Endoscopic transmural drainage of pseudocysts associated with pancreatic resections or pancreatitis: a comparative study

Pancreatic pseudocyst: Dilemma of its recent management (Review)

Advances in radiological techniques have led to an increase in the number of diagnoses of pancreatic pseudocyst, which is the most common pancreatic cyst lesion disease, accounting for two-thirds of all pancreatic cyst lesions. Historically, the management of pancreatic pseudocyst has been achieved through the use of conservative treatments and surgery; however, due to the complications and recurrence rate associated with these techniques, the management of pancreatic pseudocyst is challenging. Surgeons and gastroenterologists have attempted to determine the optimal management technique to treat pancreatic pseudocyst to reduce complications and the recurrence rate. From these investigations, percutaneous catheter, surgical and endoscopic drainage with ultrasonography guidance have become promising management techniques. The present review aimed to summarize the diagnostic and therapeutic methods used for the management of pancreatic pseudocyst and to compare percutaneous catheter, surgical and endoscopic drainage.

A Comparison of Endoscopic Versus Surgical Creation of a Cystogastrostomy to Drain Pancreatic Pseudocysts and Walled-Off Pancreatic Necrosis in 5500 Patients

Objective

To determine the success, morbidity, and mortality rates of endoscopic and surgical creation of pancreatic cystenterostomies for the drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections, pseudocysts with necrotic debris, and walled-off pancreatic necrosis.

Summary Background Data

Endoscopic methods of cystenterostomy creation to drain pancreatic pseudocysts (with and without necrotic debris) and infected peripancreatic fluid collections are perceived to be less morbid than surgery. Contemporary reports document a very high complication rate with endoscopic methods.

Methods

A meta-analysis of 5500 patients.

Results

Open and laparoscopic surgical techniques to drain chronic pancreatic pseudocysts, infected pancreatic fluid collections, and walled-off pancreatic necrosis are more successful with less morbidity and mortality than endoscopic methods.

Conclusions

In regards to a surgical step-up approach to treat chronic infected pancreatic fluid collections or walled-off pancreatic necrosis, surgical creation of a cystenterostomy is more successful with fewer complications than endoscopic methods and should be given priority if less invasive or conservative methods fail.

Endoscopic versus percutaneous drainage of post-operative peripancreatic fluid collections following pancreatic resection

BACKGROUND

Post-operative peripancreatic fluid collection (PFC) is a common complication following pancreatic resection which can be managed with endoscopic or percutaneous drainage.

METHODS

Patients who underwent either endoscopic or percutaneous drainage of post-operative PFC were extracted from a prospectively-maintained database. The two groups were matched for surgery type, presence of a surgical drain and timing of drainage.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine matched patients were identified in each group with a median age of 62 years. For primary drainage, technical success was achieved in almost all patients in both endoscopic and percutaneous groups (100% and 97%, p = NS); clinical success was achieved in 67% and 59%, respectively (p = 0.63). At least one "salvage" drainage procedure was required in 13 endoscopic patients versus 16 in the percutaneous group. Clinical success was achieved following the first salvage. Procedure in 85% of the endoscopic patients and 88% of the percutaneous patients (p = 0.62). Stent/drain duration (59 vs 33 days, p < 0.001) and number of post-procedural CT studies (2 vs 1, p = 0.02) were significantly higher in the endoscopic group. There was no difference in length of stay, complication, or recurrence between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic drainage of post-operative PFC appears to be safe and effective with comparable success rates and outcomes to percutaneous drainage.

Fluid collection after partial pancreatectomy: EUS drainage and long-term follow-up

Background and Objectives:

Postoperative fluid collection due to pancreatic leak is the most frequent complication after pancreatic surgery. EUS-guided drainage of post-pancreatic surgery fluid collection is the gold standard procedure; however, data on outcomes of this procedure are limited. The primary endpoint of our study was relapse over longterm followup, and the secondary endpoint was the efficiency and safety of EUS-guided drainage of post-pancreatic surgery fluid collection.

Patients and Methods:

This retrospective study was conducted at a single center from December 2008 to April 2016. Global morbidity was defined as the occurrence of an event involving additional endoscopic procedures, hospitalization, or interventional radiologic or surgical procedures. EUS-guided drainage was considered a clinical failure if surgery was required to treat a relapse after stent removal.

Results:

Fortyone patients were included. The technical success rate was 100%. Drainage was considered a clinical success in 93% (39/41) of cases. Additionally, 19 (46%) complications were identified as global morbidity. The duration between surgery and EUS-guided drainage was not a significantly related factor for morbidity rate (P = 0.8); however, bleeding due to arterial injuries (splenic artery and gastroduodenal artery) from salvage drainage procedures occurred within 25 days following the initial surgery. There was no difference in survival between patients with and without complications. No relapse was reported during the followup (median: 44.75 months; range: 29.24 to 65.74 months).

Conclusion:

EUSguided drainage for post-pancreatic surgery fluid collection was efficient with no relapse during longterm followup. Morbidity rate was independent of the duration between the initial surgery and EUS-guided drainage; however, bleeding risk was likely more important in cases of early drainage.

Identification of risk factors for pancreatic pseudocysts formation, intervention and recurrence: a 15-year retrospective analysis in a tertiary hospital in China

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic pseudocyst (PPC) is a common complication of acute and chronic pancreatitis. To our knowledge no study has systematically reported the risk factors for the formation, intervention and recurrence of PPC. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the potential risk factors for PPC, with regards to its formation, intervention and recurrence.

METHODS

A database containing 5106 pancreatitis patients was retrospectively analyzed. As a result, a total of 4379 eligible patients were identified and divided into 2 groups: PPC group (group A, n = 759) and non-PPC group (group B, n = 3620). The PPC group was subdivided into 2 groups: intervention PPC (group C, n = 347) and resolution PPC (group D, n = 412). The differences in surgical complication and recurrence rates were compared among 347 PPC patients receiving different interventions, including surgical, endoscopic and percutaneous drainages. Furthermore, group C was subdivided into 2 groups: recurrent PPC (group E, n = 34) and non-recurrent PPC (group F, n = 313). All possible risk factors for PPC formation, intervention and recurrence were determined by multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

In this study, PPC was developed in 17.3% (759/4379) of pancreatitis patients. The significant risk factors for PPC formation included alcoholic pancreatitis (OR, 6.332; 95% CI, 2.164-11.628; p = 0.031), chronic pancreatitis (CP) (OR, 5.822; 95% CI, 1.921-10.723; p = 0.006) and infected pancreatic necrosis (OR, 4.253; 95% CI, 3.574-7.339; p = 0.021). Meanwhile, the significant risk factors of PPC patients who received intervention were alcoholic pancreatitis (OR, 7.634; 95% CI, 2.125-13.558; p = 0.016), size over 6 cm (OR, 8.834; 95% CI, 2.017-16.649; p = 0.002) and CP (OR, 4.782; 95% CI, 1.897-10.173; p = 0.038). In addition, the recurrence rate in PPC patients treated with percutaneous drainage was found to be the highest (16.3%) among the three intervention groups. Furthermore, percutaneous drainage was the only risk factor of PPC recurrence (OR, 7.812; 95% CI, 3.109-23.072; p = 0.013) identified from this retrospective cohort study.

CONCLUSIONS

Alcoholic pancreatitis and CP are the main risk factors for PPC formation and intervention, but not PPC recurrence. A higher recurrence rate is found in PPC patients treated with percutaneous drainage, as compared to endoscopic and surgical interventions.

Algorithm for the multidisciplinary management of hemorrhage in EUS-guided drainage for pancreatic fluid collections

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs), common sequelae of acute or chronic pancreatitis, are broadly classified as pancreatic pseudocysts or walled-off necrosis according to the revised Atlanta classification. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is often considered a standard first-line therapy preferable to surgical or interventional radiology approaches for patients with symptomatic PFC. EUS-guided drainage is effective and successful; it has a technical success rate of 90%-100% and a clinical success rate of 85%-98%. Recent studies have shown a 5%-30% adverse events (AEs) rate for the procedure. The most common AEs include infection, hemorrhage, perforation and stent migration. Hemorrhage, a severe and sometimes deadly outcome, requires a well-organized and appropriate treatment strategy. However, few studies have reported the integrated management of hemorrhage during EUS-guided drainage of PFC. Establishing a practical therapeutic strategy is an essential and significant step in standardized management. The aim of this review is to describe the current situation of EUS-guided drainage of PFCs, including the etiology and treatment of procedure-related bleeding as well as current problems and future perspectives. We propose a novel and meaningful algorithm for systematically managing hemorrhage events. To our limited knowledge, a multidisciplinary algorithm for managing EUS-guided drainage for PFC-related bleeding has not been previously reported.

The role of endoscopic intervention in the management of inflammatory pancreatic fluid collections

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are a frequent complication of pancreatitis, or less commonly, pancreatic trauma or surgery. The revised Atlanta Classification categorizes PFCs as acute or chronic, with further subclassification of acute collections into acute peripancreatic collections and acute necrotic collections and of chronic fluid collections into pseudocysts and walled-off pancreatic necrosis. Acute PFCs are generally only subjected to an intervention when they are infected and not responding to antibiotics and are not managed endoscopically. Chronic PFCs, both pseudocysts and walled-off pancreatic necrosis, require intervention only when symptomatic or enlarging over time. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage has become the mainstay of management for chronic PFCs that require intervention. Developments in medical devices over the past few years have significantly simplified and shortened the duration of the procedure itself, but the optimum choice of stent in different clinical scenarios remains to be defined, as does the place of endoscopic necrosectomy. To optimize outcomes, these patients should undergo a careful preprocedure workup and discussion in a multidisciplinary environment and procedures should be carried out in high-volume pancreatic units.

Efficacy of metal and plastic stents for transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Metal stents are being used more frequently for transmural endoscopic drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) despite lack of data. The present systematic review was conducted to compare the rates of treatment success, adverse events and recurrence between patients undergoing metal versus plastic stent placement for endoscopic transmural drainage of PFC.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched to identify all published manuscripts that evaluated metal stents for endoscopic transmural drainage of PFC. All published studies from the same period involving plastic stent placement for PFC drainage that included >50 patients were also identified. Main outcome measures were to compare the rates of treatment success, adverse events and recurrence between the metal and plastic stent cohorts.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies (881 patients) met inclusion criteria. There was no difference in overall treatment success between patients treated with plastic and metal stents (81% [95% CI, 77-84%] vs 82% [95% CI, 74-88%]) for both pseudocysts (85% [95% CI, 81-89%] vs 83% [95% CI, 74-89%]) and walled-off necrosis (70% [95% CI, 62-76%] vs 78% [95% CI, 50-93%]). Also, there was no difference in the rates of adverse events (16% [95% CI, 14-39%] vs 23% [95% CI, 16-33%]) or recurrence (10% [95% CI, 8-13%] vs 9% [95% CI, 4-19%]) between plastic and metal stents.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence does not support routine placement of metal stents for transmural drainage of PFC. Randomized trials are needed to justify the use of metal stents for PFC drainage.

Outcomes of endoscopic and percutaneous drainage of pancreatic fluid collections arising after pancreatic tail resection

BACKGROUND

Up to 15% to 30% of patients develop pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) after pancreatic tail resection. Percutaneous and endoscopic methods have been used to drain these collections, though few data are available that compare outcomes of these modalities.

STUDY DESIGN

From December 1998 to April 2011, we identified all patients who underwent pancreatic tail resection and developed PFCs requiring intervention. The primary aim was to compare overall success rates in resolution of PFCs using endoscopic and percutaneous modalities. Success rates, hospital length of stay, number of CT scans, sinograms and endoscopies performed, and days with drain(s) in place were compared.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients were identified. Percutaneous drainage was performed a median of 25 days postoperatively, compared with 85 days for endoscopic drainage (p < 0.001). Endoscopic and percutaneous methods had similar rates of technical success (100% vs 97%, p = 0.50) and treatment success (80% vs 81%, p = 0.92), respectively. Recurrence rates were 16.6% for the endoscopic group and 23% for the percutaneous group (p = 0.65), and adverse events occurred in 9.4% of those treated endoscopically vs 13.3% of those treated percutaneously (p = 0.68). Location and characteristics of PFCs did not influence success rates. Recurrences were often treated by "salvage" drainage via the other modality. Median hospital stay was longer after primary percutaneous drainage compared with primary endoscopic drainage (5.5 days vs 2 days, p = 0.046). Primary percutaneous drainage patients also had more CT scans (median 3 vs 2, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic drainage and percutaneous drainage appear to be equally effective and complementary interventions for PFCs occurring after pancreatic tail resection. Primary endoscopic drainage may be associated with shorter hospital stay and fewer CT scans.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage for pancreatic fistula or pancreatic duct dilation after pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is widely used to manage pancreatic pseudocysts. Several studies have reported the use of EUS-guided drainage for pancreatic fistula and stasis of pancreatic juice caused by stricture of the pancreatic duct after pancreatic resection.

METHODS

At the authors' hospital, 262 patients underwent surgery involving pancreatic resection from April 2005 to March 2010. In 90 of these patients (34%), a grade B or C postoperative pancreatic fistula developed that required additional treatment. The authors performed EUS-guided transmural drainage (EUS-TD) for six patients (2.1%) with a pancreatic fistula or dilation of the main pancreatic duct visible by EUS. Percutaneous drainage was provided for 18 patients (6.8%). The success rates for EUS-TD and percutaneous drainage were compared in a retrospective analysis.

RESULTS

In all six cases, EUS-TD was performed successfully without complications. Five of the six patients were successfully treated with only one trial of EUS-TD. The final technical success rate was 100% for both EUS-TD and percutaneous drainage. Both the short- and long-term clinical success rates for EUS-TD were 100% and those for percutaneous drainage were 61.1 and 83%, respectively. The differences in these rates were not significant (short-term success, P = 0.091 vs. long-term success, P = 0.403). However, the time to clinical success was significantly shorter with EUS-TD (5.8 days) than with percutaneous drainage (30.4 days; P = 0.0013) in the current series.

CONCLUSIONS

The EUS-TD approach appears to be a safe and technically feasible alternative to percutaneous drainage and may be considered as first-line therapy for pancreatic fistulas visible by EUS.