A contemporary series of patients undergoing open debridement for necrotizing pancreatitis

Risk Factors Influencing Mortality in Open Necrosectomy for Acute Pancreatitis: A Comparative Analysis

Background and Objectives: Patients undergoing open necrosectomy (ON) for acute pancreatitis (AP) often face high morbidity and mortality rates. This study aims to identify risk factors associated with adverse outcomes by comparing survivors and non-survivors of ON. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 74 patients who underwent ON for AP. Patients were divided into two groups: survivors (n = 52) and non-survivors (n = 22). Preoperative and postoperative variables were compared, and p-values were calculated to identify significant differences. Results: The mortality rate was 29.73%. Significant risk factors for mortality included age over 60 (p = 0.008), multiple organ failure (p = 0.001), early necrosectomy before 28 days (p = 0.001), higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (p = 0.045), and postoperative complications such as bleeding (p = 0.005) and intestinal fistula (p = 0.038). Delayed ON after 28 days showed a significantly lower mortality rate (12.5%) compared to early ON (50%). Conclusions: Age, severity of AP, timing of ON, and postoperative complications significantly influence mortality rates in patients undergoing ON. Delaying surgery beyond 28 days and optimizing surgical techniques may improve patient outcomes.

Evaluating the role of the Minimal Incision Retroperitoneal Necrosectomy (MIRN) in the management of infected pancreatic necrosis: Experience from a tertiary care center

Background

The conventional open necrosectomy was associated with high mortality and morbidities like secondary organ failure, incisional hernia, enterocutaneous fistula, and external pancreatic fistula. In acute pancreatitis, collections are primarily confined to the retroperitoneal space. Hence, the retroperitoneal approach can be used to drain the collection and necrotic material. It benefits smaller incisions and better outcomes in terms of morbidity and mortality than the conventional open necrosectomy. This study primarily aims to describe the effects of minimal incision retroperitoneal necrosectomy versus conventional open necrosectomy for treating INP. Moreover, it provides evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of this method.

Methods

A single-center retrospective study of the prospectively maintained database from April 2008 to December 2021.

Results

A total of 122 patients were included in the study. Seventy-eight patients had an open necrosectomy, 30 had a MIRN, and 14 had a VARD procedure. These three groups were comparable in demographic variables. Preoperative variables like APACHE II at presentation, Modified CTSI, percentage of necrosis, multi-organ failure, time to surgery, and need for preoperative ICU stay were comparable among the three groups. Postoperative mortality was low in the MIRN group{open 35.8 % vs. MIRN 20.5 % vs. VARD 35.7 %, p = 0.066}. The postoperative stay was also significantly low in the MIRN and VARD group {open 23.62 ± 16.61 vs. MIRN 11.77 ± 7.73, VARD 8.86 ± 2.98, p = 0.00}. No significant difference in re-intervention rate, postoperative bleeding, and enterocutaneous fistula.

Conclusion

MIRN is a simple and easy-to-adapt procedure for infected pancreatic necrosis in the appropriately selected patient group.

Minimal-access video-assisted retroperitoneal and/or transperitoneal debridement (VARTD) in the management of infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis with deep extension: initial experience from a prospective single-arm study

BACKGROUND

The currently preferred minimally invasive approaches have substantially improved outcomes of infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis (iWON). However, iWON with deep extension (iWONde) still poses a tricky challenge for sufficient necrosis evacuation by one stand-alone approach, often requiring repeated interventions. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of a minimal-access video-assisted retroperitoneal and/or transperitoneal debridement (hereafter called VARTD) in the management of iWONde.

METHODS

Patients who had developed an iWONde were recruited to receive the VARTD in this prospective single-arm study. The primary efficacy endpoint was clinical improvement up to day 28 after the VARTD, defined as a ≥ 75% reduction in size of necrotic collection (in any axis) on CT and clinical resolution of sepsis or organ dysfunction. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of major complications or death during follow-up. Six-month postdischarge follow-up was available.

RESULTS

Between July 18, 2018, and November 12, 2020, we screened 95 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis; of these, 21 iWONde patients (mean [SD] age, 42.9 [11.7] years; 10 [48%] women) were finally enrolled. The primary efficacy endpoint was achieved by most participants (14/21, 67%). No participants required repeated interventions. The primary safety endpoint occurred in six patients (29%). Except one in-hospital death attributable to repeated intra-abdominal hemorrhage, others were discharged without any major complication.

CONCLUSIONS

The VARTD approach appears to have a reasonable efficacy with acceptable complication rates and thus might be an option for improving clinical management of iWONde.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (chictr.org.cn number, ChiCTR1800016950).

Contemporary Surgical Management of Pancreatic Necrosis

Importance

For decades, infected or symptomatic pancreatic necrosis was managed by open surgical necrosectomy, an approach that has now been largely supplanted by an array of techniques referred to as the step-up approach.

Observations

This review describes the evidence base behind the step-up approach, when to use the different techniques, and their technical basics. The most common treatment strategies are included: percutaneous drainage, video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement, sinus tract endoscopy, endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy, and surgical transgastric necrosectomy. Also included is the evidence base around management of common complications that can occur during step-up management, such as hemorrhage, intestinal fistula, and thrombosis, in addition to associated issues that can arise during step-up management, such as the need for cholecystectomy and disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome.

Conclusions and Relevance

The treatment strategies highlighted in this review are those most commonly used during step-up management, and this review is designed as a guide to the evidence base underlying these strategies, as surgeons tailor their therapeutic approach to individual patients.

Decreasing use of pancreatic necrosectomy and NSQIP predictors of complications and mortality

BACKGROUND

Surgical pancreatic necrosectomy (SPN) is an option for the management of infected pancreatic necrosis. The literature indicates that an escalating, combined endoscopic, interventional radiology and minimally invasive surgery "step-up" approach, such as video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement, may reduce the number of required SPNs and ICU complications, such as multiple organ failure. We hypothesized that complications for surgically treated severe necrotizing pancreatitis patients decreased during the period of adoption of the "step-up" approach.

METHODS

The American college of surgeons national surgery quality improvement program database (ACS-NSQIP) was used to find SPN cases from 2007 to 2019 in ACS-NSQIP submitting hospitals. Mortality and Clavien-Dindo class 4 (CD4) ICU complications were collected. Predictors of outcomes were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

There were 2457 SPN cases. SPN cases decreased from 0.09% in 2007 to 0.01% in 2019 of NSQIP operative cases (p < 0.001). Overall mortality was 8.5% and did not decrease with time. CD4 complications decreased from 40 to 27% (p < 0.001). There was a 65% reduction in SPN cases requiring a return to the operating room. Multivariate predictors of complications were emergency general surgery (EGS, p < 0.001), serum albumin (p < 0.0001) and modified frailty index (mFI) (p < 0.0001). Multivariate predictors of mortality were EGS (p < 0.0001), serum albumin (p < 0.0001), and mFI (p < 0.04). The mFI decreased after 2010 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

SPNs decreased after 2010, with decreasing CD4 complications, decreasing reoperation rates and stable mortality rates, likely indicating broad adoption of a "step-up" approach. Larger, prospective studies to compare indications and outcomes for "step up" versus open SPN are warranted.

Diagnosis, severity stratification and management of adult acute pancreatitis-current evidence and controversies

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a disease spectrum ranging from mild to severe with an unpredictable natural course. Majority of cases (80%) are mild and self-limiting. However, severe AP (SAP) has a mortality risk of up to 30%. Establishing aetiology and risk stratification are essential pillars of clinical care. Idiopathic AP is a diagnosis of exclusion which should only be used after extended investigations fail to identify a cause. Tenets of management of mild AP include pain control and management of aetiology to prevent recurrence. In SAP, patients should be resuscitated with goal-directed fluid therapy using crystalloids and admitted to critical care unit. Routine prophylactic antibiotics have limited clinical benefit and should not be given in SAP. Patients able to tolerate oral intake should be given early enteral nutrition rather than nil by mouth or parenteral nutrition. If unable to tolerate per-orally, nasogastric feeding may be attempted and routine post-pyloric feeding has limited evidence of clinical benefit. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram should be selectively performed in patients with biliary obstruction or suspicion of acute cholangitis. Delayed step-up strategy including percutaneous retroperitoneal drainage, endoscopic debridement, or minimal-access necrosectomy are sufficient in most SAP patients. Patients should be monitored for diabetes mellitus and pseudocyst.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of infected necrotizing pancreatitis management in an academic setting

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Traditional management for infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) often utilizes open necrosectomy, which carries high morbidity and complication rates. Thus, minimally invasive strategies have gained favor, specifically step-up approaches utilizing endoscopic or minimally-invasive surgery (MIS); however, the ideal management modality for INP has not been identified.

METHODS

A decision tree model was designed to analyze costs and survival associated with open necrosectomy, endoscopic step-up, and MIS step-up protocols for management of INP after 4 weeks of necrosis development with adequate retroperitoneal access. Costs were based on a third-party payer perspective using Medicare reimbursement rates. The model's effectiveness was represented by quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Sensitivity analyses were performed to validate results.

RESULTS

Endoscopic step-up was the dominant economic strategy with 7.92 QALYs for $90,864.09. Surgical step-up resulted in a decrease of 0.09 QALYs and a cost increase of $10,067.89 while open necrosectomy resulted in a decrease of 0.4 QALYs and an increased cost of $18,407.52 over endoscopic step-up. In 100,000 random-sampling simulations, 65.5% of simulations favored endoscopic step-up. MIS step-up was favored when MIS acute mortality rates fell and when MIS drainage success rates rose.

CONCLUSIONS

In our simulated patients with INP, the most cost-effective management strategy is endoscopic step-up. Cost-effectiveness varies with changes in acute mortality and drainage success, which will depend on local expertise.

Infected pancreatic necrosis and retroperitoneal abscess associated with Lactobacillus paracasei

Infected pancreatic necrosis is a postpancreatitis complication that is mainly caused by Enterobacteriaceae and Enterococci. Here, we have reported a very rare case of Lactobacillus paracasei bacteraemia associated with infected pancreatic necrosis and retroperitoneal abscess. In addition to the diagnosis of diabetic ketoacidosis, blood test results revealed a high inflammatory status. CT of the abdomen revealed pancreatic walled-off necrosis. Blood culture and aspiration fluid culture revealed positivity for L. paracasei, leading to the diagnosis of infected pancreatic necrosis. The abscess had spread in the retroperitoneal space later. The patient recovered after receiving antibiotic treatment and endoscopic and percutaneous drainage. L. paracasei can cause invasive infection, including infected pancreatic necrosis and retroperitoneal abscess, which requires aggressive therapy.

Novel techniques for management of portal system hemorrhage in acute pancreatitis

Current management of infected pancreatic necrosis is focused on a minimally invasive step-up approach. The step-up approach consists of initial percutaneous or endoscopic drainage of infected pancreatic necrosis, followed, if necessary, by minimally invasive surgical or endoscopic debridement. While there is reduced morbidity and mortality, vascular complications can be life-threatening. Reported vascular complications have been limited to arterial bleeding. Venous bleeding has not been previously reported. We present two cases of portal venous bleeding in patients who underwent treatment for infected pancreatic necrosis with a step-up approach. We discuss the clinical presentation, diagnosis, and initial management. Moreover, we present two different techniques that can be used to successfully manage venous bleeding in patients who have percutaneous drains in place as part of a step-up approach. These techniques involve tamponading the cavity or drain tract with topical hemostatics and direct embolization of the bleeding vein. These experiences can serve as a guide for managing portal venous bleeding in patients with infected pancreatic necrosis.

Comparison between video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement and small incision pancreatic necrosectomy in infected pancreatic necrosis

BACKGROUND

Debridement and drainage have always been mainstream treatment for infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN), and the application of minimally invasive necrosectomy is becoming increasingly widespread. However, few studies have compared video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD) and small incision pancreatic necrosectomy (SIPN) individually. Our aim was to compare VARD and SIPN by evaluating outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with IPN who underwent either VARD or SIPN between 2010 and 2019 in China. Data relative to patient demographics, major complications, health care resource utilization and mortality were collected. Statistical analyses used were the two-tailed Student's t-test and the chi-squared test.

RESULTS

Of 59 patients, 31 patients underwent SIPN and 28 patients were treated with VARD. SIPN and VARD had similar treatment success and mortality rates. The rate of reintervention due to lack of clinical improvement was significantly lower in the SIPN group (32% versus 61%; P = 0.028). In addition, the length of total hospital stay was 60 days in the SIPN group and 72 days in the VARD group (P < 0.0001) and mean total costs was significantly less in the SIPN group than in the VARD group (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

Given the shorter hospitalization period, lower total cost and lower rate of reinterventions, SIPN may be superior to the step-up approach for patients with IPN than for those with VARD.

Open necrosectomy is feasible as a last resort in selected cases with infected pancreatic necrosis: a case series and systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis is a common inflammatory pancreatic disorder, often caused by gallstone disease and frequently requiring hospitalization. In 80% of cases, a rapid and favourable outcome is described, while a necrosis of pancreatic parenchyma or extra-pancreatic tissues is reported in 10-20% of patients. The onset of pancreatic necrosis determines a significant increase of early organ failure rate and death that has higher incidence if infection of pancreatic necrosis (IPN) or extra-pancreatic collections occur. IPN always requires an invasive intervention, and, in the last decade, the advent of minimally invasive techniques has gradually replaced the employment of the open traditional approach. We report a series of three severe cases of IPN managed with primary open necrosectomy (ON) and a systematic review of the literature, in order to understand if emergency surgery still has a role in the current clinical practice.

METHODS

From January 2010 to January 2020, 3 cases of IPN were treated in our Academic Department of General and Emergency Surgery. We performed a PubMed MEDLINE search on the ON of IPN, selecting 20 from 654 articles for review.

RESULTS

The 3 cases were male patients with a mean age of 61.3 years. All patients referred to our service complaining an evolving severe clinical condition evocating a sepsis due to IPN. CT scan was the main diagnostic tool. Patients were initially conservatively managed. In consideration of clinical worsening conditions, and at the failure of conservative and minimal invasive treatment, they were, finally, managed with emergency ON. Patients reported no complications nor procedure-related sequelae in the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

The ON is confirmed to be the last resort, useful in selected severe cases, with a defined timing and in case of proven non-feasibility and no advantage of other minimally invasive approaches.

Open necrosectomy in acute pancreatitis-obsolete or still useful?

BACKGROUND

Multiple organ failure and early surgery are associated with high morbimortality after open necrosectomy. Data are mostly derived from historical cohorts with early necrosectomy bereft of step-up treatment algorithm implementation. Thus, mostly circumstantial evidence suggests a better clinical course following mini-invasive surgical and endoscopic necrosectomy. We studied the results of open necrosectomy in a contemporary cohort of patients with complicated pancreatic necrosis treated at a tertiary center.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study from a university teaching hospital. Results of 109 consecutive patients treated with open necrosectomy during a 12-year period are reported.

RESULTS

The overall 90-day mortality rate was 22.9%. The 90-day mortality rate was 10.6% if necrosectomy could be delayed until 4 weeks from symptom onset and the necrosis had become walled off on preoperative imaging. The risk factors for 90-day mortality were age over 60 years (OR 19.4), pre-existing co-morbidities (OR 16.9), necrosectomy within 4 weeks (OR 6.5), multiple organ failure (OR 12.2), white blood cell count over 23 × 10⁹ (OR 21.4), and deterioration or prolonged organ failure as an indication for necrosectomy (OR 10.4). None or one of these risk factors was present in 52 patients (47.7% of all patients), and these patients had no mortality.

CONCLUSION

Late open necrosectomy for walled-off necrosis has a low mortality risk. Open necrosectomy can be done without mortality in the absence of multiple risk factors for surgery.

Pancreatic necrosis: Complications and changing trend of treatment

Incidence of acute pancreatitis seems to be increasing in the Western countries and has been associated with significantly increased morbidity. Nearly 80% of the patients with acute pancreatitis undergo resolution; some develop complications including pancreatic necrosis. Infection of pancreatic necrosis is the leading cause of death in these patients. A significant portion of these patients needs surgical interventions. Traditionally, the “gold standard” procedure has been the open surgical necrosectomy, which is now being completed by the relatively lesser invasive interventions. Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) procedures include endoscopic drainage, percutaneous image-guided catheter drainage, and retroperitoneal drainage. This review article discusses the open and MIS interventions for pancreatic necrosis with each having its own respective benefits and disadvantages are covered.

Minimally Invasive Debridement for Infected Pancreatic Necrosis

Necrotizing pancreatitis has historically been treated with open necrosectomy, which carries a high morbidity and mortality rate. More recently, there has been a shift towards endoscopic and percutaneous approaches employed as part of a minimally invasive step-up approach. Herein, we describe the technical approaches to video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement and sinus tract endoscopic debridement of pancreatic necrosis. Additionally, we review important patient selection considerations and the strengths and weaknesses of each of the approaches.

Management of infected pancreatic necrosis: state of the art

Pancreatic necrosis occurs in 15% of acute pancreatitis. The presence of infection is the most important factor in the evolution of pancreatitis. The diagnosis of infection is still challenging. Mortality in infected necrosis is 20%; in the presence of organic dysfunction, mortality reaches 60%. In the last three decades, there has been a real revolution in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis. However, the challenges persist and there are many unsolved questions: antibiotic treatment alone, tomography-guided percutaneous drainage, endoscopic drainage, video-assisted extraperitoneal debridement, extraperitoneal access, open necrosectomy? A step up approach has been proposed, beginning with less invasive procedures and reserving the operative intervention for patients in which the previous procedure did not solve the problem definitively. Indication and timing of the intervention should be determined by the clinical course. Ideally, the intervention should be done only after the fourth week of evolution, when it is observed a better delimitation of necrosis. Treatment should be individualized. There is no procedure that should be the first and best option for all patients. The objective of this work is to critically review the current state of the art of the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis.

Risk Factors for the Need of Surgical Necrosectomy After Percutaneous Catheter Drainage in the Management of Infection Secondary to Necrotizing Pancreatitis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the need of surgical necrosectomy after percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) for infected necrotizing pancreatitis.

METHODS

The clinical data of documented/suspected patients who were treated with a step-up approach were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 329 patients enrolled, the initial PCD was performed at 12 (interquartile range, 9-15) days since onset and 35.3% were cured by PCD alone. In the pre-PCD model, mean computed tomographic (CT) density of necrotic fluid collection (NFC; P < 0.001), and multiple-organ failure (MOF; P < 0.001) within 24 hours before the initial PCD were independent risk factors, and a combination of the previously mentioned 2 factors produced an area under the curve of 0.775. In the post-PCD model, mean CT density of NFC (P = 0.041), MOF (P = 0.002), and serum procalcitonin level (P = 0.035) 3 days after the initial PCD were independent risk factors, and a combination of these previously mentioned factors produced an area under the curve of 0.642.

CONCLUSIONS

Both mean CT density of NFC and MOF are independent pre- and post-PCD risk factors for the need of necrosectomy after PCD. Post-PCD serum procalcitonin level might be a respondent factor that is correlated with the necessity of necrosectomy.

Minimally invasive and endoscopic versus open necrosectomy for necrotising pancreatitis: a pooled analysis of individual data for 1980 patients

OBJECTIVE

Minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy and endoscopic necrosectomy, compared with open necrosectomy, might improve outcomes in necrotising pancreatitis, especially in critically ill patients. Evidence from large comparative studies is lacking.

DESIGN

We combined original and newly collected data from 15 published and unpublished patient cohorts (51 hospitals; 8 countries) on pancreatic necrosectomy for necrotising pancreatitis. Death rates were compared in patients undergoing open necrosectomy versus minimally invasive surgical or endoscopic necrosectomy. To adjust for confounding and to study effect modification by clinical severity, we performed two types of analyses: logistic multivariable regression and propensity score matching with stratification according to predicted risk of death at baseline (low: <5%; intermediate: ≥5% to <15%; high: ≥15% to <35%; and very high: ≥35%).

RESULTS

Among 1980 patients with necrotising pancreatitis, 1167 underwent open necrosectomy and 813 underwent minimally invasive surgical (n=467) or endoscopic (n=346) necrosectomy. There was a lower risk of death for minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy (OR, 0.53; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.84; p=0.006) and endoscopic necrosectomy (OR, 0.20; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.63; p=0.006). After propensity score matching with risk stratification, minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy remained associated with a lower risk of death than open necrosectomy in the very high-risk group (42/111 vs 59/111; risk ratio, 0.70; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.95; p=0.02). Endoscopic necrosectomy was associated with a lower risk of death than open necrosectomy in the high-risk group (3/40 vs 12/40; risk ratio, 0.27; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.88; p=0.03) and in the very high-risk group (12/57 vs 28/57; risk ratio, 0.43; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.77; p=0.005).

CONCLUSION

In high-risk patients with necrotising pancreatitis, minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic necrosectomy are associated with reduced death rates compared with open necrosectomy.

Revised Atlanta Classification for Acute Pancreatitis: A Pictorial Essay

The 2012 revised Atlanta classification is an update of the original 1992 Atlanta classification, a standardized clinical and radiologic nomenclature for acute pancreatitis and associated complications based on research advances made over the past 2 decades. Acute pancreatitis is now divided into two distinct subtypes, necrotizing pancreatitis and interstitial edematous pancreatitis (IEP), based on the presence or absence of necrosis, respectively. The revised classification system also updates confusing and sometimes inaccurate terminology that was previously used to describe pancreatic and peripancreatic collections. As such, use of the terms acute pseudocyst and pancreatic abscess is now discouraged. Instead, four distinct collection subtypes are identified on the basis of the presence of pancreatic necrosis and time elapsed since the onset of pancreatitis. Acute peripancreatic fluid collections (APFCs) and pseudocysts occur in IEP and contain fluid only. Acute necrotic collections (ANCs) and walled-off necrosis (WON) occur only in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis and contain variable amounts of fluid and necrotic debris. APFCs and ANCs occur within 4 weeks of disease onset. After this time, APFCs or ANCs may either resolve or persist, developing a mature wall to become a pseudocyst or a WON, respectively. Any collection subtype may become infected and manifest as internal gas, though this occurs most commonly in necrotic collections. In this review, the authors present a practical image-rich guide to the revised Atlanta classification system, with the goal of fostering implementation of the revised system into radiology practice, thereby facilitating accurate communication among clinicians and reinforcing the radiologist's role as a key member of a multidisciplinary team in treating patients with acute pancreatitis. (©)RSNA, 2016.

Pancreatic Necrosis and Gas in the Retroperitoneum: Treatment with Antibiotics Alone

OBJECTIVE:

To present our experience in the management of patients with infected pancreatic necrosis without drainage.

METHODS:

The records of patients with pancreatic necrosis admitted to our facility from 2011 to 2015 were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS:

We identified 61 patients with pancreatic necrosis. Six patients with pancreatic necrosis and gas in the retroperitoneum were treated exclusively with clinical support without any type of drainage. Only 2 patients had an APACHE II score >8. The first computed tomography scan revealed the presence of gas in 5 patients. The Balthazar computed tomography severity index score was >9 in 5 of the 6 patients. All patients were treated with antibiotics for at least 3 weeks. Blood cultures were positive in only 2 patients. Parenteral nutrition was not used in these patients. The length of hospital stay exceeded three weeks for 5 patients; 3 patients had to be readmitted. A cholecystectomy was performed after necrosis was completely resolved; pancreatitis recurred in 2 patients before the operation. No patients died.

CONCLUSIONS:

In selected patients, infected pancreatic necrosis (gas in the retroperitoneum) can be treated without percutaneous drainage or any additional surgical intervention. Intervention procedures should be performed for patients who exhibit clinical and laboratory deterioration.

Comparison between minimally invasive and open surgical treatment in necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Minimal access techniques have gained popularity for the management of necrotizing pancreatitis, but only a few studies compared open necrosectomy with a less invasive treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of minimally invasive treatment for necrotizing pancreatitis in comparison with open necrosectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 70 patients who underwent minimally invasive intervention or open surgical debridement for necrotizing pancreatitis between January 2007 and December 2014. Data were analyzed for postoperative morbidity and outcome.

RESULTS

Of 70 patients, 22 patients underwent primary open necrosectomy and 48 patients were treated with minimally invasive techniques. Percutaneous and endoscopic drainage were successful in 34.9% and 75.0% of patients, respectively. The rates of postoperative new-onset organ failure and intensive care unit stay were significantly lower in the minimally invasive group (25.0% versus 54.5%; P = 0.016, and 29.2% versus 54.5%; P = 0.041, respectively). Gastrointestinal fistulas occurred more frequently after primary open necrosectomy (36.4% versus 10.4%; P = 0.009). Mortality was comparable in both groups (18.6% versus 27.3%; P = 0.420). Mortality for salvage open necrosectomy was similar to that for primary open debridement (28.6% versus 27.3%; P = 0.924). The independent risk factors for major postoperative complications were primary open necrosectomy (P = 0.028) and shorter interval to first intervention (P = 0.020). Mortality was independently associated only with older age (P = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive treatment should be preferred over open necrosectomy for initial management of necrotizing pancreatitis.

Routine use of U-tube drainage for necrotizing pancreatitis: a step toward less morbidity and resource utilization

BACKGROUND

A U-tube drainage catheter (UTDC) is a novel intervention for necrotizing pancreatitis, with multiple benefits: bidirectional flushing, greater interface with large fluid collections, less risk of dislodgement, and creation of a large-diameter fistula tract for potential fistulojejunostomy. We report the first clinical experience with UTDC for necrotizing pancreatitis.

METHODS

From 2011 to 2014, all patients undergoing UTDC for necrotizing pancreatitis at our institution were identified. Clinical variables including patient, disease, and intervention-specific characteristics as well as long-term outcomes populated our dataset.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients underwent UTDC for necrotizing pancreatitis; the median follow-up was 10.2 months. Necrotizing pancreatitis was most commonly owing to gallstones (n = 9; 41%), idiopathic disease (n = 5; 23%), and alcohol abuse (n = 4; 18%). During the course of UTDC and definitive operative therapy (when required), patients had median hospital stays of 31 days, 6 interventional radiology procedures, and 6 CT scans. Operative intervention was not necessary in 9 patients (41%). Among the other 13 patients, 4 patients underwent distal pancreatectomy/splenectomy, 8 had a fistulojejunostomy performed, and 1 underwent both procedures.

CONCLUSION

UTDC for necrotizing pancreatitis patients is associated with effective drainage and low morbidity/hospital resource utilization. With skilled interventional radiologists and multidisciplinary coordination, this technique is a valuable means of minimizing morbidity for patients with necrotizing pancreatitis.

Predictors of Clavien 4 Complications and Mortality After Necrosectomy: Analysis of the NSQIP Database

BACKGROUND

Acute severe pancreatitis is one of the most common gastrointestinal reasons for admission to hospitals in the USA. Up to 20 % of these patients will progress to necrotizing pancreatitis requiring intervention. The aim of this study is to identify specific preoperative factors for the development of Clavien 4 complications and mortality in patients undergoing pancreatic necrosectomy.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) participant use files were reviewed from 2007 to 2012 to identify patients who underwent a pancreatic necrosectomy. Postoperative complications were stratified into Clavien 4 (ICU level complications) and Clavien 5 (mortality). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1156 patients underwent a pancreatic necrosectomy from 2007 to 2012. Overall, 42 % of patients experienced a Clavien 4 complication. Mortality rate was 9.5 %. Nonindependent functional status and ASA class were highly significant (p < 0.001) in univariate analysis. Frailty and emergency surgery status (p < 0.001), as well as increased blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and alkaline phosphatase and decreased albumin (p < 0.05) demonstrated independent significance of Clavien 4 complications and mortality in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

This study identified specific preoperative variables that place patients at increased risk of Clavien 4 complications and mortality after necrosectomy. Identification of high-risk patients can aid in selection of appropriate treatment strategies and allow for informed preoperative discussion regarding surgical risk.

Is necrosectomy obsolete for infected necrotizing pancreatitis? Is a paradigm shift needed?

In 1886, Senn stated that removing necrotic pancreatic and peripancreatic tissue would benefit patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Since then, necrosectomy has been a mainstay of surgical procedures for infected necrotizing pancreatitis (NP). No published report has successfully questioned the role of necrosectomy. Recently, however, increasing evidence shows good outcomes when treating walled-off necrotizing pancreatitis without a necrosectomy. The literature concerning NP published primarily after 2000 was reviewed; it demonstrates the feasibility of a paradigm shift. The majority (75%) of minimally invasive necrosectomies show higher completion rates: between 80% and 100%. Transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy has shown remarkable results when combined with percutaneous drainage or a metallic stent. Related morbidities range from 40% to 92%. Single-digit mortality rates have been achieved with transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy, but not with video-assisted retroperitoneal necrosectomy series. Drainage procedures without necrosectomy have evolved from percutaneous drainage to transluminal endoscopic drainage with or without percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy access for laparoscopic instruments. Most series have reached higher success rates of 79%-93%, and even 100%, using transcystic multiple drainage methods. It is becoming evident that transluminal endoscopic drainage treatment of walled-off NP without a necrosectomy is feasible. With further refinement of the drainage procedures, a paradigm shift from necrosectomy to drainage is inevitable.