Minimally Invasive Retroperitoneal Pancreatic Necrosectomy in the Management of Infected Pancreatitis

The Potential Clinical Benefits of Direct Surgical Transgastric Pancreatic Necrosectomy for Patients With Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

Surgical transgastric pancreatic necrosectomy (STGN) has the potential to overcome the shortcomings (ie, repeat interventions, prolonged hospitalization) of the step-up approach for infected necrotizing pancreatitis. We aimed to determine the outcomes of STGN for infected necrotizing pancreatitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This observational cohort study included adult patients who underwent STGN for infected necrosis at two centers from 2008 to 2022. Patients with a procedure for pancreatic necrosis before STGN were excluded. Primary outcomes included mortality, length of hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay, new-onset organ failure, repeat interventions, pancreatic fistulas, readmissions, and time to episode closure.

RESULTS

Forty-three patients underwent STGN at a median of 48 days (interquartile range [IQR] 32-70) after disease onset. Mortality rate was 7% (n = 3). After STGN, the median length of hospital was 8 days (IQR 6-17), 23 patients (53.5%) required ICU admission (2 days [IQR 1-7]), and new-onset organ failure occurred in 8 patients (18.6%). Three patients (7%) required a reintervention, 1 (2.3%) developed a pancreatic fistula, and 11 (25.6%) were readmitted. The median time to episode closure was 11 days (IQR 6-22).

CONCLUSIONS

STGN allows for treatment of retrogastric infected necrosis in one procedure and with rapid episode resolution. With these advantages and few pancreatic fistulas, direct STGN challenges the step-up approach.

Management of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: An Evidence-based Approach

Managing pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) remains a challenge for many clinicians. Recently, significant progress has been made in the therapy of PFCs, including improvements in technology and devices, as well as in the development of minimally invasive endoscopic techniques, many of which are proven less traumatic when compared with surgical options and more efficacious when compared with percutaneous techniques. This review will explore latest developments in the management of PFCs and how they incorporate into the current treatment algorithm.

Step-up mini-invasive surgery for infected pancreatic necrosis: Results from prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the clinical efficacy and success predictors of mini-invasive techniques in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN).

METHODS

IPN patients admitted to our clinic for treatment by mini-invasive techniques were included in this study prospectively. Treatment was divided into four sequential phases: percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD), mini-incision drainage (MID), video assisted debridement (VAD) and open surgery. Patients progressed to next phase if the infection cannot be controlled. The frequency of surgery, treatment duration, cure rate, incidence of complication and overall mortality were recorded. Risk factors for failure of PCD and MID procedures were detected by logistic regression including demographics, disease severity and morphologic characteristics.

RESULTS

From January 2012 to March 2015, a total of 54 consecutive IPN patients were treated, with an average age of 51.2 ± 3.1 years. Of the 54 cases, 18 (33.3%) were cured after PCD; 13 (24.1%) with uncontrolled infection were cured after MID; and the remaining 19 cases (35.2%) were cured after VAD. No open surgery was performed. Overall mortality was 7.4% (4/54), and the incidence of complications was 12.9% (7/54). In multivariable regression, the following factors were associated with high failure rate for both PCD and MID: heterogeneous fluid collection (odds ratio (OR) = 3.14; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.32 ～ 4.25, P = 0.001 for PCD; OR = 2.99; 95% CI: 1.52 ～ 5.10, P = 0.006 for MID), multiple infected collections (OR = 4.51; 95% CI: 2.94 ～ 8.63; P = 0.000 for PCD; OR = 4.17; 95% CI: 2.77 ～ 8.12, P = 0.000 for MID), CT severity index (0 ～ 3/4 ～ 6/7 ～ 10: OR = 2.16; 95% CI: 1.83 ～ 3.62, P = 0.031 for PCD; OR = 2.72; 95% CI: 1.78 ～ 4.10, P = 0.005 for MID).

CONCLUSIONS

Step-up mini-invasive techniques can be considered a first choice in the treatment of IPN. CT is effective to predict success of PCD and MID.

Walled-off necrosis: safety of watchful waiting

BACKGROUND

Asymptomatic pancreatic necrosis should be managed conservatively, regardless of its extent. However, late sequelae and safety of non-interventional management in patients with asymptomatic walled-off necrosis remain unclear.

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to report the clinical outcome of outpatient expectant management in a cohort of patients with walled-off necrosis who were discharged asymptomatic after an episode of acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

Sixteen patients with walled-off necrosis asymptomatic at discharge were identified retrospectively from a single institution. Data were analyzed for the type of complications, their incidence and treatment.

RESULTS

Seven of 16 patients (44 %) did not experience any complications during a median follow-up of 17 months. Nine of 16 patients (56 %) became symptomatic or developed complications within a median follow-up of 49 days after discharge. The most common complication was infection of pancreatic necrosis which occurred in 7 of 9 patients. Six of these patients were successfully treated with minimally invasive techniques. In 5 of 7 patients, infection of necrosis was due to oral commensal bacteria. Acute intracavitary hemorrhage and intractable abdominal pain developed in one patient each. There was no mortality in this series.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient watchful waiting can be used safely in patients with asymptomatic walled-off necrosis, although nearly half of them eventually develop complications which require interventional treatment. Most late infections of pancreatic necrosis are probably due to a blood-borne transmission of oral commensal bacteria.

Minimally invasive treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis

Infected pancreatic necrosis is a challenging complication that worsens prognosis in acute pancreatitis. For years, open necrosectomy has been the mainstay treatment option in infected pancreatic necrosis, although surgical debridement still results in high morbidity and mortality rates. Recently, many reports on minimally invasive treatment in infected pancreatic necrosis have been published. This paper presents a review of minimally invasive techniques and attempts to define their role in the management of infected pancreatic necrosis.

Minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy in management of acute necrotizing pancreatitis

INTRODUCTION

One of the most important requirements in treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis is minimized invasion.

AIM

We are presenting experience in treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis by an original minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy technique, comparing our results to other studies, evaluating feasibility and safety, discussing advantages and disadvantages of this method.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 13 patients who had acute necrotizing pancreatitis with large fluid collections in retroperitoneal space and underwent retroperitoneal necrosectomy.

RESULTS

There were eight males and three females aged between 24 and 60 years, average age was 42.8 ±9.2 years. The most common cause of pancreatitis was alcohol, 10 patients (76.9%). Average time between diagnosis and performance of operation was 25.7 ±11.3 days. One patient underwent eight repeated interventions: two retroperitoneal necrosectomies; five laparotomies; ultrasound-guided drainage. One patient underwent four reinterventions: lumbotomy; revision; two lavages. Three patients had two reinterventions: one had laparotomy and tamponation; one had two repeated retroperitoneal necrosectomies; third had one repeated retroperitoneal necrosectomy and one had ultrasound-guided drainage. Three patients needed one additional retroperitoneal necrosectomy. Five patients did not required additional interventions. 61.5% of our patients did not require more than one reintervention. Postoperative stay varied from 9 to 94 days, average 50.8 ±32.6 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive techniques should be considered as first-choice surgical option in treating patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Pancreatic necrosis occupying less than 30% and with massive fluid collections in the left retroperitoneal space can be safely managed by minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy.

Analysis of the delayed approach to the management of infected pancreatic necrosis

AIM

To analyze outcomes of delayed single-stage necrosectomy after early conservative management of patients with infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) associated with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP).

METHODS

Between January 1998 and December 2009, data from patients with SAP who developed IPN and were managed by pancreatic necrosectomy were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine of 61 pancreatic necrosectomies were performed by open surgery and 2 laparoscopically. In 55 patients, single-stage necrosectomy could be performed (90.2%). Patients underwent surgery at a median of 29 d (range 13-46 d) after diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. Sepsis and multiple organ failure accounted for the 9.8% mortality rate. Pancreatic fistulae (50.8%) predominantly accounted for the morbidity. The median hospital stay was 23 d, and the median interval for return to regular activities was 110 d.

CONCLUSION

This series supports the concept of delayed single-stage open pancreatic necrosectomy for IPN. Advances in critical care, antibiotics and interventional radiology have played complementary role in improving the outcomes.