdivided into two groups: primary surgical (n = 21) versus nonsurgical (n = 18). Outcome measures were the differences in mortality, morbidity, and pancreatic function. Comorbidity, organ failure, and other severity indexes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Mortality occurred in 16.7% of cases in the nonsurgical group versus 42.9% in the surgical group. In the primary nonsurgical group, seven were operated on due to failure of initial conservative treatment. In this latter group, mortality was 28.6% and was performed significantly later than in the primary surgical group. The group of primary surgical treatment was associated with a significant higher rate of multiple organ failure (MOF) at IPN diagnosis, new onset or worsening of organ failure, and MOF and nosocomial infection after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial nonsurgical approach in IPN is associated with better results both in cases which respond to this treatment as well as in those who, failing this conservative approach, have to be operated on after a delayed period. Primary surgically treated patients had a more severe disease at the time of IPN.

American College of Gastroenterology guideline: management of acute pancreatitis

This guideline presents recommendations for the management of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). During the past decade, there have been new understandings and developments in the diagnosis, etiology, and early and late management of the disease. As the diagnosis of AP is most often established by clinical symptoms and laboratory testing, contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the pancreas should be reserved for patients in whom the diagnosis is unclear or who fail to improve clinically. Hemodynamic status should be assessed immediately upon presentation and resuscitative measures begun as needed. Patients with organ failure and/or the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) should be admitted to an intensive care unit or intermediary care setting whenever possible. Aggressive hydration should be provided to all patients, unless cardiovascular and/or renal comorbidites preclude it. Early aggressive intravenous hydration is most beneficial within the first 12-24 h, and may have little benefit beyond. Patients with AP and concurrent acute cholangitis should undergo endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) within 24 h of admission. Pancreatic duct stents and/or postprocedure rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) suppositories should be utilized to lower the risk of severe post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients. Routine use of prophylactic antibiotics in patients with severe AP and/or sterile necrosis is not recommended. In patients with infected necrosis, antibiotics known to penetrate pancreatic necrosis may be useful in delaying intervention, thus decreasing morbidity and mortality. In mild AP, oral feedings can be started immediately if there is no nausea and vomiting. In severe AP, enteral nutrition is recommended to prevent infectious complications, whereas parenteral nutrition should be avoided. Asymptomatic pancreatic and/or extrapancreatic necrosis and/or pseudocysts do not warrant intervention regardless of size, location, and/or extension. In stable patients with infected necrosis, surgical, radiologic, and/or endoscopic drainage should be delayed, preferably for 4 weeks, to allow the development of a wall around the necrosis.

Surgical treatment of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis remains an unpredictable, potentially lethal disease with significant morbidity and mortality rates. New insights in the pathophysiology of acute pancreatitis have changed management concepts. In the first phase, characterized by a systemic inflammatory response syndrome, organ failure, not related to infection but rather to severe inflammation, dominates the focus of treatment. In the second phase, secondary infectious complications largely determine the clinical outcome. As infection is associated with increased mortality in acute pancreatitis, numerous prophylactic strategies have been explored in the past two decades.

PURPOSE

This review describes the strategies that have been developed to lower the infection rate, in an attempt to lower mortality. Antibiotic prophylaxis has been the subject of many RCT's without showing convincing evidence of their efficacy. Probiotics, although theoretically capable of lowering the rate of infection, also had no effect on infectious complications, and consequently, no effective strategy to lower the rate of infectious complications is currently available. In the second part of this review, new approaches for necrosectomy that have been designed by different centers around the world are discussed. All the interventional techniques have in common their aim to lower the invasive character, hypothesizing that lowering the surgical trauma will improve survival and lower complication rates. Recent advances include postponing intervention as a strategy to facilitate necrosectomy and improve prognosis and the "step-up approach" in case of infected necrosis. The step-up approach includes percutaneous catheter drainage as the first step, to be followed by necrosectomy, either through a minimally invasive approach or by open necrosectomy, as the next step.

CONCLUSIONS

All attempts to develop treatment strategies to lower the infection rate in acute pancreatitis have failed. Accumulating evidence is emerging to show that the combination of centralization, the use of catheter drainage as the first step of invasive treatment, and the development of minimally invasive techniques, improve the outlook for patients with infected necrosis. It is uncertain at this point in time as to which of the three effects is dominant in the improvement of prognosis.

Minimally invasive necrosectomy versus conventional surgery in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis: a systematic review and a meta-analysis of comparative studies

AIM

The purpose of this meta-analysis and systematic review is to compare minimally invasive necrosectomy (MIN) versus open necrosectomy (ON) surgery for infected necrosis of acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

One randomized controlled trial and 3 clinical controlled trials were selected, with a total of 336 patients (215 patients who underwent MIN and 121 patients underwent ON) included after searching in the following databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, BioMed Central, Science Citation Index (from inception to August 2011), Greynet, SIGLE (System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe), National Technological Information Service, British Library Integrated catalogue, and the Current Controlled Trials. Statistical analysis is performed using the odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

After the analysis of the data amenable to polling, significant advantages were found in favor of the MIN in terms of: incidence of multiple organ failure (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.39) (P < 0.0001), incisional hernias (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.90) (P = 0.03), new-onset diabetes (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.12-0.88) (P = 0.03), and for the use of pancreatic enzymes (OR, 0.005; 95% CI, 0.04-0.57) (P = 0.005). No differences were found in terms of mortality rate (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.18-1.05) (P = 0.06), multiple systemic complications (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.01-8.60) (P = 0.51), surgical reintervention for further necrosectomy (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.00-3.07) (P = 0.19), intra-abdominal bleeding (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.41-1.50) (P = 0.46), enterocutaneous fistula or perforation of visceral organs (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27-1.00) (P = 0.05), pancreatic fistula (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.30-1.46) (P = 0.30), and surgical reintervention for postoperative complications (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.23-1.08) (P = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of comparative studies and high heterogeneity of the data present in the literature did not permit to draw a definitive conclusion on this topic. The results of the present meta-analysis might be helpful to design future high-powered randomized studies that compare MIN with ON for acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

Surgical treatment of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis remains an unpredictable, potentially lethal disease with significant morbidity and mortality rates. New insights in the pathophysiology of acute pancreatitis have changed management concepts. In the first phase, characterized by a systemic inflammatory response syndrome, organ failure, not related to infection but rather to severe inflammation, dominates the focus of treatment. In the second phase, secondary infectious complications largely determine the clinical outcome. As infection is associated with increased mortality in acute pancreatitis, numerous prophylactic strategies have been explored in the past two decades.

PURPOSE

This review describes the strategies that have been developed to lower the infection rate, in an attempt to lower mortality. Antibiotic prophylaxis has been the subject of many RCT's without showing convincing evidence of their efficacy. Probiotics, although theoretically capable of lowering the rate of infection, also had no effect on infectious complications, and consequently, no effective strategy to lower the rate of infectious complications is currently available. In the second part of this review, new approaches for necrosectomy that have been designed by different centers around the world are discussed. All the interventional techniques have in common their aim to lower the invasive character, hypothesizing that lowering the surgical trauma will improve survival and lower complication rates. Recent advances include postponing intervention as a strategy to facilitate necrosectomy and improve prognosis and the "step-up approach" in case of infected necrosis. The step-up approach includes percutaneous catheter drainage as the first step, to be followed by necrosectomy, either through a minimally invasive approach or by open necrosectomy, as the next step.

CONCLUSIONS

All attempts to develop treatment strategies to lower the infection rate in acute pancreatitis have failed. Accumulating evidence is emerging to show that the combination of centralization, the use of catheter drainage as the first step of invasive treatment, and the development of minimally invasive techniques, improve the outlook for patients with infected necrosis. It is uncertain at this point in time as to which of the three effects is dominant in the improvement of prognosis.

Focused open necrosectomy in necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The control of sepsis is the primary goal of surgical intervention in patients with infected necrosis. Simple surgical approaches that are easy to reproduce may improve outcomes when specialists in endoscopy are not available. The aim of the present study was to describe the experience with a focused open necrosectomy (FON) in patients with infected necrosis.

METHOD

A prospective pilot study conducted to compare a semi-open/closed drainage laparotomy and FON with the assistance of peri-operative ultrasound. The incidence of sepsis, dynamics of C-reactive protein (CRP), intensive care unit (ICU)/hospital stay, complication rate and mortality were compared and analysed.

RESULTS

From a total of 58 patients, 36 patients underwent a conventional open necrosectomy and 22 patients underwent FON. The latter method resulted in a faster resolution of sepsis and a significant decrease in mean CRP on Day 3 after FON, P = 0.001. Post-operative bleeding was in 1 versus 7 patients and the incidence of intestinal and pancreatic fistula was 2 versus 8 patients when comparing FON to the conventional approach. The median ICU stay was 11.6 versus 23 days and the hospital stay was significantly shorter, 57 versus 72 days, P = 0.024 when comparing FON versus the conventional group. One patient died in the FON group and seven patients died in the laparotomy group, P = 0.139.

DISCUSSION

FON can be an alternative method to conventional open necrosectomy in patients with infected necrosis and unresolved sepsis.

IAP/APA evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

There have been substantial improvements in the management of acute pancreatitis since the publication of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) treatment guidelines in 2002. A collaboration of the IAP and the American Pancreatic Association (APA) was undertaken to revise these guidelines using an evidence-based approach.

METHODS

Twelve multidisciplinary review groups performed systematic literature reviews to answer 38 predefined clinical questions. Recommendations were graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The review groups presented their recommendations during the 2012 joint IAP/APA meeting. At this one-day, interactive conference, relevant remarks were voiced and overall agreement on each recommendation was quantified using plenary voting.

RESULTS

The 38 recommendations covered 12 topics related to the clinical management of acute pancreatitis: A) diagnosis of acute pancreatitis and etiology, B) prognostication/predicting severity, C) imaging, D) fluid therapy, E) intensive care management, F) preventing infectious complications, G) nutritional support, H) biliary tract management, I) indications for intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis, J) timing of intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis, K) intervention strategies in necrotizing pancreatitis, and L) timing of cholecystectomy. Using the GRADE system, 21 of the 38 (55%) recommendations, were rated as 'strong' and plenary voting revealed 'strong agreement' for 34 (89%) recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2012 IAP/APA guidelines provide recommendations concerning key aspects of medical and surgical management of acute pancreatitis based on the currently available evidence. These recommendations should serve as a reference standard for current management and guide future clinical research on acute pancreatitis.

Interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis: an overview of current approaches

The management of necrotizing pancreatitis has undergone a paradigm shift toward minimally invasive techniques for necrosectomy, obviating the need for open necrosectomy in most cases. There is increasing evidence that minimally invasive approaches including a step-up approach that incorporates percutaneous catheter or endoscopic transluminal drainage, followed by video-assisted retroperitoneal or endoscopic debridement are associated with improved outcomes over traditional open necrosectomy for patients with infected necrosis. A recent international multidisciplinary consensus conference emphasized the superiority of minimally invasive approaches over standard surgical approaches. The success of these techniques depends on concerted efforts of a multidisciplinary team of interventional endoscopists, radiologists, intensivists and surgeons dedicated to the management of severe acute pancreatitis and its complications. This review provides an overview of minimally invasive techniques for management of necrotizing pancreatitis, including indications, timing, advantages and disadvantages.

Endoscopic transluminal pancreatic necrosectomy using a self-expanding metal stent and high-flow water-jet system

Walled-off pancreatic necrosis and a pancreatic abscess are the most severe complications of acute pancreatitis. Surgery in such critically ill patients is often associated with significant morbidity and mortality within the first few weeks after the onset of symptoms. Minimal invasive approaches with high success and low mortality rates are therefore of considerable interest. Endoscopic therapy has the potential to offer safe and effective alternative treatment. We report here on 3 consecutive patients with infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis and 1 patient with a pancreatic abscess who underwent direct endoscopic necrosectomy 19-21 d after the onset of acute pancreatitis. The infected pancreatic necrosis or abscess was punctured transluminally with a cystostome and, after balloon dilatation, a non-covered self-expanding biliary metal stent was placed into the necrotic cavity. Following stent deployment, a nasobiliary pigtail catheter was placed into the cavity to ensure continuous irrigation. After 5-7 d, the metal stent was removed endoscopically and the necrotic cavity was entered with a therapeutic gastroscope. Endoscopic debridement was performed via the simultaneous application of a high-flow water-jet system; using a flush knife, a Dormia basket, and hot biopsy forceps. The transluminal endotherapy was repeated 2-5 times daily during the next 10 d. Supportive care included parenteral antibiotics and jejunal feeding. All patients improved dramatically and with resolution of their septic conditions; 3 patients were completely cured without any further complications or the need for surgery. One patient died from a complication of prolonged ventilation severe bilateral pneumonia, not related to the endoscopic procedure. No procedure related complications were observed. Transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy with temporary application of a self-expanding metal stent and a high-flow water-jet system shows promise for enhancing the potential of this endoscopic approach in patients with walled-off pancreatic necrosis and/or a pancreatic abscess.

Clinical features and outcomes of patients with severe acute pancreatitis complicated with gangrenous cholecystitis

BACKGROUND

The effects of gangrenous cholecystitis (GC) and consequent surgical interventions on the clinical outcomes and prognosis of patients with severe acute pancreatitis are not clear. The present study was to characterize the clinical outcomes of patients with severe acute pancreatitis complicated with GC.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 253 consecutive patients hospitalized for acute pancreatitis in intensive care unit. Among them, 68 were diagnosed as having severe acute pancreatitis; 10 out of the 68 patients had GC. We compared these 10 patients with GC and 58 patients without GC. The indices analyzed included sepsis/septic shock, pancreatic encephalopathy, acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute renal failure, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and death.

RESULTS

Specific CT images of GC in patients with severe acute pancreatitis included enlarged and high-tensioned gallbladder, wall thickening, lumenal emphysema, discontinuous and/or irregular enhancement of mucosa, and pericholecystic effusion. The rates of severe sepsis/septic shock (70.0% vs 24.1%, P<0.01), pancreatic encephalopathy (50.0% vs 17.2%, P<0.05), acute respiratory distress syndrome (90.0% vs 41.4%, P<0.01), multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (70.0% vs 24.1%, P<0.01), acute renal failure (40.0% vs 27.6%, P<0.05), and death (40.0% vs 13.8%, P<0.05) were significantly higher in patients with GC than in those without GC.

CONCLUSION

CT scans can help to identify early GC in patients with severe acute pancreatitis; early diagnosis and intervention for patients with GC can reduce morbidity and mortality.

Clinical management of patients with acute pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis is the leading cause of hospitalization for gastrointestinal disorders in the United States. As rates of hospitalization for acute pancreatitis continue to increase, so does demand for effective management. We review approaches to best manage patients with acute pancreatitis, covering diagnosis, risk and prognostic factors, treatment, and complications, considering recommendations from current practice guidelines.

Preliminary report on a new, fully covered, metal stent designed for the treatment of pancreatic fluid collections

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic transluminal treatment of pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) has been reported as an effective alternative approach to surgical treatment. A wide, short stent with an anti-migration system has been developed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a newly developed, fully covered, self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) customized for cystogastrostomy.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

SETTING

Tertiary-care academic medical centers and affiliated hospitals.

PATIENTS

Nine patients who underwent endoscopic treatment of PFCs (5 with pseudocysts and 4 with walled-off pancreatic necrosis).

INTERVENTION

Stent deployment after endoscopic US-guided puncture. Irrigation and necrosectomy were performed at the discretion of the endoscopist.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Technical and clinical success rate, complications, and removability.

RESULTS

The FCSEMS was inserted successfully in all cases (9/9, 100%). Clinical success was achieved in 7 of 9 cases (77.8%). No early complications associated with the procedure were observed. Late complications were observed in 2 cases (bleeding and asymptomatic migration). The FCSEMS was removed without any complications in all 6 cases where it was attempted after the procedure had been completed (100%).

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective evaluation of a small number of cases. The FCSEMS was always inserted via the transgastric route. Follow-up duration was short.

CONCLUSION

The endoscopic approach that uses this new FCSEMS is feasible for the treatment of PFCs. However, further evaluation is required.

Implications of culture positivity in acute pancreatitis: does the source matter?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Sepsis is an important complication and cause of morbidity and mortality in acute pancreatitis (AP). The source of sepsis may be infected pancreatic and peripancreatic collections and/or necrosis or extrapancreatic including infections in the bloodstream or respiratory and urinary tracts. We studied the implications of the source of sepsis on various outcome parameters in AP like persistent organ failure (POF), length of hospital (LOH) stay, and mortality.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of culture reports of AP patients was done, and the outcome parameters were recorded.

RESULTS

Three hundred fifty-seven patients (229 M; age: 40.3 ± 14.04 years) of AP who had detailed culture reports were included. Eighty-four (23.5%) patients had pancreatic (or peripancreatic) source (group 1), 52 (14.6%) patients had other (extrapancreatic) sources (group 2), 20 (5.6%) patients were noted to have positive cultures from sources, which were both pancreatic and extrapancreatic (combined) sources (group 3), while 201 patients had sterile cultures. POF was seen in 147 (48%) patients (group 1: 67.8%; group 2: 65%; group 3: 90%; group 4: 34% [P < 0.001]). The mean LOH stay was 22.1 ± 20.26 days (group 1: 30.2 ± 20.64 days; group 2: 26.4 ± 26.82 days; group 3: 47.3 ± 32.60 days; group 4: 15.2 ± 11.34 days [P < 0.001]). Seventy (19.7%) patients succumbed to their illness (group 1 [22.9%]; group 2 [36.5%]; group 3 [40%]; group 4 [12%] [P < 0.001]).

CONCLUSIONS

POF and LOH stay were more common in patients with combined pancreatic and extrapancreatic sources of sepsis. Mortality was significantly higher in patients with sepsis (groups 1, 2, 3) compared with sterile groups.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The role of antimicrobial therapy in severe acute pancreatitis

The role of antimicrobial therapy in patients with severe acute pancreatitis is to treat secondary pancreatic infections to prevent systemic sepsis and death. Infected pancreatic necrosis is diagnosed using image-directed fine needle aspiration with culture and Gram's stain. Prophylactic antibiotics have not proven efficacious, while the precise timely detection of secondary pancreatic infections is often elusive. A high clinical index of suspicion should prompt the empiric initiation of antimicrobial therapy until culture results are available. Positive cultures should guide antimicrobial therapy, and for infected pancreatic necrosis, antibiotics should be used in conjunction with interventional techniques for source control.

Endoscopic management of acute pancreatitis

Patients presenting with acute pancreatitis can be complex on different levels. Having a multifaceted approach to these patients is often necessary with radiographic, endoscopic, and surgical modalities all working to benefit the patient. Major surgical intervention can often be avoided or augmented by therapeutic and diagnostic endoscopic maneuvers. The diagnostic role of endoscopy in patients presenting with acute idiopathic pancreatitis can help define specific causative factors and ameliorate symptoms by endoscopic maneuvers. Etiologies of an acute pancreatitis episode, such as choledocholithiasis with or without concomitant cholangitis, microlithiasis or biliary sludge, and anatomic anomalies, such as pancreas divisum and pancreatobiliary ductal anomalies, often improve after endoscopic therapy.

Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," last published in 2008.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Some recommendations were ungraded (UG). Recommendations were classified into three groups: 1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; 2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and 3) pediatric considerations.

RESULTS

Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 hr of recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 hrs of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1C); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients) (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement, as based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥ 65 mm Hg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7-9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO2/FIO2 ratio of ≤ 100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 hrs) for patients with early ARDS and a Pao2/Fio2 < 150 mm Hg (2C); a protocolized approach to blood glucose management commencing insulin dosing when two consecutive blood glucose levels are > 180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤ 180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 hrs after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 hrs of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5 to 10 mins (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven "absolute"' adrenal insufficiency (2C).

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Video-assisted Laparoscopic Débridement for Retroperitoneal Pancreatic Collections: A Reliable Step-up Approach

Several minimal access routes have been implemented as a step-up approach to treat infected pancreatic necrosis. We evaluate our experience with a series of consecutive patients with pancreatic collections treated with video-assisted retroperitoneal débridement (VARD). Seven patients were consecutively treated with VARD: five patients after acute necrotizing pancreatitis, one chronic pancreatitis, and one patient with perforation after endoscopic sphincterotomy. The indication for VARD was: development of sepsis, positive direct culture of the necrosis, and compartment syndrome. The procedure was performed under general anesthesia and modified lateral decubitus. There were four left, two right, and one bilateral VARD. Mean hospital stay since admission to VARD procedure was 30 days (range, 12 to 72 days). Mean operative time was 63 minutes. There were no intraoperative complications. Two patients needed a second procedure to control sepsis. Most patients had a long intensive care unit (ICU) stay with 6.1 days (range, 2 to 22 days) mean postoperative ICU stay. One patient had a hypernatremia as a consequence of saline lavage and three patients presented pancreatic fistula that were managed with conservative treatment. There was no mortality. VARD approach is a recommended step-up approach to treat infected pancreatic necrosis, and its indication may be extended to treat other retroperitoneal collections.

The new revised classification of acute pancreatitis 2012

This study aims to update the 1991 Atlanta Classification of acute pancreatitis, to standardize the reporting of and terminology of the disease and its complications. Important features of this classification have incorporated new insights into the disease learned over the last 20 years, including the recognition that acute pancreatitis and its complications involve a dynamic process involving two phases, early and late. The accurate and consistent description of acute pancreatitis will help to improve the stratification and reporting of new methods of care of acute pancreatitis across different practices, geographic areas, and countries.

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.

Early surgery versus optimal current step-up practice for chronic pancreatitis (ESCAPE): design and rationale of a randomized trial

Background

In current practice, patients with chronic pancreatitis undergo surgical intervention in a late stage of the disease, when conservative treatment and endoscopic interventions have failed. Recent evidence suggests that surgical intervention early on in the disease benefits patients in terms of better pain control and preservation of pancreatic function. Therefore, we designed a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the benefits, risks and costs of early surgical intervention compared to the current stepwise practice for chronic pancreatitis.

Methods/design

The ESCAPE trial is a randomized controlled, parallel, superiority multicenter trial. Patients with chronic pancreatitis, a dilated pancreatic duct (≥ 5 mm) and moderate pain and/or frequent flare-ups will be registered and followed monthly as potential candidates for the trial. When a registered patient meets the randomization criteria (i.e. need for opioid analgesics) the patient will be randomized to either early surgical intervention (group A) or optimal current step-up practice (group B). An expert panel of chronic pancreatitis specialists will oversee the assessment of eligibility and ensure that allocation to either treatment arm is possible. Patients in group A will undergo pancreaticojejunostomy or a Frey-procedure in case of an enlarged pancreatic head (≥ 4 cm). Patients in group B will undergo a step-up practice of optimal medical treatment, if needed followed by endoscopic interventions, and if needed followed by surgery, according to predefined criteria. Primary outcome is pain assessed with the Izbicki pain score during a follow-up of 18 months. Secondary outcomes include complications, mortality, total direct and indirect costs, quality of life, pancreatic insufficiency, alternative pain scales, length of hospital admission, number of interventions and pancreatitis flare-ups. For the sample size calculation we defined a minimal clinically relevant difference in the primary endpoint as a difference of at least 15 points on the Izbicki pain score during follow-up. To detect this difference a total of 88 patients will be randomized (alpha 0.05, power 90%, drop-out 10%).

Discussion

The ESCAPE trial will investigate whether early surgery in chronic pancreatitis is beneficial in terms of pain relief, pancreatic function and quality of life, compared with current step-up practice.

Trial registration

ISRCTN: ISRCTN45877994

Improved outcome of severe acute pancreatitis in the intensive care unit

Background. Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is associated with serious morbidity and mortality. Our objective was to describe the case mix, management, and outcome of patients with SAP receiving modern critical care in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Methods. Retrospective analysis of patients with SAP admitted to the ICU in a single tertiary care centre in the UK between January 2005 and December 2010. Results. Fifty SAP patients were admitted to ICU (62% male, mean age 51.7 (SD 14.8)). The most common aetiologies were alcohol (40%) and gallstones (30%). On admission to ICU, the median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score was 17, the pancreatitis outcome prediction score was 8, and the median Computed Tomography Severity Index (CTSI) was 4. Forty patients (80%) tolerated enteral nutrition, and 46% received antibiotics for non-SAP reasons. Acute kidney injury was significantly more common among hospital nonsurvivors compared to survivors (100% versus 42%, P = 0.0001). ICU mortality and hospital mortality were 16% and 20%, respectively, and median lengths of stay in ICU and hospital were 13.5 and 30 days, respectively. Among hospital survivors, 27.5% developed diabetes mellitus and 5% needed long-term renal replacement therapy. Conclusions. The outcome of patients with SAP in ICU was better than previously reported but associated with a resource demanding hospital stay and long-term morbidity.

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous drainage of infected pancreatic necrosis

Background

The role of percutaneous drainage in the management of infected pancreatic necrosis remains controversial, and ultrasound-guided technique is rarely used for this indication. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of sonographically guided percutaneous catheter drainage for infected pancreatic necrosis.

Methods

The patient group consisted of 16 men and 2 women. The mean age of the patients was 47 years. The median computed tomography severity index of acute pancreatitis was 10 points. Percutaneous catheter drainage was performed under sonographic guidance using preferably retroperitoneal approach, and transperitoneal access in selected cases. The medical records and imaging scans were reviewed retrospectively for each patient.

Results

Percutaneous catheter drainage resulted in a complete resolution of infected pancreatic necrosis in 6 of 18 patients (33 %). Twelve of 18 patients who were initially managed with PCD required eventually necrosectomy (67 %). The most common reason for crossover to surgical intervention was persistent sepsis (n = 7). Open necrosectomy was performed in 4 of these patients, and 3 patients underwent successful minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy. Five patients required conversion to open surgery because of procedure-related complications. In 3 cases, there was leakage of the necrotic material into the peritoneal cavity. Two other patients experienced hemorrhagic complications. Overall mortality rate was 17 %. The size of the largest necrotic collection in patients who were successfully treated with percutaneous drainage decreased by a median of 76 % shortly after the procedure, whereas it decreased only by a median of 16 % in cases of failure of percutaneous drainage.

Conclusions

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous catheter drainage used in infected pancreatic necrosis is a technique with acceptably low morbidity and mortality that may be the definitive treatment or a bridge management to necrosectomy. A negligible decrease in size of the necrotic collection predicts failure of percutaneous drainage.

A retroperitoneal approach for infected pancreatic necrosis

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis remains associated with a high rate of complication and death. The surgery strategy for proven or suspected infected necrosis is controversial.

METHODS

The present study reviews the medical records of 9,421 patients admitted with the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis from 2002 to 2009.

RESULTS

The medical records of 9,421 admitted patients diagnosed with acute pancreatitis were reviewed. Among the patients, 412 received necrosectomy. Of the 412 that were identified, 108 patients underwent retroperitoneal necrosectomy, whereas the remaining 304 patients received open necrosectomy. The mortality rates were 20.4% (62/304) and 8.3% (9/108), respectively (p = 0.004). The rates of complications in the retroperitoneal group were lower than that in the open group (p < 0.05). The mean lengths of hospital stay and ICU stay after surgery were longer in the open group than those in the retroperitoneal group (48 vs. 30 days; 6 vs. 2 days, p < 0.05). Furthermore, the postoperational days in the hospital and surgical time were also significantly different (30 vs. 12 days; 167 vs. 93 min, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy approach reduced the rate of complications and death among patients with infected necrosis, compared with open necrosectomy.

Efficacy of conservative treatment, without necrosectomy, for infected pancreatic necrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Conservative treatment (intensive care, a combination of antimicrobial agents, and nutritional support, with or without drainage of the infected fluid) has recently been shown to be effective for patients with infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN), but the data from individual studies are not robust enough to recommend it as the standard of care. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies related to primary conservative management for IPN.

METHODS

We performed a literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed from January 1990 to March 2012 for studies of a priori protocols for primary conservative treatment, without necrosectomy, for consecutive patients with IPN. We analyzed data from 8 studies, comprising 324 patients with IPN who received primary conservative management. We then analyzed an additional 4 studies (comprising 157 patients) that reported the efficacy of percutaneous drainage in nonconsecutive patients with IPN. Outcome measures were the success of conservative management strategy, need for necrosectomy, and mortality.

RESULTS

There was significant heterogeneity in results among the studies. Based on a random effects model, conservative management was successful for 64% of patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 51%-78%); mortality was 12% (95% CI, 6%-18%), and 26% of patients required necrosectomy or additional surgery for complications (95% CI, 15%-37%). A separate analysis of 4 studies that reported outcomes of nonconsecutive patients with IPN following percutaneous drainage had comparable results; 50% had successful outcomes (95% CI, 43%-58%), mortality was 18% (95% CI, 6%-30%), and 38% of patients required surgery (95% CI, 20%-56%).

CONCLUSIONS

Conservative management without necrosectomy is a successful approach for 64% of patients with IPN. This approach has low mortality and prevents surgical necrosectomy.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," last published in 2008.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations.

RESULTS

Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7-9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO (2)/FiO (2) ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a PaO (2)/FI O (2) <150 mm Hg (2C); a protocolized approach to blood glucose management commencing insulin dosing when two consecutive blood glucose levels are >180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5-10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven "absolute"' adrenal insufficiency (2C).

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Transmural endoscopic necrosectomy of infected pancreatic necroses and drainage of infected pseudocysts: a tailored approach

OBJECTIVE

Transmural endoscopic drainage and necrosectomy have become favored treatment modes for infected pancreatic pseudocysts and necroses. In this analysis, we summarize the outcome of 40 patients with complicated course of acute pancreatitis after endoscopic treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From January 2006 through May 2011, 40 patients of our department with complicated pancreatitis were included in this retrospective analysis. All patients underwent endosonographic transgastric puncture followed by wire-guided insertion of one or more double pigtail stents. Patients with extensive necroses were treated repeatedly with transgastric necrosectomy. Treatment success was determined by clinical, laboratory, and radiological parameters.

RESULTS

Nine patients had interstitial pancreatitis (IP) with pancreatic pseudocysts. Thirty-one patients had necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) with acute pancreatic necroses (n = 4) or walled-off pancreatic necrosis (n = 27). All patients with IP and nine patients with NP had pseudocysts without solid material and underwent transgastric drainage only. In this group major complications occurred in 11.1% and no mortality was observed. Twenty-two NP patients were treated with additional repeated necrosectomy. In patients with localized peripancreatic necroses (n = 10) no need of surgery or mortality was observed, major complications occurred in 10%. In patients with extensive necroses reaching the lower abdomen (n = 12), three needed subsequent surgery and three died.

CONCLUSIONS

Transgastric endoscopy is an effective minimally invasive procedure even in patients with advanced pancreatic necroses. Complication rate is low particularly in patients with sole pseudocysts or localized necroses. The extent of the fluid collections and necroses is a new predictive parameter for the outcome of the patients.

Management of peripancreatic fluid collections following partial pancreatectomy: a comparison of percutaneous versus EUS-guided drainage

BACKGROUND

Peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) occur in up to 30 % of patients following partial pancreatic resections. Traditionally, postoperative PFCs are managed via percutaneous drainage (PD). EUS-guided transgastric drainage has been shown to be effective for the management of PFCs secondary to acute pancreatitis. However, there are limited data on the use of EUS-guided drainage (EUSD) for the management of postoperative PFCs.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and efficacy of PD versus EUSD of PFCs in patients who have undergone partial pancreatic resections.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of patients with symptomatic PFCs following pancreatic enucleation or distal pancreatectomy at MSKCC between January 2008 and December 2010. Patients were identified using an electronic medical records query in addition to a prospectively maintained pancreatic surgery complications database.

SETTING

Single, academic, tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Twenty-three patients with symptomatic PFCs following pancreatic enucleation or distal pancreatectomy were retrospectively identified.

INTERVENTIONS

CT-guided PD versus endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUSD) MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes included technical success, clinical success, number of interventions, and complications. Technical success was defined as successful localization of the PFC by fine-needle aspiration and placement of a drainage catheter or stent. Clinical success was defined as radiographic resolution of the PFC and removal of the drain or stent, without the need for an alternative drainage procedure or surgery.

RESULTS

PD was initially performed in 14 patients and EUSD initially in 9 patients. Three patients with initial PD had recurrence of PFC after removal of the external drain and underwent subsequent EUSD. The mean size of the fluid collections was 10.0 cm in the PD group and 8.9 cm in the EUSD group. Technical success was achieved in all patients in both groups. Clinical success was achieved in 11 of 14 (79 %) patients in the PD group compared with 11 of 11 (100 %) in the EUSD group, with one patient in the EUSD group lost to follow-up. One patient with initial PD required two additional percutaneous procedures before complete PFC resolution. Five EUSD patients required repeat endoscopy for stent revision or necrosectomy. The median number of interventions was two [range 1-5] in the PD group and two [range 1-5] in the EUSD group. The median number of days the drainage catheters were in place was 44.5 [range 2-87] in the PD group versus 57 [range 32-217] in the EUSD group. There were no procedure-related complications in either group. Adverse events in the PD group included splenic artery stump bleeding, pleural effusion, cysto-colonic and cysto-cutaneous fistulae, and persistent catheter site pain. One patient in the EUSD group developed a small-bowel obstruction and bleeding gastric ulcer.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, nonrandomized study and small numbers.

CONCLUSIONS

EUSD of postoperative PFCs appears to be safe and technically feasible. This technique appears to be as successful as PD for the management of PFCs with the advantage of not requiring an external drainage apparatus and should be considered as a therapeutic option in this group of patients. Further evaluation, with analysis of cost and quality of life, should be considered in a prospective, randomized trial.

The role of open necrosectomy in the current management of acute necrotizing pancreatitis: a review article

The optimal management of necrotizing pancreatitis continues to evolve. Currently, conservative intensive care treatment represents the primary therapy of acute severe necrotizing pancreatitis, aiming at prevention of organ failure. Following this mode of treatment most patients with sterile necroses can be managed successfully. Surgery might be considered as an option in the late phase of the disease for patients with proven infected pancreatic necroses and organ failure. For these patients surgical debridement is still considered the treatment of choice. However, even for this subgroup of patients, the concept of operative strategy has been recently challenged. Nowadays, it is generally accepted that necrotizing pancreatitis with proven infected necroses as well as septic complications directly caused by pancreatic infection are strong indications for surgical management. However, the question of the most appropriate surgical technique for the treatment of pancreatic necroses remains unsettled. At the same time, recent advances in radiological imaging, new developments in interventional radiology, and other minimal access interventions have revolutionised the management of necrotizing pancreatitis. In light of these controversies, the present paper will focus on the current role of surgery in terms of open necrosectomy in the management of severe acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

Grenzen des laparoskopischen Operierens bei abdomineller Sepsis

<b><i>Hintergrund: </i></b>Zahlreiche präklinische Daten weisen auf Vorteile des laparoskopischen Operierens auch bei abdomineller Sepsisquelle und septischem Patienten hin. <b><i>Methode und Ergebnisse: </i></b>Anhand derzeit verfügbarer Literatur betrachten wir die Möglichkeiten und Limitierungen laparoskopischen Operierens beim septischen Patienten mit abdominellem Fokus. Neben generellen Überlegungen werden im Speziellen das Vorgehen bei Appendizitis, Cholezystitis, perforiertem Ulkus, Sigmadivertikulitis und akuter Pankreatitis erörtert. <b><i>Schlussfolgerungen: </i></b>Erfahrene laparoskopische Chirurgen können die Sanierung der abdominellen Sepsisquelle bei Appendizitis, Cholezystitis, perforiertem Ulkus oder auch Sigmadivertikulitis sicher durchführen. Kombinationen aus interventionellen Techniken und minimal invasiven Operationen bieten insbesondere bei der perforierten Sigmadivertikulitis und bei infizierten Pankreasnekrosen innovative Ansätze, die derzeit in multizentrischen prospektiven Studien untersucht werden.

Minimally invasive treatment of pancreatic necrosis

AIM: To systematically review these minimally invasive approaches to infected pancreatic necrosis.

METHODS: We used the MEDLINE database to investigate studies between 1996 and 2010 with greater than 10 patients that examined these techniques. Using a combination of Boolean operators, reports were retrieved addressing percutaneous therapy (341 studies), endoscopic necrosectomy (574 studies), laparoscopic necrosectomy via a transperitoneal approach (148 studies), and retroperitoneal necrosectomy (194 studies). Only cohorts with at least 10 or more patients were included. Non-English papers, letters, animal studies, duplicate series and reviews without original data were excluded, leaving a total of 27 studies for analysis.

RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies with 947 patients total were examined (eight studies on percutaneous approach; ten studies on endoscopic necrosectomy; two studies on laparoscopic necrosectomy via a transperitoneal approach; five studies on retroperitoneal necrosectomy; and two studies on a combined percutaneous-retroperitoneal approach). Success rate, complications, mortality, and number of procedures were outcomes that were included in the review. We found that most published reports were retrospective in nature, and thus, susceptible to selection and publication bias. Few reports examined these techniques in a comparative, prospective manner.

CONCLUSION: Each minimally invasive approach though was found to be safe and feasible in multiple reports. With these new techniques, treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis remains a challenge. We advocate a multidisciplinary approach to this complex problem with treatment individualized to each patient.