Endoscopic transgastric irrigation tube placement via PEG for debridement of organized pancreatic necrosis

Endoscopic interventions for managing pancreatic fluid collections associated with acute pancreatitis: A state-of-the-art review (with videos)

Acute pancreatitis is an acute inflammatory disease, which may be associated with pancreatic and peri-pancreatic necrosis and development of (peri)pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs). Interventions in acute pancreatitis have evolved over the years with a paradigm shift from open surgical drainage and necrosectomy to minimally invasive approaches. Depending on the presence of necrosis, the PFCs may be acute necrotic collections or acute pancreatic fluid collections, which evolve over a period of three to four weeks to walled-off necrosis and pseudocysts, respectively. Patients with symptomatic and infected PFCs require drainage. In general, drainage should be delayed beyond three to four weeks when the collection wall has matured and the necrotic debris is liquefied. However, some patients may merit early drainage (within the first three to four weeks), if they have suspected infected pancreatic necrosis and worsening organ dysfunction despite antibiotics and supporting therapy. Endoscopic transmural drainage and necrosectomy have now emerged as the most favored treatment modality in suitable pancreatic collections located predominantly in the lesser sac. Being minimally invasive, per-oral endoscopic direct necrosectomy is as effective as surgical necrosectomy in patients with infected necrotic collections but with fewer adverse events. Percutaneous endoscopic necrosectomy is an important addition to our armamentarium for laterally placed collections as an effective alternative to surgical video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement. The current review provides an overview of the evolution, indications, approaches, techniques and outcomes of endoscopic interventions in the management of pancreatic fluid collections associated with acute pancreatitis. Future direction for better outcomes has been highlighted.

Supportive treatment during the periprocedural period of endoscopic treatment for pancreatic fluid collections: a critical review of current knowledge and future perspectives

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) commonly develop as complications of acute pancreatitis and ductal disruption due to chronic pancreatitis. In the revised Atlanta classification, PFCs were classified based on the presence of necrosis and duration following the onset of acute pancreatitis. Interventions are required in cases of symptomatic pancreatic pseudocysts or walled-off necrosis (WON). In the management of these PFCs, endoscopic ultrasound-guided transluminal drainage and subsequent direct endoscopic necrosectomy for WON are increasingly utilized as less invasive treatment modalities compared to surgical debridement. To date, researchers have focused predominantly on the technical aspects of endoscopic therapy for symptomatic PFCs. Given the poor physical condition of patients receiving endoscopic treatment for PFCs, systemic support may have a substantial impact on the short- and long-term outcomes of these patients. A multidisciplinary approach is required to improve the clinical outcomes of patients with infected PFCs and their associated comorbidities. However, non-interventional support during the periprocedural period of endoscopic treatment of PFCs has not been fully discussed, and there have been considerable variations in the selection of treatment options between endoscopists and centers. To address these unmet needs in the clinical management of PFCs and promote future research to improve the clinical outcomes, we conducted a review of the literature within a multicenter consortium of expert endoscopists with specific expertise in the endoscopic treatment of PFCs. In this review, we summarize the current evidence on non-interventional supportive care (e.g., continuous lavage, medications, nutritional support, and antimicrobials) and propose potential topics for future research.

Hydrogen Peroxide as an Adjunctive Therapy for Walled-Off Pancreatic Necrosis During Direct Endoscopic Necrosectomy: A Solution to the Problem or a Problematic Solution?

Nearly 25 years after its initial description, endoscopic therapy of walled-off pancreatic necrosis has become widely accepted. Endoscopic therapy is composed of transmural placement of stents, now most commonly lumen-apposing metal stents and removal of solid debris, if needed. Removal of solid debris can be achieved with irrigation provided by percutaneously or endoscopically placed (nasocystic) tubes or by mechanically through direct necrosectomy. This editorial provides commentary on the use of hydrogen peroxide instilled at the time of direct necrosectomy for treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis.

International, multicenter retrospective trial comparing the efficacy and safety of bi-flanged versus lumen-apposing metal stents for endoscopic drainage of walled-off pancreatic necrosis

Background

To compare fully covered bi-flanged metal stents (BFMS) and lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage/debridement of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON).

Methods

Patients with WON managed by EUS-guided therapy were divided into those who underwent: 1) drainage using BFMS; and 2) drainage using LAMS and scheduled direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN). Clinical success (resolution of the WON), technical success (successful stent placement), and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated.

Results

387 patients underwent WON endoscopic drainage, 205 using BFMS and 182 using LAMS. The clinical success in the BFMS or LAMS groups were similar (197 [96.1%] vs. 174 [95.6%]; P=0.81). Median number of procedures required for WON resolution was significantly lower in BFMS compared to LAMS (2 vs. 3, P<0.001). Technical success for stent placement was similar in BFMS and LAMS groups (203 [99%] vs. 180 [99%], P=0.90). Procedure-related AEs were similar in the BFMS and LAMS groups (19 [9.3%] vs. 20 [10.9%], P=0.61). Stent dysfunction with occluding debris was higher in the BFMS group compared to LAMS group (21 [10.2 %] vs. 11 [5.9%], P=0.04). The migration rate was higher in the BFMS group than in the LAMS group (15 [7.3%] vs. 3 [1.6%]; P<0.001). DEN was required in 23 [11.2%] patients in the BFMS group after lack of WON resolution by conservative means.

Conclusion

BFMS with a “step-up approach” and LAMS with scheduled DEN are both safe and effective for EUS-guided drainage/debridement of WON.

Endoscopic Management of Pancreatic Fluid Collections

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) may develop due to inflammation secondary to acute and/or chronic pancreatitis, trauma, surgery, or obstruction from solid or cystic neoplasms. PFCs can be drained percutaneously, surgically, or endoscopically with endoscopic ultrasound-guided cyst gastrostomy and/or transpapillary drainage through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. There has been a paradigm shift in the endoscopic management of PFCs in the past few years with newer techniques including utilization of self-expanding metal stents and multiport devices. This review is a comprehensive update on the classification of PFC, indications for drainage, optimal approach, and techniques.

Endoscopic transluminal drainage and necrosectomy by using a novel, through-the-scope, fully covered, large-bore esophageal metal stent: preliminary experience in 10 patients

BACKGROUND

Interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis have undergone a recent paradigm shift toward minimally invasive techniques, including endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy (ETN). The optimal stent for endoscopic transmural drainage remains unsettled.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a novel large-bore, fully covered metal through-the-scope (TTS) esophageal stent for cystenterostomy in large walled-off necrosis (WON).

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

SETTING

Single tertiary care academic center.

PATIENTS

Ten patients with large (>10 cm) WON collections who underwent endoscopic transmural drainage and ETN.

INTERVENTION

Initial cystenterostomy was performed by using EUS, and in the same session, a TTS (18 × 60 mm), fully covered esophageal stent was placed to create a wide-bore fistula into the cavity. In 1 or more later sessions, the stent was removed, and ETN was performed as needed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Technical and clinical success rates and adverse events.

RESULTS

The TTS stent was successfully deployed at the initial cystogastrostomy in all 10 patients. All patients had large WON (median size 17 cm, range 11-30 cm) and underwent intervention at a median of 30 days (range 12-117 days) after onset of acute pancreatitis. Resolution of WON was achieved in 9 of the 10 patients (90%) after a median of 3 endoscopic sessions. There were no early adverse events. Late adverse events occurred in 3 patients (30%); worsening of infection from stent migration and occlusion of cystogastrostomy (2 patients), and fatal pseudoaneurysmal bleeding from erosion of infected necrosis into a major artery distant from the stent (1 patient). The stent was easily removed in all the cases after resolution or improvement of the necrotic cavity.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, single-center evaluation of a small number of cases. No comparative arm to determine the relative efficacy or cost-effectiveness of these stents compared with conventional plastic stents.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic therapy using a large-bore TTS, fully covered esophageal stent is feasible for use in the treatment of large WON. Further studies are needed to validate these findings.

Endoscopic interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis

Interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis have undergone a paradigm shift away from open surgical necrosectomy and toward minimally invasive techniques, with endoscopic transmural drainage (ETD) and necrosectomy emerging as principle forms of treatment. Recent multicenter studies, randomized trials, evidence-based guidelines, and consensus statements have endorsed the safety and efficacy of endoscopic and other minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of walled-off necrosis. A comprehensive review of indications, standard and novel approaches, outcomes, complications, and controversies regarding ETD and necrosectomy is presented. Given the inherent challenges and associated risks, endoscopic techniques for the management of necrotizing pancreatitis should be performed at specialized multidisciplinary centers by expert endoscopists well versed in the management of necrotizing pancreatitis.

Endotherapy for organized pancreatic necrosis: perspectives after 20 years

It has been nearly 20 years since the first peroral endoscopic necrosectomy was performed for patients with pancreatitis. We have since increased our understanding of pancreatitis, and the nomenclature has changed to define disease in which necrosis becomes organized (called "walled-off"). Endoscopic approaches to evaluate and treat pancreatitis have progressed from making small transmural tracts for irrigation to making large tracts, which allow the endoscope to move directly into necrotic cavities and perform endoscopic necrosectomy. The purpose of endoscopic debridement is to irrigate and/or remove areas of necrosis. Collaboration between therapeutic endoscopists and interventional radiologists has led to a combined approach to organized pancreatic necrosis. We discuss the history of peroral endoscopic treatment of organized (walled-off) pancreatic necrosis and current endoscopic approaches to therapy.

Management of severe acute pancreatitis

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) develops in about 25% of patients with acute pancreatitis. Severity of acute pancreatitis is linked to the presence of systemic organ dysfunctions and/or necrotizing pancreatitis. Risk factors independently determining the outcome of SAP are early multiorgan failure (MOF), infection of necrosis, and extended necrosis (>50%). Morbidity of SAP is biphasic, in the first week it is strongly related to systemic inflammatory response syndrome while, sepsis due to infected pancreatic necrosis leading to MOF syndrome occurs in the later course after the first week. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography provides the highest diagnostic accuracy for necrotizing pancreatitis when performed after the first week of disease. Patients who suffer early organ dysfunctions or are at risk for developing a severe disease require early intensive care treatment. Antibiotic prophylaxis has not been shown as an effective preventive treatment. Early enteral feeding is based on a high level of evidence, resulting in a reduction of local and systemic infection. Patients suffering infected necrosis causing clinical sepsis are candidates for intervention. Hospital mortality of SAP after interventional or surgical debridement has decreased to below 20% in high-volume centers.

Management of severe acute pancreatitis

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) develops in about 25% of patients with acute pancreatitis. Severity of acute pancreatitis is linked to the presence of systemic organ dysfunctions and/or necrotizing pancreatitis. Risk factors independently determining the outcome of SAP are early multiorgan failure (MOF), infection of necrosis, and extended necrosis (>50%). Morbidity of SAP is biphasic, in the first week it is strongly related to systemic inflammatory response syndrome while, sepsis due to infected pancreatic necrosis leading to MOF syndrome occurs in the later course after the first week. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography provides the highest diagnostic accuracy for necrotizing pancreatitis when performed after the first week of disease. Patients who suffer early organ dysfunctions or are at risk for developing a severe disease require early intensive care treatment. Antibiotic prophylaxis has not been shown as an effective preventive treatment. Early enteral feeding is based on a high level of evidence, resulting in a reduction of local and systemic infection. Patients suffering infected necrosis causing clinical sepsis are candidates for intervention. Hospital mortality of SAP after interventional or surgical debridement has decreased to below 20% in high-volume centers.

Endoscopic pancreatic necrosectomy

Traditionally, patients with symptomatic sterile pancreatic necrosis or infected necrosis have been managed by open surgical debridement and removal of necrotic tissue. Within the last decade, however, reports of endoscopic pancreatic necrosectomy, an alternative minimally invasive approach, have demonstrated high success rates and low mortality rates. This report describes the indications, technique, and study outcome data of the procedure. While our experience with this technique has recently increased, better selection criteria are needed to identify patients who are most suitable for endoscopic therapy.

Direct endoscopic necrosectomy for the treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis: results from a multicenter U.S. series

BACKGROUND

Direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) for treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) has been performed as an alternative to operative or percutaneous therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To report the largest combined experience of DEN performed for WOPN.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

Six U.S. tertiary medical centers.

PATIENTS

A total of 104 patients with a history of acute pancreatitis and symptomatic WOPN since 2003.

INTERVENTIONS

DEN for WOPN.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Resolution or near-resolution of WOPN without the need for surgical or percutaneous intervention and procedural complications.

RESULTS

Successful resolution was achieved in 95 of 104 patients (91%). Of the patients in whom it failed, 5 died during follow-up before resolution, 2 underwent operative drainage for persistent WOPN, 1 required surgery for massive bleeding on fistula tract dilation, and 1 died periprocedurally. The mean time to resolution from the initial DEN was 4.1 months. The first débridement was performed a mean of 63 days after the initial onset of acute pancreatitis. In 73%, the entry was transgastric with median tract dilation diameter of 18 mm. The median number of procedures was 3 with 2 débridements. Complications occurred in approximately 14% and included 5 retrogastric perforations/pneumoperitoneum, which were managed nonoperatively. Univariate analysis identified a body mass index >32 as a risk factor for failed DEN.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, highly specialized centers.

CONCLUSIONS

This large, multicenter series demonstrates that transmural, minimally invasive endoscopic débridement of WOPN performed in the United States is an efficacious and reproducible technique with an acceptable safety profile.

Endoscopic and percutaneous drainage of symptomatic walled-off pancreatic necrosis reduces hospital stay and radiographic resources

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN), a complication of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP), can become infected, obstruct adjacent structures, and result in clinical deterioration of patients. Patients with WOPN have prolonged hospitalizations, needing multiple radiologic and medical interventions. We compared an established treatment of WOPN, standard percutaneous drainage (SPD), with combined modality therapy (CMT), in which endoscopic transenteric stents were added to a regimen of percutaneous drains.

METHODS

Symptomatic patients with WOPN between January 2006 and August 2009 were treated with SPD (n = 43, 28 male) or CMT (n = 23, 17 male) and compared by disease severity, length of hospitalization, duration of drainage, complications, and number of radiologic and endoscopic procedures.

RESULTS

Patient age (59 vs 54 years), sex (77% vs 58% male), computed tomography severity index (8.0 vs 7.2), number of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies (2.0 vs 2.6), and percentage with disconnected pancreatic ducts (50% vs 46%) were equivalent in the CMT and SPD arms, respectively. Patients undergoing CMT had significantly decreased length of hospitalization (26 vs 55 days, P < .0026), duration of external drainage (83.9 vs 189 days, P < .002), number of computed tomography scans (8.95 vs 14.3, P < .002), and drain studies (6.5 vs 13, P < .0001). Patients in the SPD arm had more complications.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with symptomatic WOPN, CMT provided a more effective and safer management technique, resulting in shorter hospitalizations and fewer radiologic procedures than SPD.

Minimal access retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy: improvement in morbidity and mortality with a less invasive approach

OBJECTIVE

Comparison of minimal access retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy (MARPN) versus open necrosectomy in the treatment of infected or nonresolving pancreatic necrosis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Infected pancreatic necrosis may lead to progressive organ failure and death. Minimal access techniques have been developed in an attempt to reduce the high mortality of open necrosectomy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis on a prospective data base comprising 189 consecutive patients undergoing MARPN or open necrosectomy (August 1997 to September 2008). Outcome measures included total and postoperative ICU and hospital stays, organ dysfunction, complications and mortality using an intention to treat analysis.

RESULTS

Overall 137 patients underwent MARPN versus open necrosectomy in 52. Median (range) age of the patients was 57.5 (18-85) years; 118 (62%) were male. A total of 131 (69%) patients were tertiary referrals, with a median time to transfer from index hospital of 19 (2-76) days. Etiology was gallstones or alcohol in 129 cases (68%); 98 of 168 (58%) patients had a positive culture at the first procedure. Of the 137 patients, 34 (31%) had postoperative organ failure in the MARPN group, and 39 of 52 (56%) in the open group (P<0.0001); 59/137 (43%) versus 40/52 (77%), respectively, required postoperative ICU support (P<0.0001). Of the 137 patients 75 (55%) had complications in the MARPN group and 42 of 52 (81%) in the open group (P=0.001). There were 26 (19%) deaths in the MARPN group and 20 (38%) following open procedure (P=0.009). Age (P<0.0001), preoperative multiorgan failure (P<0.0001), and surgical procedure (MARPN, P=0.016) were independent predictors of mortality.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown significant benefits for a minimal access approach including fewer complications and deaths compared with open necrosectomy.

Minimally invasive techniques in pancreatic necrosis

Traditional open surgical necrosectomy for treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis is associated with high morbidity and mortality, leading to a shift toward minimally invasive endoscopic, radiologic, and laparoscopic approaches. Percutaneous drainage is useful as a temporizing method to control sepsis and as an adjunctive treatment to surgical intervention. It is limited because of the requirement for frequent catheter care and the need for repeated procedures. Endoscopic transgastric or transduodenal therapies with endoscopic debridement/necrosectomy have recently been described and are highly successful in carefully selected patients. It avoids the need for open necrosectomy and can be used in poor operative candidates. Laparoscopic necrosectomy is also promising for treatment of pancreatic necrosis. However, the need for inducing a pneumoperitoneum and the potential risk of infection limit its usefulness in patients with critical illness. Retroperitoneal access with a nephroscope is used to directly approach the necrosis with complete removal of a sequestrum. Retroperitoneal drainage using the delay-until-liquefaction strategy also appears to be successful to treat pancreatic necrosis. The anatomic location of the necrosis, clinical comorbidities, and operator experience determine the best approach for a particular patient. Tertiary care centers with sufficient expertise are increasingly using minimally invasive procedures to manage pancreatic necrosis.

A comparison of direct endoscopic necrosectomy with transmural endoscopic drainage for the treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic therapy of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) via direct intracavitary debridement is described.

OBJECTIVE

To compare direct endoscopic necrosectomy with conventional transmural endoscopic drainage for the treatment of WOPN.

DESIGN

Retrospective, comparative study.

SETTING

Academic tertiary-care center.

PATIENTS

Patients referred to Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, since April 1998 for endoscopic drainage of WOPN.

INTERVENTIONS

Each patient underwent standard endoscopic drainage that consisted of transmural cavity puncture, dilation of the fistula tract, and placement of a large-bore stent(s). Patients were classified into the direct endoscopic necrosectomy group if, during any of their procedures, adjunctive direct endoscopic necrosectomy was performed; all others were in the standard drainage group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Success was defined as resolution of the necrotic cavity without the need for operative or percutaneous intervention.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were identified who met study criteria: 25 underwent direct endoscopic necrosectomy, and 20 underwent standard endoscopic drainage. There were no differences in baseline patient or cavity characteristics. Successful resolution was accomplished in 88% who underwent direct endoscopic necrosectomy versus 45% who received standard drainage (P < .01), without a change in the total number of procedures. The maximum size of tract dilation was larger in the direct endoscopic necrosectomy group (17 mm vs 14 mm, P < .02). Complications were limited to mild periprocedural bleeding with equivalent rates between groups.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, referral bias, single center.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct endoscopic necrosectomy achieves higher rates of resolution, without a concomitant change in the number of endoscopic procedures, complication rate, or time to resolution compared with standard endoscopic drainage for WOPN. The need for fewer postprocedural inpatient hospital days and a decrease in the rate of cavity recurrence are also likely benefits of this technique.

Minimally invasive management of pancreatic abscess, pseudocyst, and necrosis: a systematic review of current guidelines

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive techniques have been used to manage infected pancreatic necrosis and its local complications, although there are no randomised trials to evaluate these techniques. The aims of this study were to review the scope and quality of recommendations in current clinical practice guidelines on the role of percutaneous catheter drainage and endoscopic techniques for pancreatic abscess, pseudocyst, and infected pancreatic necrosis and identify the degree of consensus between guidelines.

METHODS

A MEDLINE search was performed to identify current guidelines from any professional body published in the English language. Guidelines were analysed to determine their specific recommendations for using percutaneous catheter drainage and endoscopic techniques to manage pancreatic abscess, infected pseudocyst, and infected pancreatic necrosis.

RESULTS

Sixteen guidelines were reviewed. Percutaneous catheter drainage for pancreatic abscess was recommended by eight guidelines; for infected pseudocysts, one guideline did not recommend its use and six recommended its use; for infected necrosis, two guidelines did not recommend its use and four recommended its use. Endoscopic management of both pancreatic abscess and infected pseudocyst was recommended by seven guidelines; for infected necrosis, endoscopic management was recommended by ten guidelines. Ten guidelines did not include levels of evidence to support their recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidelines lacked consensus in their recommendations for minimally invasive management of pancreatic abscess, infected pseudocyst, and infected necrosis, and few recommendations were graded according to the strength of the evidence. More prospective trials are needed to provide evidence where it is lacking, which should be incorporated into clinical practice guidelines.

Toward an update of the atlanta classification on acute pancreatitis: review of new and abandoned terms

OBJECTIVES

The 1992 Atlanta classification is a clinically based classification system that defines the severity and complications of acute pancreatitis. The purpose of this review was to assess whether the terms abandoned by the Atlanta classification are really discarded in the literature. The second objective was to review what new terms have appeared in the literature since the Atlanta symposium.

METHODS

We followed a Medline search strategy in review and guideline articles after the publication of the Atlanta classification. This search included the abandoned terms: "phlegmon," "infected pseudocyst," "hemorrhagic pancreatitis," and "persistent pancreatitis."

RESULTS

A total of 239 publications were reviewed, including 10 guideline articles and 42 reviews. The abandoned terms "hemorrhagic pancreatitis" and "persistent pancreatitis" are hardly encountered, in contrast, both "infected pseudocyst" and "phlegmon" are frequently used, and several authors question their abandonment. New terminology in acute pancreatitis consists of "organized pancreatic necrosis," "necroma," "extrapancreatic necrosis," and "central gland necrosis."

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates that the Atlanta classification is still not universally accepted. Several abandoned terms are frequently used, and new terms have emerged that describe manifestations in acute pancreatitis that were not specifically addressed during the Atlanta symposium.

Peroral endoscopic drainage/debridement of walled-off pancreatic necrosis

BACKGROUND

Experience with minimal access, transoral/transmural endoscopic drainage/debridement of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN) after necrotizing pancreatitis is limited. We sought to determine outcome using this technique.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis.

RESULTS

From 1998 to 2006, 53 patients underwent transoral/transmural endoscopic drainage/debridement of sterile (27, 51%) and infected (26, 49%) WOPN. Intervention was performed a median of 49 days (range, 20-300 days) after onset of acute necrotizing pancreatitis. A median of 3 endoscopic procedures/patient (range, 1-12) were performed. Twenty-one patients (40%) required concurrent radiologic-guided catheter drainage of associated or subsequent areas of peripancreatic fluid and/or WOPN. Twelve patients (23%) required open operative intervention a median of 47 days (range, 5-540) after initial endoscopic drainage/debridement, due to persistence of WOPN (n = 3), recurrence of a fluid collection (n = 2), cutaneous fistula formation (n = 2), or technical failure, persistence of pancreatic pain, colonic obstruction, perforation, and flank abscess (n = 1 each). Final outcome after initial endoscopic intervention (median, 178 days) revealed successful endoscopic therapy in 43 (81%) and persistence of WOPN in 10 (19%). Preexistent diabetes mellitus, size of WOPN, and extension of WOPN into paracolic gutter were significant predictive factors for need of subsequent open operative therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful resolution of symptomatic, sterile, and infected WOPN can be achieved using a minimal access endoscopic approach. Adjuvant percutaneous drainage is necessary in up to 40% of patients, especially when WOPN extends to paracolic gutters or pelvis. Operative intervention for failed endoscopic treatment is required in about 20% of patients.

Treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts, pancreatic necrosis, and pancreatic duct leaks

Pancreatic pseudocysts arise as a complication of acute and chronic pancreatitis or pancreatic trauma (including postsurgical). Pancreatic necrosis occurs following severe pancreatitis and may evolve into an entity termed organized pancreatic necrosis that is endoscopically treatable. Pancreatic duct leaks are frequently seen in relation to pseudocysts and necrosis. Alternatively, pancreatic duct leaks may present with pleural effusions, ascites, or after pancreatic surgery or percutaneous drainage. Endoscopic treatment of pancreatic fluid collections and pancreatic duct leaks can be achieved using transpapillary and/or transmural stent placement.

Percutaneous transgastric irrigation drainage in combination with endoscopic necrosectomy in necrotizing pancreatitis (with videos)

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic drainage of pancreatic acute and chronic pseudocysts and pancreatic necrosectomy have been shown to be beneficial for critically ill patients, with complete endoscopic resolution rates of around 80%.

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to describe an improved endoscopic technique used to treat pancreatic necrosis.

DESIGN

Case report.

SETTING

University hospital.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Two patients with large retroperitoneal necroses were treated with percutaneous transgastric retroperitoneal flushing tubes and a percutaneous transgastric jejunal feeding tube by standard percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy access in addition to endoscopic necrosectomy.

RESULTS

Intensive percutaneous transgastric flushing in combination with percutaneous normocaloric enteral nutrition and repeated endoscopic necrosectomy led to excellent outcomes in both patients.

LIMITATIONS

Small number of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The "double percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy" approach for simultaneous transgastric drainage and normocaloric enteral nutrition in severe cases of pancreatic necroses is safe and effective. It could be a promising improvement to endoscopic transgastric treatment options in necrotizing pancreatitis.

Outcome following endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections in outpatients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the performance of endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) in outpatients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 19 consecutive outpatient cases in 18 patients who underwent attempted endoscopic transmural drainage of PFCs by a single endoscopist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN, over a 5-year period (October 1998 to October 2003). All drainages were performed without EUS-guided entry, using an aspiration needle and no cautery. Two 10-Fr stents were placed after dilation of the entry site.

RESULTS

The study group consisted of 12 men and 6 women (median age, 48 years; range, 28-79 years), with 14 cases of pseudocysts and 5 cases of pancreatic necrosis. Transmural drainage approaches included 13 transgastric, 5 transduodenal, and 1 combined transgastric/transpapillary. Drainage was established in 16 of 19 (84%) cases. Hospitalization was noted in 6 of 19 (32%) cases, with median hospitalization duration of 1.5 days (range, 1-19 days). Three patients were hospitalized for overnight observation only. In all instances, the decision to hospitalize was made while the patient was still in recovery. No deaths occurred. Follow-up imaging was available in 15 of 16 (94%) cases in which drainage was established, demonstrating PFC resolution in all 15.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic transmural drainage of PFCs can be performed safely and effectively in selected outpatients. It is our opinion that outpatient drainage of PFCs be considered only by experienced therapeutic endoscopists with readily available inpatient facilities. Future studies should seek to identify predictors of hospitalization and address cost-effectiveness.

Endoscopic management of pancreatic fistula after pancreatic and other abdominal surgery

Post-operative pancreatic fistulae represent a challenge for all the actors in gastroenterology: for surgeons, because they want to prevent and treat conservatively this complication since re-operation is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates; for radiologists, because they have to provide the best staging and informations without any additional risk; and for endoscopists, because endoluminal treatment is emerging as a safe and effective procedure provided it is performed in highly experienced tertiary centres in the setting of a multidisciplinary approach. Herein, we review the definitions, the causes, the staging and the possible options to prevent or treat post-operative pancreatic fistulae. Special attention is paid to the endoscopic management of this complication: including the relief of ductal obstructions, the stenting of leakages and the drainage of bulging or non-bulging fluid collections. Practical problems and issues are clearly outlined as well as the need for future improvements in staging and management of the patients having such complications.

Endoscopic drainage of pancreatic fluid collections and pancreatic necrosis

PFCs are heterogeneous, with different underlying pathology and pathophysiology. Each type of PFC is amenable to drainage, although not in every patient. Collections with only a fluid component that have either apposition to the gastric or duodenal wall demonstrated by CT or communication with the main pancreatic duct demonstrated by pancreatography can be drained endoscopically using transmural or transpapillary approaches, respectively. Collections containing significant amounts of solid debris that are treated endoscopically require placement of an irrigation system to evacuate solid debris. Endoscopists considering endoscopic therapy of a pancreatic collection must identify the type of collection being drained and exclude masqueraders of PFCs such as cystic neoplasms. EUS-guided drainage, if available, may decrease the complications of bleeding and perforation during transmural entry of PFCs. Refinement in endoscopic techniques to improve the safety and studies comparing the efficacy of endoscopic therapy with that of other drainage methods are needed.

Outcome differences after endoscopic drainage of pancreatic necrosis, acute pancreatic pseudocysts, and chronic pancreatic pseudocysts

BACKGROUND

Comparative outcomes after endoscopic drainage of specific types of symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections, defined by using standardized nomenclature, have not been described. This study sought to determine outcome differences after attempted endoscopic drainage of pancreatic fluid collections classified as pancreatic necrosis, acute pseudocyst, and chronic pseudocyst.

METHODS

Outcomes were retrospectively analyzed for consecutive patients with symptoms caused by pancreatic fluid collections referred for endoscopic transmural and/or transpapillary drainage.

RESULTS

Complete endoscopic resolution was achieved in 113 of 138 patients (82%). Resolution was significantly more frequent in patients with chronic pseudocysts (59/64, 92%) than acute pseudocysts (23/31, 74%, p = 0.02) or necrosis (31/43, 72%, p = 0.006). Complications were more common in patients with necrosis (16/43, 37%) than chronic (11/64, 17%, p = 0.02) or acute pseudocysts (6/31, 19%, p = NS). At a median follow-up of 2.1 years after successful endoscopic treatment (resolution), pancreatic fluid collections had recurred in 18 of 113 patients (16%). Recurrences developed more commonly in patients with necrosis (9/31, 29%) than acute pseudocysts (2/23, 9%, p = 0.07) or chronic pseudocysts (7/59, 12%, p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

Successful resolution of pancreatic fluid collections may be achieved endoscopically by an experienced therapeutic endoscopist. Outcomes differ depending on the type of pancreatic fluid collection drained. Further studies of endoscopic drainage of pancreatic fluid collections must use defined terminology to allow meaningful comparisons.