Early on-demand drainage or standard management for acute pancreatitis patients with acute necrotic collections and persistent organ failure: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Long-Term Outcome of Immediate Versus Postponed Intervention in Patients With Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis (POINTER): Multicenter Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the long-term outcomes of immediate drainage versus the postponed-drainage approach in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND

In the randomized POINTER trial, patients assigned to the postponed-drainage approach using antibiotic treatment required fewer interventions, as compared with immediate drainage, and over a third were treated without any intervention.

METHODS

Clinical data of those patients alive after the initial 6-month follow-up were re-evaluated. The primary outcome was a composite of death and major complications.

RESULTS

Out of 104 patients, 88 were re-evaluated with a median follow-up of 51 months. After the initial 6-month follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 7 of 47 patients (15%) in the immediate-drainage group and 7 of 41 patients (17%) in the postponed-drainage group (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.33-2.28; P =0.78). Additional drainage procedures were performed in 7 patients (15%) versus 3 patients (7%) (RR 2.03; 95% CI 0.56-7.37; P =0.34). The median number of additional interventions was 0 (IQR 0-0) in both groups ( P =0.028). In the total follow-up, the median number of interventions was higher in the immediate-drainage group than in the postponed-drainage group (4 vs. 1, P =0.001). Eventually, 14 of 15 patients (93%) in the postponed-drainage group who were successfully treated in the initial 6-month follow-up with antibiotics and without any intervention remained without intervention. At the end of follow-up, pancreatic function and quality of life were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Also, during long-term follow-up, a postponed-drainage approach using antibiotics in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis results in fewer interventions as compared with immediate drainage and should therefore be the preferred approach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN33682933.

Timing of minimally invasive step-up intervention for symptomatic pancreatic necrotic fluid collections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Minimally invasive step-up interventions are now the standard treatment recommended by current guidelines for symptomatic pancreatic necrotic fluid collections (PNFC); however, it is controversial whether delayed treatment after four weeks should always be used in patients who have failed conservative treatment and whose condition has not improved or worsened. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the impacts of the different timing of interventions on the clinical outcomes and prognosis of patients with symptomatic PNEC requiring intervention.

METHODS

We searched Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed and Web of Science databases to identify comparative studies assessing the safety and efficacy of early and postponed interventions in treating symptomatic PNFC.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Mortality. Secondary outcomes included some major complications, need for further minimally invasive necrosectomy and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included ten studies (2 RCTs and 8 observational studies) with a total of 1178 symptomatic PNFC patients who required intervention. Pooled results showed that there was no significant difference between early minimally invasive intervention and postponed intervention in mortality(OR 1.41, 95%CI 0.93-2.12;p = 0.10) and the incidence of early and late complications, but the early intervention group had a significantly increased need for further minimally invasive necrosectomy compared with postponed intervention (OR 2.04,95%CI 1.04-4.03; p = 0.04). There was no increase in length of stay for patients who received early intervention compared to postponed drainage (MD 3.53, 95% CI -4.20, 11.27; p = 0.37).

CONCLUSION

Intervention before four weeks should be considered for patients with PNFC complicated by persistent organ failure or infections, who have been treated conservatively to the maximum extent possible.

The optimal timing and intervention to reduce mortality for necrotizing pancreatitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A series of randomized controlled trials have investigated the efficacy and safety of different timings of interventions and methods of intervention. However, the optimal treatment strategy is not yet clear.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Library until November 30, 2022. A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Trials comparing different treatment strategies for necrotizing pancreatitis were included. This study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022364409) to ensure transparency.

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 10 studies involving 570 patients and 8 treatment strategies. Although no statistically significant differences were identified comparing odds ratios, trends were confirmed by the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) scores. The interventions with a low rate of mortality were delayed surgery (DS), delayed surgical step-up approach (DSU) and delayed endoscopic step-up approach (DEU), while the interventions with a low rate of major complications were DSU, DEU and DS. According to the clustered ranking plot, DSU performed the best overall in reducing mortality and major complications, while DD performed the worst. Analysis of the secondary endpoints confirmed the superiority of DEU and DSU in terms of individual components of major complications (organ failure, pancreatic fistula, bleeding, and visceral organ or enterocutaneous fistula), exocrine insufficiency, endocrine insufficiency and length of stay. Overall, DSU was superior to other interventions.

CONCLUSION

DSU was the optimal treatment strategy for necrotizing pancreatitis. Drainage alone should be avoided in clinical practice. Any interventions should be postponed for at least 4 weeks if possible. The step-up approach was preferred.

Drainage of pancreatic fluid collections in acute pancreatitis: A comprehensive overview

Moderately severe and severe acute pancreatitis is characterized by local and systemic complications. Systemic complications predominate the early phase of acute pancreatitis while local complications are important in the late phase of the disease. Necrotic fluid collections represent the most important local complication. Drainage of these collections is indicated in the setting of infection, persistent or new onset organ failure, compressive or pressure symptoms, and intraabdominal hypertension. Percutaneous, endoscopic, and minimally invasive surgical drainage represents the various methods of drainage with each having its own advantages and disadvantages. These methods are often complementary. In this minireview, we discuss the indications, timing, and techniques of drainage of pancreatic fluid collections with focus on percutaneous catheter drainage. We also discuss the novel methods and techniques to improve the outcomes of percutaneous catheter drainage.

The clinical outcome from early versus delayed minimally invasive intervention for infected pancreatic necrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

While the management of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) has evolved in the last two decades with the adoption of minimally invasive interventions (drainage ± debridement), it is unknown whether the principle of delaying intervention inherited from the open surgery era still applies. The aim of the current study was to investigate the impact of the timing of minimally invasive intervention on the outcomes of patients with IPN requiring intervention.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE and Web of Science databases were searched for appropriate studies. The primary outcome of interest was hospital mortality, the secondary outcomes were the incidence of complications during the hospitalization, including new-onset organ failure, gastrointestinal fistula or perforation, bleeding and length of hospital or intensive care unit (ICU) stay.

RESULTS

Seven clinical studies were included with a total of 742 patients with IPN requiring intervention, of whom 321 received early intervention and 421 delayed intervention. Results from the meta-analysis showed that early minimally invasive intervention did not increase hospital mortality (odds ratio 1.65, 95% confidence interval 0.97-2.81; p = 0.06) but was associated with a remarkably prolonged hospital stay and an increased incidence of gastrointestinal fistula or perforation when compared with delayed intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Although no firm conclusion can be drawn because of the quality of available studies, it does appear that timing of intervention is a risk factor for adverse outcomes and ought to be investigated more rigorously in prospective studies.

Retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal percutaneous catheter drainage of necrotic pancreatic collections: a comparative analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the success rate, clinical outcomes, and complications of retroperitoneal (RP) versus transperitoneal (TP) percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) of the necrotic pancreatic fluid collections.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study comprised consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis who underwent PCD of lesser sac collections amenable to drainage via both TP and RP routes. The patients were divided into two groups based on the route of drainage (group I, RP, and group II, TP). The technical success, clinical success, complications, and clinical outcomes were compared between the groups. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the timing of drainage (acute necrotic collections, ANC vs. walled-off necrosis, WON) and organ failure (OF).

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients [mean age, 38.7 ± 12.3 years, 54 males] were included in the study. Group I and II comprised 22 (27.8%) and 57 (72.2%) patients, respectively. The procedures were technically successful in all the patients. There was no significant difference in the complication rate between the two groups. The clinical success was higher in group II (75.4%) as compared to group I (54.5%). However, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.070). There was no significant difference in the hospital stay (p = 0.298), intensive care unit stay (p = 0.401), need for surgical necrosectomy (p = 0.243), and mortality (p = 0.112) between the two groups. The outcomes in patients with OF and ANC were not affected by the route of PCD. Clinical success rate was significantly higher in WON undergoing TP drainage (p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Both RP and TP routes of PCD are safe and effective. Clinical success rate was significantly higher in WON undergoing TP drainage.

How to Identify the Indications for Early Intervention in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis Patients: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study

Aim

To explore the indications for early intervention in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) and evaluate the effect of early intervention on the prognosis of ANP patients.

Methods

The clinical data of patients with ANP who underwent general surgery at Xuanwu Hospital of Capital Medical University from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2020, were collected retrospectively. The patients were followed-up every 6 months after discharge, and the last follow-up date was June 30, 2021.

Results

A total of 98 patients with ANP were included in the study. They were divided into an early group (n= 43) and a delayed group (n = 55) according to the first percutaneous drainage (PCD) intervention time (≤ 4 weeks or > 4 weeks). Body temperature, inflammatory factor levels, and the number of patients with persistent organ failure (POF) were higher in the early group than in the delayed group. After the minimally invasive intervention, the body temperature and inflammatory factors of the two groups decreased significantly, most patients with POF improved, and the number of patients with reversal of POF in the early group was higher than that in the delayed group. Although the patients in the early group required more surgical intervention than those in the delayed group, there was no significant difference in mortality, incidence of postoperative complications, total length of hospital stay, or operation cost between the two groups. During long-term follow-up, there was no significant difference in the incidence of short-term and long-term complications and overall survival between the two groups.

Conclusions

Compared to patients in the delayed group, early intervention did not affect the prognosis of patients with ANP. It may be more suitable for patients with ANP with deterioration [such as POF or infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN)].

Synchronous organ failure and infected pancreatic necrosis define genuine critical acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Critical acute pancreatitis (CAP) was supposed to be strongly associated with the highest risk of adverse outcomes. However, the definition of CAP needs to be further clarified.

METHODS

A prospective database with consecutive patients of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) at a tertiary hospital was post-hoc analyzed. Patients were assigned to IPN alone, Metachronous-CAP (MCAP) and Synchronous-CAP group (SCAP) according to presence or absence of organ failure (OF) and the crosstalk between OF and IPN. Clinical interventions and outcomes were compared among groups.

RESULTS

A total of 248 IPN patients were enrolled and the overall mortality was 25.8%. Compared with MCAP, SCAP was associated with higher mortality (66.2 versus 10.0%) and morbidity (41.2 versus 18.0%), longer duration of OF (median 35.5 versus 12.0 days), ICU length of stay (LOS) (median 28.0 versus 16.0 days) and hospital LOS (median 67.0 versus 60.0 days) (all P < 0.05). The IPN alone and MCAP had comparable mortality (10.8 versus 10.0%), morbidity and hospital LOS, except that MCAP patients were characterized with longer duration of OF and ICU LOS (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

SCAP, characterized with synchronous persistent OF and IPN, was associated with higher mortality and morbidity and should be defined as genuine CAP.