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.

Endoscopic Transgastric Versus Surgical Approach for Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Surgical approach (SA) is the standard treatment for infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) and endoscopic transgastric approach (ETA) is a promising alternative treatment. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of ETA versus SA in INP. Several databases were systematically searched for eligible studies that compared ETA with SA for INP. Predefined criteria were used for study selection. Three reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias. Primary outcomes included clinical resolution rate, short-term mortality, major complications, and hospital stay. Study-specific effect sizes and their 95% confidence interval (CI) were combined to calculate the pooled value using fixed-effects or random-effects model. Six studies were included with 295 patients. Major complication rate [odds ratio (OR), 0.13; 95% CI, 0.06-0.29], new-onset organ failure rate (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.12-0.54), postoperative pancreatic fistula rate (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.03-0.28), and incisional hernia rate (OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.01-0.85) were lower in the ETA group. There was a shorter hospital stay (mean difference, -17.72; 95% CI, -21.30 to -14.13) in the ETA group. No differences were found in clinical resolution, short-term mortality, postoperative bleeding, perforation of visceral organ, and endocrine or exocrine insufficiency. Compared with SA, ETA showed comparable effectiveness and safety for the treatment of INP based on current evidence.

Cyst Gastrostomy and Necrosectomy for the Management of Sterile Walled-Off Pancreatic Necrosis: a Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgical and Endoscopic Outcomes at a High-Volume Pancreatic Center

INTRODUCTION

Walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON) is a sequela of acute necrotizing pancreatitis in 15-40% of cases. We sought to compare the outcomes of minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic cyst gastrostomy (CG) and necrosectomy for the management for sterile WON at a tertiary care high-volume pancreas center.

METHOD

This is a retrospective review of patients who underwent minimally invasive surgical or endoscopic CG and necrosectomy for clinically sterile WON between 2008 and 2013. Peri-procedural outcomes including costs were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent minimally invasive surgical (robotic = 14, laparoscopic = 6) CG and necrosectomy, and 20 patients underwent endoscopic treatment. The surgical cohort had a larger median cyst size and higher CCI score. For the surgical cohort, median OR time was 167.5 min, estimated blood loss was 30 ml, and 65% underwent concomitant cholecystectomy. There was no mortality in either group and no difference in complication rates (20%). The failure rate was similar (15 versus 10%, P = 0.66). Although surgery was associated with a lower re-intervention rate (0 versus 1, P = 0.008), the endotherapy group was associated with shorter total LOS (inclusive of re-interventions) (7 versus 3 days, P = 0.032). The cost of the index procedure was significantly higher for the surgery group (P = 0.014); however, when considering all readmissions and re-interventions until resolution of the WON, the total cost was similar for both groups.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic CG and necrosectomy are comparable treatments for sterile WON in terms of outcomes and overall cost. The surgical approach may be considered advantageous when a concomitant cholecystectomy is required.

The efficiency of continuous regional intra-arterial infusion in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to investigate the efficiency of continuous regional intra-arterial infusion (CRAI) with antisecretory agents and antibiotics in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CRAI was used as a new clinical technique to treat acute pancreatitis patients during a 4-year period at the First Affiliated Hospital, Wenzhou Medical College, China. In this retrospective study, thirty-four patients with proven infected pancreatic necrosis were included. Twelve patients were treated with CRAI, and were matched according to age, sex, APACHE II scores, Ranson scores and remote organ dysfunction, with 22 patients with IPN treated surgically. The clinical outcome following surgery and CRAI were compared.

RESULTS

No difference was found between the two groups when comparing age, gender, APACHE II scores, Ranson scores and remote organ dysfunction (p > 0.05). The patients treated with CRAI had a lower incidence of complications (33.3% vs 72.7%), duration of hospitalization (27.1 ± 4.7 days vs 43.0 ± 12.0 days) and cost of hospitalization (4.09 ± 1.64 thousand RMB vs 8.77 ± 3.74 thousand RMB) as compared to patients treated with surgery (p < 0.05). The survival rate was significantly higher in the CRAI group as compared to the surgical group (91.7% vs 63.6%; p < 0.01). However, the two groups had similar rates of concomitant operative treatment and incidence of remote organ dysfunction (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

CRAI or CRAI in combination with abscess drainage seemingly improve the clinical outcome in patients with infected pancreatic necrosis. Further confirmative prospective randomized multicenter studies are warranted prior to broad introduction of the CRAI concept.

Options for closure of the infected abdomen

BACKGROUND

The infected abdomen poses substantial challenges to surgeons, and often, both temporary and definitive closure techniques are required. We reviewed the options available to close the abdominal wall defect encountered frequently during and after the management of complicated intra-abdominal infections.

METHODS

A comprehensive review was performed of the techniques and literature on abdominal closure in the setting of intra-abdominal infection.

RESULTS

Temporary abdominal closure options include the Wittmann Patch, Bogota bag, vacuum-assisted closure (VAC), the AbThera™ device, and synthetic or biologic mesh. Definitive reconstruction has been described with mesh, components separation, and autologous tissue transfer.

CONCLUSION

Reconstructing the infected abdomen, both temporarily and definitively, can be accomplished with various techniques, each of which is associated with unique advantages and disadvantages. Appropriate judgment is required to optimize surgical outcomes in these complex cases.