Endoscopic ultrasound criteria to predict the need for intervention in pancreatic necrosis

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-guided Drainage of Pancreatic Collections, Including the Role of Necrosectomy

In recent years, the management of symptoms of pancreatic fluid collections has shifted from surgical and percutaneous interventions to endoscopic techniques. Available data show that endoscopic drainage can be achieved with minimal morbidity and procedural-related mortality, a high degree of technical and clinical success, and acceptable risk of adverse events. Although endoscopic management of walled-off necrosis provides a durable, minimally invasive treatment option, it is still generally performed only in tertiary care medical centers because of the overall complexity of this clinical scenario.

Antibiosis of Necrotizing Pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Necrotizing pancreatitis is a life-threatening presentation of acute pancreatitis. The mortality of 20-80% initially depends on the persistence of organ failure and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and, in the later course of the disease, on secondary infection of the necrosis. The questions whether prophylactic antibiotics aiming to prevent this infection should be administered and which antibiotic is the best to use, as well as the problem of fungal infection under antibiotic treatment are still intriguing and insufficiently solved.

METHODS

A search of the literature using PubMed was carried out, supplemented by a review of the programmes of the Digestive Disease Week (DDW) and the United European Gastroenterology Week (UEGW).

RESULTS

Despite the widely practised prophylactic antibiotic administration in severe pancreatitis, no evidence for the benefit of this strategy exists. One of the drawbacks might be a tendency for disastrous fungal infection under prophylactic antibiotics. Bacterial translocation from the gut in the second week after the onset of symptoms is the major source for infection of pancreatic necrosis and provides a clear indication for antibiotic treatment. However, routine fine-needle aspiration for a calculated antibiotic therapy cannot be recommended, and all other tests offer only indirect signs. Important factors such as enteral versus parenteral feeding and the method of necrosectomy are mostly neglected in the trials but seem to be essential for the outcome of the patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though most meta-analyses including the newer double-blind, placebo-controlled trials on prophylactic antibiotics showed no beneficial effects in the prevention of infection of necrosis and/or outcome of the patients, this strategy is still widely used in clinical routine. Since nearly all trials published so far show systematic problems (i.e. inaccurate definition of the severity of the disease, poor statistical testing, and neglect of differences in the route of nutrition), there is a need for randomized controlled prospective trials with exact definitions of the disease.

Predictors of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) after abdominal paracentesis drainage (APD) in patients with moderately severe or severe acute pancreatitis along with fluid collections

Aims

Although we previously demonstrated abdominal paracentesis drainage (APD) preceding percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) as the central step for treating patients with moderately severe (MSAP) or severe acute pancreatitis (SAP), the predictors leading to PCD after APD have not been studied.

Methods

Consecutive patients with MSAP or SAP were recruited between June 2011 and June 2013. As a step-up approach, all patients initially received medical management, later underwent ultrasound-guided APD before PCD, if necessary, followed by endoscopic necrosectomy through the path formed by PCD. APD primarily targeted fluid in the abdominal or pelvic cavities, whereas PCD aimed at (peri)pancreatic fluid.

Results

Of the 92 enrolled patients, 40 were managed with APD alone and 52 received PCD after APD (14 required necrosectomy after initial PCD). The overall mortality was 6.5%. Univariate analysis showed that among the 20 selected parameters, 13 factors significantly affected PCD intervention after APD. Multivariate analysis revealed that infected (peri)pancreatic collections (P = -0.001), maximum extent of necrosis of more than 30% of the pancreas (P = -0.024), size of the largest necrotic peri(pancreatic) collection (P = -0.007), and reduction of (peri)pancreatic fluid collections by <50% after APD (P = -0.008) were all independent predictors of PCD.

Conclusions

Infected (peri)pancreatic collections, a largest necrotic peri(pancreatic) collection of more than 100 ml, and reduction of (peri)pancreatic fluid collections by <50% after APD could effectively predict the need for PCD in the early course of the disease.

Endoscopic management of pancreatic pseudocysts and necrosis

Over the last several years, there have been refinements in the understanding and nomenclature regarding the natural history of acute pancreatitis. Patients with acute pancreatitis frequently develop acute pancreatic collections that, over time, may evolve into pancreatic pseudocysts or walled-off necrosis. Endoscopic management of these local complications of acute pancreatitis continues to evolve. Treatment strategies range from simple drainage of liquefied contents to repeated direct endoscopic necrosectomy of a complex necrotic collection. In patients with chronic pancreatitis, pancreatic pseudocysts may arise as a consequence of pancreatic ductal obstruction that then leads to pancreatic ductal disruption. In this review, we focus on the indications, techniques and outcomes for endoscopic therapy of pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis.