Necrotizing pancreatitis: diagnosis and management

Abdominal Compartment Syndrome is an Early, Lethal Complication of Acute Pancreatitis

Data defining the optimal management of abdominal compartment syndrome resulting from acute pancreatitis are lacking. We investigated the outcomes of patients with acute pancreatitis who underwent surgery for treatment of abdominal compartment syndrome at a tertiary referral center. An electronic database was searched to identify patients with acute pancreatitis who underwent laparotomy between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2009, for treatment of abdominal compartment syndrome. Twelve patients underwent decompressive laparotomy for abdominal compartment syndrome. The median interval between onset of pancreatitis and laparotomy was 4.5 days. Nine patients underwent a laparotomy within seven days of onset of pancreatitis. As a result of cardiopulmonary instability, four decompressive laparotomies were performed in the intensive care unit. In 11 patients, cardiopulmonary improvement was observed. Statistically significant improvements were seen across multiple physiologic parameters. Despite this initial improvement, six patients (50%) died from multisystem organ failure. Two patients survived without need for pancreatic débridement. Abdominal compartment syndrome is an uncommon but likely underrecognized and highly lethal complication of acute pancreatitis that should be considered in patients who become critically ill early in the course of their pancreatitis. Prompt recognition and decompressive laparotomy may rescue some of these patients and does not mandate future débridement.

Cav 1.2 and Cav 2.2 expression is regulated by different endogenous ghrelin levels in pancreatic acinar cells during acute pancreatitis

Ghrelin influences pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions, regulates intracellular calcium [Ca2+]i levels, and has an anti-inflammatory role in acute pancreatitis. This study investigated the role of endogenous ghrelin in the expression of Cav 1.2 (L-type of Ca2+ channel) and Cav 2.2 (N-type of Ca2+ channel) in acute pancreatitis. For this purpose, acute edematous pancreatitis (AEP) and acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) rat models were established. Cav 1.2 and Cav 2.2 expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry in the pancreatic tissues of rats; ghrelin, interleukin-1β (IL-1β) and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) serum levels were detected using ELISA. Next, in AR42J cells with either knock-out or overexpression of ghrelin, Cav 1.2 and Cav 2.2 expression was examined using western blot analysis, and intracellular calcium [Ca2+]i was detected with confocal microscopy. In this study, the ghrelin serum level was highest in the ANP group and was higher in the AEP group than the normal group. Expression of Cav 1.2 and Cav 2.2 in the ANP and AEP groups was higher than in the respective control groups. The serum IL-1β and TNF-α levels were significantly higher in the ANP group compared to the other groups. Cav 1.2 and Cav 2.2 expression and [Ca2+]i decreased in ghrelin knockdown AR42J cells but increased in ghrelin overexpressing cells. In conclusion, Cav 1.2 and Cav 2.2 expression increased in ANP. The [Ca2+]i level, which is mediated by Cav 1.2 and Cav 2.2 expression, is directly regulated by ghrelin in pancreatic acinar cells, and serum ghrelin levels may be involved in the severity of acute pancreatitis.

Natural History After Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis: a Large US Tertiary Care Experience

BACKGROUND

Most studies of acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) focus on short-term outcomes. We evaluated long-term survival and outcomes following ANP.

METHODS

Patients treated for ANP at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center from 2001 to 2008 were studied. Data on presentation and course during initial hospitalization and follow-up (median 34 months) was extracted.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients (n = 167) was 53 ± 16 years; 70 % were male, 94 % white, 71 % transfers, 52 % biliary etiology, and 78 % had first-attack of acute pancreatitis. Majority had severe disease with high Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE-II) score (median 11), length of stay (median 26 days), intensive care unit (ICU) admission (87 %), presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) (90 %), persistent organ failure (60 %), and infected necrosis (50 %). Intervention was needed in 74 %. Eighteen (10.8 %) patients died during index hospitalization, 9 (5.4 %) during the first year, and 13 (7.8 %) after 1 year. Median survival was significantly shorter when compared with age- and sex-matched US general population (9.1 vs. 26.1 years, p < 0.001). Increasing age (HR 1.05), persistent organ failure (HR 4.5), and >50 % necrosis (HR 3.8) were independent predictors of death at 1 year. In eligible patients, new-onset diabetes, oral pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy, and disability were noted in 45, 25, and 53 %, respectively.

CONCLUSION

ANP significantly impacts long-term survival. A high proportion of patients develop functional derangement and disability following ANP.

Severe Acute Pancreatitis and Necrotizing Pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis results in nearly 250,000 admissions annually. Acute pancreatitis varies widely in its clinical presentation. Pancreatic necrosis accounts for substantial additional morbidity, with mortality rates remaining as high as 10% to 20% despite advances in critical care. The extent of necrosis correlates well with the incidence of infected necrosis, multiorgan failure, need for pancreatic debridement, and morbidity and mortality. Having established the diagnosis of pancreatic necrosis, goals of appropriately aggressive resuscitation should be established and adhered to in a multidisciplinary approach involving both medical and surgical critical care.

Enteral nutrition formulations for acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis is a common and potentially lethal disease with increasing incidence. Severe cases are characterised by high mortality, and despite improvements in intensive care management, no specific treatment relevantly improves clinical outcomes of the disease. Meta-analyses suggest that enteral nutrition is more effective than conventional treatment consisting of discontinuation of oral intake with use of total parenteral nutrition. However, no systematic review has compared different enteral nutrition formulations for the treatment of patients with acute pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of different enteral nutrition formulations in patients with acute pancreatitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Group Specialised Register of Clinical Trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 7), MEDLINE (from inception to 20 August 2013), EMBASE (from inception to 2013, week 33) and Science Citation Index-Expanded (from 1990 to August 2013); we conducted full-text searches and applied no restrictions by language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised clinical trials assessing enteral nutrition in patients with acute pancreatitis. We allowed concomitant interventions if they were received equally by all treatment groups within a trial.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and extracted data. We performed the analysis using Review Manager 5 (Review Manager 2013) and both fixed-effect and random-effects models. We expressed results as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data, and as mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Analysis was based on an intention-to-treat principle.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials (1376 participants) in this review. We downgraded the quality of evidence for many of our outcomes on the basis of high risk of bias. Low-quality evidence suggests that immunonutrition decreases all-cause mortality (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.80). The effect of immunonutrition on other outcomes from a subset of the included trials was uncertain. Subgrouping trials by type of enteral nutrition did not explain any variation in effect. We found mainly very low-quality evidence for the effects of probiotics on the main outcomes. One eligible trial in this comparison reported a higher rate of serious adverse events leading to increased organ failure and mortality due to low numbers of events and low risk of bias. When we excluded this study as a post hoc sensitivity analysis, risks of mortality (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.84), organ failure (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.92) and local septic complications (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.72) were lower with probiotics. In one trial assessing immunonutrition with probiotics and fibres, no deaths occurred, but hospital stay was shorter with immunonutrition (MD -5.20 days, 95% CI -8.73 to -1.67). No deaths were reported following semi-elemental enteral nutrition (EN), and the effect on length of hospital stay was small (MD 0.30 days, 95% CI -0.82 to 1.42). Fibre-enriched formulations reduced the number of other local complications (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.87) and length of hospital stay (MD -9.28 days, 95% CI -13.21 to -5.35) but did not significantly affect all-cause mortality (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.84) and other outcomes. Very low-quality evidence from the subgroup of trials comparing EN versus no intervention showed a decrease in all-cause mortality with EN (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.86).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found evidence of low or very low quality for the effects of immunonutrition on efficacy and safety outcomes. The role of supplementation of enteral nutrition with potential immunomodulatory agents remains in question, and further research is required in this area. Studies assessing probiotics yielded inconsistent and almost contrary results, especially regarding safety and adverse events, and their findings do not support the routine use of EN enriched with probiotics in routine clinical practice. However, further research should be carried out to try to determine the potential efficacy or harms of probiotics. Lack of trials reporting on other types of EN assessed and lack of firm evidence regarding their effects suggest that additional randomised clinical trials are needed. The quality of evidence for the effects of any kind of EN on mortality was low, and further studies are likely to have an impact on the finding of improved survival with EN versus no nutritional support. Evidence remains insufficient to support the use of a specific EN formulation.

Study on acute recent stage pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is an inflammatory disease of the pancreas which involves the pancreas and surrounding tissue, and systemic inflammation with a characteristic systemic increase of vascular permeability and increased risk of multiple organ dysfunction. Currently, the pathogenesis of AP is fuzzy, and the diagnosis and treatment need to be standardized. Nevertheless, increased knowledge of AP may achieve more thorough understanding of the pathogenesis. The use of further advanced diagnostic tools and superior treatment, potentially will help clinicians to manage AP at an appropriate stage. However, in view of the multi factorial disease and the complex clinical manifestations, the management of patients with AP is also remaining areas for improvement.

Surgical management of necrotizing pancreatitis: An overview

Necrotizing pancreatitis is an uncommon yet serious complication of acute pancreatitis with mortality rates reported up to 15% that reach 30% in case of infection. Traditionally open surgical debridement was the only tool in our disposal to manage this serious clinical entity. This approach is however associated with poor outcomes. Management has now shifted away from open surgical debridement to a more conservative management and minimally invasive approaches. Contemporary approach to patients with necrotizing pancreatitis and/or infectious pancreatitis is summarized in the 3Ds: Delay, Drain and Debride. Patients can be managed in the intensive care unit and any intervention should be delayed. Percutaneous drainage can be utilized first and early in the course of the disease, followed by endoscopic drainage or video assisted retroperitoneoscopic drainage if necrosectomy is deemed necessary. Open surgery is now less frequently performed and should be reserved for cases refractory to any other approach. The management of necrotizing pancreatitis therefore requires a multidisciplinary dynamic model of approach rather than being a surgical disease.

Multi-drug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae pancreatitis: a new challenge in a serious surgical infection

BACKGROUND

Klebsiella pneumoniae is an important cause of nosocomial infections, but its role in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is not well defined. Few cases of K. pneumoniae associated SAP have been reported. Due to the emergence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) and carbapenemases, treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) K. pneumoniae presents a challenge. Tigecycline and colistin have gained recent attention for their broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity.

METHODS

We describe a case of SAP due to K. pneumoniae bearing K. pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) treated successfully with colistin plus tigecycline and offer a review of similar experiences published in the literature.

RESULTS

The case reported herein required surgical drainage of multiple pancreatic abscesses and treatment with tigecycline and colistin. Our comparative analysis revealed a number of unique features associated with SAP due to K. pneumoniae: 1) underlying pancreatic injury, 2) multiple drug resistance determinants and virulence factors that complicate treatment, and 3) surgical debridement as a requirement for cure.

CONCLUSION

As the prevalence of K. pneumoniae bearing KPC continues to increase in the healthcare setting, SAP caused by this MDR pathogen will become more common. Tigecycline plus colistin was a successful antibiotic regimen for the treatment of SAP due to K. pneumoniae bearing KPC.

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.

[Guidelines for specialized nutritional and metabolic support in the critically ill-patient. Update. Consensus of the Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine and Coronary Units-Spanish Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (SEMICYUC-SENPE): severe acute pancreatitis]

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) causes local and systemic complications leading to high catabolic, hypermetabolic and hyperdynamic stress states with marked morbidity and mortality. In the last decade, nutritional support has become a key element in the treatment of SAP. Thus, specialized nutrition is indicated from admission, with enteral nutrition being preferred to parenteral nutrition. Enteral nutrition should be initiated early using infusion through the jejunum beyond the ligament of Treitz to minimize pancreatic stress. There are no specific studies that establish the type of diet to be used but experts recommend the use of polymeric diets. Parenteral nutrition, without a specific formula, is indicated in patients with SAP who are intolerant to enteral nutrition or when the clinical signs of pancreatitis are exacerbated or aggravated by enteral nutrition. Even so, a minimal level of enteral infusion should be maintained to preserve the trophic effect of the intestinal mucosa. In the last few years, several studies of the administration of immunomodulatory diets in patients with SAP have been carried out to demonstrate their effects on the course of the disease. However, there are few clear recommendations on the prognostic benefits of pharmaconutrient enriched diets in these patients. There is substantial scientific evidence suggesting that the only clear indication for pharmaconutrition in patients with SAP is parenteral glutamine administration, which is recommended by all clinical guidelines with distinct grades of evidence.

Acute pancreatitis with an emphasis on infection

Acute pancreatitis is an inflammatory disease that is mild and self-limiting in about 80% of cases. However, severe necrotizing disease still has a mortality of up to 30%. Differentiated multimodal treatment concepts are needed for these patients, including a multidisciplinary team (intensivists, gastroenterologists, interventional radiologists, and surgeons). The primary therapy is supportive. Patients with infected pancreatic necrosis who are septic undergo interventional or surgical treatment, ideally not before the fourth week after onset of symptoms. This article reviews the pathophysiologic mechanisms of acute pancreatitis and describes clinical pathways for diagnosis and management based on the current literature and guidelines.

Current Surgical Management of Infected Pancreatic Necrosis

Infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) continues to be a challenging problem for the surgeon. We reviewed the experience on a hepatobiliary surgical service with patients who required operative intervention for IPN with emphasis on surgical approach, timing of surgery, and complications. Between 2002 and 2008, 21 patients underwent surgery for IPN. The initial surgical approach in these 21 patients included either direct pancreatic debridement (DPD, n = 13) or transgastric debridement using cyst-gastrostomy (CG, n = 8). Fifteen patients (71%) required only a single procedure, whereas three (14%) required two procedures and three (14%) required three procedures. The mean time from onset of pancreatitis to operation was 77 days. Patients requiring a single intervention had a longer interval from onset of pancreatitis to surgery compared with those requiring multiple interventions. When comparing CG and DPD groups, there was a longer interval from onset of pancreatitis to debridement, a lower chance of needing multiple debridements, and fewer pancreatic fistulae in the CG group. Overall survival was 95 per cent. Our results demonstrate that CG can be successfully used in select patients with IPN. Patients undergoing CG are less likely to require repeat surgical debridement and to develop pancreatic fistulae compared with patients undergoing DPD.

Surgical treatment of acute pancreatitis today

Az enyhe akut pancreatitis kezelése alapvetően konzervatív, míg súlyos esetekben a sebészi kezelésnek jelentős szerepe van. Módszer: A szerzők az utóbbi 10 évben megjelent, a műtét kérdéseit taglaló közlemények alapján elemzik a sebészi kezelés indikációit, időzítését és a műtét technikai kérdéseit. Eredmények/következtetések: A steril pancreasnecrosis csak ritkán, a szeptikus necrosis azonban műtéti indikációt képez, ha a konzervatív kezelés eredménytelen. A terápiarezisztens sokszervi elégtelenség, a súlyos hasi kompartmentszindróma és egyéb sebészi szövődmény, mint a vérzés, perforáció is műtéti beavatkozást tesz szükségessé. Pancreatitist okozó epekövesség talaján kialakult cholestasis esetén sürgős endoszkópos sphincterotomia és később cholecystectomia javasolt. Pancreasnecrosis esetén a műtét ideális időpontja a betegség kezdetétől számított 21. nap utánra tehető, mivel a „korai” műtétek szövődmény- és halálozási aránya magas. Fontos a gondos necrectomia, amelynek a retrocolicus és retroduodenalis terekre is ki kell terjednie. A nyitott has kezelésének több a szövődménye, ezért csak válogatott esetekben javasolják. A műtétet posztoperatív bursa omentalis lavage-zsal érdemes kiegészíteni. Orv. Hetil., 2010, 41, 1697–1701.

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous drainage may decrease the mortality of severe acute pancreatitis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) treatment for severe acute pancreatitis compared to conservative and conventional surgical treatments.

METHODS

Eighty-one patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) were admitted and divided into three groups: forty-nine cases in the conservative therapy group; nineteen cases in the surgery group; and thirteen cases in the PCD therapy group. Forty-five patients with a CT severity index (CTSI) < or = 8.0 received conservative treatment. One patient with CTSI = 7.0 underwent surgery. Thirty-five patients with a CTSI > 8.0 were randomly selected for surgery or PCD treatment. After randomization, six patients (four patients in the surgery group and two patients in the PCD group) were dropped from the study. The total number of patients included in the surgery and PCD groups was sixteen and thirteen, respectively.

RESULTS

Four patients (8.2%) in the conservative therapy group died, five patients (31.3%) in surgery group with a CTSI > 8.0 died, and all patients in the PCD group survived. The mortality rate was lower in the PCD group than in the surgery group (P = 0.048). The serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level recovered more quickly in patients in the PCD group compared to those in the surgery group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with SAP and a CTSI < or = 8.0 could be treated with conservative therapy, while patients with a CTSI > 8.0 should be treated with surgery or PCD therapy if the life-threatening complications of extensive fluid collection or necrosis are a factor. However, PCD therapy used in a timely manner for drainage may decrease mortality in patients with SAP, decrease inflammatory mediator release, and avoid incidence of severe sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and emergency surgery.

Percutaneous catheter drainage in combination with choledochoscope-guided debridement in treatment of peripancreatic infection

AIM: To introduce and evaluate the new method used in treatment of pancreatic and peripancreatic infections secondary to severe acute pancreatitis (SAP).

METHODS: A total of 42 SAP patients initially underwent ultrasound-guided percutaneous puncture and catheterization. An 8-Fr drainage catheter was used to drain the infected peripancreatic necrotic foci for 3-5 d. The sinus tract of the drainage catheter was expanded gradually with a skin expander, and the 8-Fr drainage catheter was replaced with a 22-Fr drainage tube after 7-10 d. Choledochoscope-guided debridement was performed repeatedly until the infected peripancreatic tissue was effectively removed through the drainage sinus tract.

RESULTS: Among the 42 patients, the infected peripancreatic tissue or abscess was completely removed from 38 patients and elective cyst-jejunum anastomosis was performed in 4 patients due to formation of pancreatic pseudocysts. No death and complication occurred during the procedure.

CONCLUSION: Percutaneous catheter drainage in combination with choledochoscope-guided debridement is a simple, safe and reliable treatment procedure for peripancreatic infections secondary to SAP.

What is the best way to feed patients with pancreatitis?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patients with acute pancreatitis have traditionally been treated with 'bowel rest'. Recent data, however, suggest that this approach may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality. This paper reviews evolving concepts in the nutritional management of patients with acute pancreatitis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Both experimental and clinical data strongly support the concept that enteral nutrition started within 24 h of admission to hospital reduces complications, length of hospital stay and mortality in patients with acute pancreatitis. Clinical trials suggest that both gastric and jejunal tube feeding is well tolerated in patients with severe pancreatitis. Although there is limited data for the optimal type of enteral feed, a semielemental formula with omega-3 fatty acids is recommended. On the basis of current evidence, immune modulating formulas with added arginine and probiotics are not recommended.

SUMMARY

Nutritional support should be viewed as an active therapeutic intervention that improves the outcome of patients with acute pancreatitis. Enteral nutrition should begin within 24 h after admission and following the initial period of volume resuscitation and control of nausea and pain. Patients with mild acute pancreatitis should be started on a low-fat oral diet. In patients with severe acute pancreatitis, enteral nutrition may be provided by the gastric or jejunal route.

Acute pancreatitis at the beginning of the 21st century: the state of the art

Acute pancreatitis is an acute inflammatory disease of the pancreas which can lead to a systemic inflammatory response syndrome with significant morbidity and mortality in 20% of patients. Gallstones and alcohol consumption are the most frequent causes of pancreatitis in adults. The treatment of mild acute pancreatitis is conservative and supportive; however severe episodes characterized by necrosis of the pancreatic tissue may require surgical intervention. Advanced understanding of the pathology, and increased interest in assessment of disease severity are the cornerstones of future management strategies of this complex and heterogeneous disease in the 21st century.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in acute necrotizing pancreatitis revisited

OBJECTIVE

To review studies of antibiotic prophylaxis in acute necrotizing pancreatitis published in the last decade and update recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

A search of PubMed (1998-July 2009) was conducted using the terms necrotizing pancreatitis, antibiotics, prophylaxis, and treatment. Clinical studies, meta-analyses, and review articles published in English were included. Additional references were obtained from article bibliographies. Randomized trials published before 1998 were included if indicated.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Relevant studies or meta-analyses on antibiotic prophylaxis since our previous review in 1998 were evaluated; older data were included if still relevant.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Since our previous review, 4 more randomized trials, including 2 double-blind trials, have been conducted. The blinded studies found no significant difference in mortality with antibiotic prophylaxis compared with placebo, while the unblinded studies found a significant decrease in infections. Given these disparate results, available guidelines and meta-analyses provide different conclusions, usually based on exclusion or inclusion of a single trial. Based on all available data, antibiotic prophylaxis should not be used in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. Instead, a more measured, on-demand use of antibiotics is preferred. Antibiotics should be added if signs and symptoms of infection are present (eg, fever, leukocytosis, positive results of cultures). Given improvements in intensive care and nutritional support, recent trials have found a lower incidence of infected necrotizing pancreatitis than before. Therefore, future trials are likely to need higher numbers of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of antibiotic prophylaxis for patients with necrotizing pancreatitis is not indicated, based on 2 blinded trials. Instead, on-demand use of antibiotics appears to be appropriate. Given progress in intensive care and the high crossover rate in studies, the need for antibiotic prophylaxis may continue to be debated for decades.

[Antibiotic therapy in acute pancreatitis]

Infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) is one of the main causes of mortality in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). The choice of antibiotic therapy in AP should be based on penetration of the drug in the pancreas and the degree of coverage provided against the typical bacterial flora produced in IPN. Drugs such as imipenem, ciprofloxacin and metronidazole have been widely studied and seem to be ideal in the treatment of INP. Clinical practice guidelines recommend a carbapenem agent as the initial empirical treatment. When Gram-positive pathogens are isolated in pancreatic samples, vancomycin can be used alone or associated with a carbapenem. Currently, prophylactic antibiotic therapy for IPN is not supported by the scientific evidence, since both the best quality studies (double-blind) and the latest meta-analysis published have found no benefit of the use of this strategy.

Acute pancreatitis at the beginning of the 21st century: The state of the art

Acute pancreatitis is an acute inflammatory disease of the pancreas which can lead to a systemic inflammatory response syndrome with significant morbidity and mortality in 20% of patients. Gallstones and alcohol consumption are the most frequent causes of pancreatitis in adults. The treatment of mild acute pancreatitis is conservative and supportive; however severe episodes characterized by necrosis of the pancreatic tissue may require surgical intervention. Advanced understanding of the pathology, and increased interest in assessment of disease severity are the cornerstones of future management strategies of this complex and heterogeneous disease in the 21st century.

Computed tomographic prognostic factors for predicting local complications in patients with pancreatic necrosis

This prospective study aimed at evaluating dynamic computed tomography (CT) as a prognostic indicator of local complications in patients with pancreatic necrosis.

METHODS

We analyze the relationship between the anatomic pattern of pancreatic necrosis at dynamic CT (pancreatic necrosis, peripancreatic necrosis, and transparenchymal necrosis) and the development of local complications (infected pancreatic necrosis and pseudocyst).

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-eight patients were included in the study. Nine patients were excluded, and 86 required surgery. Average time from the onset of symptoms to dynamic CT was 8.3 days. Multivariate analysis identified the following prognostic factors for local complications: (1) extent of pancreatic necrosis (odds ratio [OR], 7.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-23.76; P = 0.015) and presence of peripancreatic necrosis (OR, 37.32; 95% CI, 3.77-369.38; P = 0.002) were useful to predict the development of infected pancreatic necrosis; and (2) transparenchymal necrosis with upstream viable (enhancing) pancreas (OR, 36.22; 95% CI, 3.18-412.36; P = 0.004) and no peripancreatic necrosis (OR, 0.016; 95% CI, 0.004-0.62; P < 0.001) were associated with pseudocyst development.

CONCLUSIONS

Dynamic CT prognostic factors useful to predict local complications in patients with pancreatic necrosis were the extent of pancreatic necrosis, presence of peripancreatic necrosis, and the finding of transparenchymal necrosis with upstream viable (enhancing) pancreas.

Progress in evidence-based medicine for treatment of severe acute pancreatitis

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is an abdominal catastrophe with a high morbidity and mortality. Up to now, no special drugs or therapeutic methods are available for SAP. Since evidence-based medicine came into being, much more clinical evidence has provided better choice of treatment for SAP. However, such evidence does not fit for all ASP patients based on its critical inclusion and exclusion criteria. It is, therefore, important to treat ASP patients by combining such evidence with clinical experiences.