Endoscopic and surgical treatment options for chronic pancreatitis: an imaging perspective

Imaging Recommendations for Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth most prevalent cause of cancer-related death worldwide, with a fatality rate equal to its incidence rate. Pancreatic cancer is a rare malignancy with a global incidence and death ranking of 14th and 7th, respectively. Pancreatic cancer cases are divided into three categories without metastatic disease: resectable, borderline resectable, or locally advanced disease. The category is determined by the tumor's location in the pancreas and whether it is abutting or encasing the adjacent arteries and/or vein/s.

The stage of disease and the location of the primary tumor determine the clinical presentation: the pancreatic head, neck, or uncinate process, the body or tail, or multifocal disease. Imaging plays a crucial role in the diagnosis and follow-up of pancreatic cancers. Various imaging modalities available for pancreatic imaging are ultrasonography (USG), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and 18-fluoro-deoxy glucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET).

Even though surgical resection is possible in both resectable and borderline resectable non-metastatic cases, neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy has become the standard practice for borderline resectable cases as it gives a high yield of R0 resection.

Pain relief in chronic pancreatitis: endoscopic or surgical treatment? a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Pain is one of the consequences of chronic pancreatitis (CP) that has the greatest impact on the quality of life of patients. Endoscopic and surgical interventions, by producing a decrease in intraductal pancreatic pressure, can provide pain relief. This is the first systematic review that includes only randomized clinical trials (RTCs) comparing outcomes in the short-term (less than 2 years) and long-term (more than 2 years) between these two types of interventions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases to identify RTCs comparing short and long-term pain relief, procedural complications, and days of hospitalization between endoscopic and surgical interventions was performed following the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Three RCTs evaluating a total of 199 patients (99 in the endoscopy group and 100 in the surgery group) were included in this study. Surgical interventions provided complete pain relief, with statistical difference, in the long-term (16,4% vs 35.7%; RD 0.19; 95% CI 0.03-0.35; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%), without significant difference in short-term (17.5% vs 31.2%; RD 0.14; 95% CI -0.01-0.28; p = 0.07; I2 = 0%) when compared to endoscopy. There was no statistical difference in short-term (17.5% vs 28.1%; RD 0.11; 95% CI -0.04-0.25; p = 0.15; I2 = 0%) and long-term (34% vs 41.1%; RD 0.07; 95% CI -0.10-0.24; p = 0.42; I2 0%) in partial relief of pain between both interventions. In the short-term, both complications (34.9% vs 29.7%; RD 0.05; 95% CI -0.10-0.21; p = 0.50; I2 = 48%) and days of hospitalization (MD -1.02; 95% CI -2.61-0.58; p = 0.21; I2 = 0%) showed no significant differences.

CONCLUSION

Surgical interventions showed superior results when compared to endoscopy in terms of complete long-term pain relief. The number of complications and length of hospitalization in both groups were similar.