Various Endoscopic Techniques for Treatment of Consequences of Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis: Practical Updates for the Endoscopist

Pancreatic necrosis: a scoping review

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a commonly encountered GI diagnosis, accounting for 275,000 hospital admissions annually in the United States alone. Pancreatic necrosis (PN) is the most common complication of AP, and the development of PN is associated with significant morbidity and increased mortality. This expert review evaluates the evidence-based management of symptomatic PN from the era of maximal open pancreatic necrosectomy in the late 1990s though the modern paradigm of minimally invasive and endoscopic interventions. The authors present the retrospective and controlled data behind the "step-up approach" to PN treatment and discuss the application of current society guidance. Evidence based management of PN is characterized by early supportive care, and treatment by minimally invasive intervention when a patient is critically ill or persistently symptomatic. Appropriate choices when intervention is required include percutaneous drainage, minimally invasive surgery, and/or endoscopic treatment. The transition from open maximal necrosectomy to minimally invasive intervention has resulted in improved outcomes for patients, including gains in mortality, significant morbidity, and cost. The ideal precision management strategy for an individual patient remains an area of increasing understanding.

Efficacy and Safety of Anhydrous Ethanol-Assisted Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Transluminal Necrosectomy in Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis

AIM

Endoscopic necrosectomy has become the first-line treatment option for infectious necrotizing pancreatitis (INP), especially walled-off necrosis. However, the problems, including operation-related adverse events (AEs) and the need for multiple endoscopic procedures, have not been effectively addressed. We sought to evaluate the clinical safety and efficacy of anhydrous ethanol-assisted endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transluminal necrosectomy in INP.

METHODS

A single-center observational cohort study of INP patients was conducted in a tertiary endoscopic center. Anhydrous ethanol-assisted EUS-guided transluminal necrosectomy (modified group) and conventional endoscopic necrosectomy (conventional group) were retrospectively compared in INP patients. The technical and clinical success rates, operation time, perioperative AEs, postoperative hospital stay, and recurrent INP rates were analyzed, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 55 patients were enrolled. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding baseline characteristics. Compared to patients in the conventional group, patients in the modified group demonstrated significantly reduced times of endoscopic transluminal necrosectomies (1.96 ± 0.89 vs. 2.73 ± 0.98; P = 0.004) and comparable perioperative AEs (P = 0.35). Meanwhile, no statistically significant differences were observed in the technical and clinical success rates (P = 0.92), operation time (P = 0.59), postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.36), and recurrent INP rates (P = 1.00) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Anhydrous ethanol-assisted EUS-guided transluminal necrosectomy seemed safe and effective in treating INP. Compared with conventional endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy, its advantage was mainly in reducing the number of endoscopic necrosectomies without increasing perioperative AEs.

Efficacy and Safety of Anhydrous Ethanol-Assisted Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Transluminal Necrosectomy in Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis

AIM

Endoscopic necrosectomy has become the first-line treatment option for infectious necrotizing pancreatitis (INP), especially walled-off necrosis. However, the problems, including operation-related adverse events (AEs) and the need for multiple endoscopic procedures, have not been effectively addressed. We sought to evaluate the clinical safety and efficacy of anhydrous ethanol-assisted endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transluminal necrosectomy in INP.

METHODS

A single-center observational cohort study of INP patients was conducted in a tertiary endoscopic center. Anhydrous ethanol-assisted EUS-guided transluminal necrosectomy (modified group) and conventional endoscopic necrosectomy (conventional group) were retrospectively compared in INP patients. The technical and clinical success rates, operation time, perioperative AEs, postoperative hospital stay, and recurrent INP rates were analyzed, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 55 patients were enrolled. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding baseline characteristics. Compared to patients in the conventional group, patients in the modified group demonstrated significantly reduced times of endoscopic transluminal necrosectomies (1.96 ± 0.89 vs. 2.73 ± 0.98; P = 0.004) and comparable perioperative AEs (P = 0.35). Meanwhile, no statistically significant differences were observed in the technical and clinical success rates (P = 0.92), operation time (P = 0.59), postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.36), and recurrent INP rates (P = 1.00) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Anhydrous ethanol-assisted EUS-guided transluminal necrosectomy seemed safe and effective in treating INP. Compared with conventional endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy, its advantage was mainly in reducing the number of endoscopic necrosectomies without increasing perioperative AEs.

Endoscopic treatment of pancreaticopleural fistulas

INTRODUCTION

Pancreaticopleural fistula (PPF) is a serious complication of acute and chronic pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of various endoscopic techniques for the treatment of patients with PPFs.

METHODOLOGY

Prospective analysis of the results of endoscopic treatment of 22 patients with PPF due to pancreatitis was conducted at the Department of General, Gastroenterological, and Oncological Surgery, Ludwik Rydygier Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun, between 2018 and 2021.

RESULTS

PPF was diagnosed in 22 patients (21 men and 1 woman; mean age 49.52 [30-67] years) with pancreatitis. In 19/22 (86.36%) patients, PPF communicated with the left pleural cavity and in 3/22 (13.64%) patients with the right pleural cavity. Chronic pancreatitis was diagnosed in 14/22 (63.64%) patients. Symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections were found in 15/22 (68.18%) patients with PPF (pancreatic pseudocyst in 11 and walled-off pancreatic necrosis in four patients). Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was performed in 21/22 (95.45%) patients, confirming the diagnosis of PPF. All 21 patients underwent endoscopic sphincterotomy with prosthesis implantation in the main pancreatic duct (passive transpapillary drainage). In 1/22 (4.55%) patients, active transmural/transgastric drainage of the PPF was necessary due to inflammatory infiltration of the peripapillary region, precluding endoscopic pancreatography. Endoscopic transmural drainage was performed in all the 15 patients with pancreatic fluid collection. Clinical success was achieved in 21/22 (95.45%) patients. The mean total time of endotherapy was 191 (range 88-712) days. Long-term success of endoscopic treatment of PPFs during one year follow-up period was achieved in 19/22 (86.36%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic treatment is effective for managing post-inflammatory PPFs. The preferred treatment method is passive transpapillary drainage (prosthesis of the main pancreatic duct). If transpapillary drainage is not feasible, transmural drainage of the PPF remains the preferred method. Endoscopic transmural drainage leads to closure of the fistula canal in patients with pancreatic fluid collection complicated by PPF.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Necrosectomy-A Review of the Literature

In this article, an attempt was made to clarify the role of percutaneous endoscopic necrosectomy (PEN) in the interventional treatment of pancreatic necrosis. A comprehensive review of the current literature was performed to identify publications on the role of PEN in patients with consequences of acute necrotizng pancreatitis. The aim of the study was to review the literature on minimal invasive necrosectomy, with emphasis on PEN using esophageal self-expanding metal stents (SEMS). The described results come from 15 studies after a review of the current literature. The study group comprised 52 patients (36 men and 16 women; mean age, 50.87 (13-75) years) with walled-off pancreatic necrosis, in whom PEN using a self-expandable esophageal stent had been performed. PEN was successfully completed in all 52 patients (100%). PEN complications were observed in 18/52 (34.62%) patients. Clinical success was achieved in 42/52 (80.77%) patients, with follow-up continuing for an average of 136 (14-557) days. In conclusion, the PEN technique is potentially effective, with an acceptable rate of complications and may be implemented with good clinical results in patients with pancreatic necrosis.

The Role of Antibiotics in Endoscopic Transmural Drainage of Post-Inflammatory Pancreatic and Peripancreatic Fluid Collections

BACKGROUND

Although endoscopic treatment of symptomatic post-inflammatory pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collections (PPPFCs) is an established treatment method, some aspects of endotherapy and periprocedural management remain controversial. The role of antibiotics is one of the most controversial issues in interventional endoscopic management of local complications of pancreatitis.

METHODS

This study was a randomized, non-inferiority, placebo-controlled, and double-blinded clinical trial to investigate the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in endoscopic transmural drainage in patients with symptomatic non-infected PPPFCs and assess the influence of antibiotic treatment on the results of endotherapy in patients with symptomatic infected PPPFCs.This trial included 62 patients treated endoscopically for PPPFCs in 2020 at our medical center. Patients were divided into two groups; group 1 comprised patients who had received empirical intravenous antibiotic therapy during endotherapy and group 2 comprised patients who did not receive antibiotic therapy during endoscopic drainage of PPPFCs. The end points were clinical success and long-term success of endoscopic treatment.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients were included in group 1 (walled-off pancreatic necrosis [WOPN, 51.6%; pseudocyst, 48.4%) and 31 patients in group 2 (WOPN, 58.1%; pseudocyst, 41.9%) (p=0.6098/nonsignificant statistical [NS]). Infection with PPPFCs was observed in 15/31 (48.39%) patients in group 1 and in 15/31 (48.39%) patients in group 2 (p=1.0/NS). The average time of active (with flushing through nasocystic drainage) drainage in group 1 was 13.0 (6 - 21) days and was 14.0 (7 - 25) days in group 2 (p=0.405/NS). The average total number endoscopic procedures on one patient was 3.3 (2 - 5) in group 1 and 3.4 (2 - 7) in group 2 (p=0.899/NS). Clinical success of PPPFCs was observed in 29/31 (93.5%) patients from group 1 and in 30/31 (96.8%) patients from group 2 (p=0.5540/NS). Complications of endotherapy were noted in 8/31 (25.8%) patients in group 1 and in 10/31 (32.3%) patients in group 2 (p=0.576/NS). Long-term success in group 1 and 2 was reported in 26/31 (83.9%) and 24/31 (77.4%) patients, respectively (p=0.520/NS).

CONCLUSIONS

The effective endoscopic drainage of sterile PPPFCs requires no preventive or prophylactic use of antibiotics. In infected PPPFCs, antibiotic therapy is not required for effective endoscopic transmural drainage.

Early endoscopic treatment of symptomatic pancreatic necrotic collections

EUS-guided transmural endoscopic drainage is commonly used in the treatment of WOPN in the late phase of ANP. The role of endoscopic intervention remains unclear in the early phase of ANP. This study aimed to prospectively evaluate early endoscopic treatment of ANCs compared with endoscopic drainage of WOPN. Overall, 71 patients with ANP who underwent transmural endoscopic drainage for necrotic collections were included. Endoscopic intervention was performed within the first four weeks of ANP in 25 (35.21%) patients with ANC (Group 1) and in 46 (64.79%) patients after four weeks since the onset of ANP with WOPN (Group 2). The overall mean age of patients was 49.9 (22-79) years and 59 of them were males. The mean time of active drainage and duration of total endoscopic treatment was 26.8 and 16.9 days (P = 0.0001) and 270.8 and 164.2 days (P = 0.0001) in Groups 1 and 2, respectively. The average total number of endoscopic interventions was 9.5 and 4.5 in Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.0001). The clinical success rate, frequency of complications of endoscopic interventions, long-term success rate, and recurrence rate were not significantly different between the groups (P > 0.05 for each). Transmural endoscopic drainage is effective method of treatment of early ANCs within the first four weeks of ANP. However, compared with endoscopic intervention in WOPN, more interventions and longer duration of drainage are required.

The Role of Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents in Transmural Endoscopic Drainage of Postinflammatory Pancreatic and Peripancreatic Fluid Collections

Rapid development of advanced gastrointestinal endoscopic techniques contributed to the appearance of new biomedical materials including polymers, which are used for the production of different types of endoprostheses. Endotherapy (ET) of postinflammatory pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collections (PPFCs) with the use of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is an effective method of treatment. This paper describes the high efficacy of ET and its potential complications, which are mostly related to the design of the LAMS used. The high efficacy of LAMS in the transmural drainage of PPFCs is associated with lower safety of treatment. Complications of ET presented in the manuscript are mainly related to endoprosthesis' construction. This paper presents possible directions of development in the field of transmural LAMSs, which in the future may contribute to the invention of an innovative type of LAMS based on new biomedical technologies. Possibly, subsequent novel endoprosthesis projects, based on the above results, will be able to meet the current needs and requirements associated with endoscopic transmural drainage procedures in cases of postinflammatory PPFCs. The ultimate goal is to improve safety of minimally invasive techniques for treatment of the local consequences of pancreatitis.

[Endoscopic transluminal interventions in the treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis]

The review is devoted to endoscopic transluminal interventions in the treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Terminology, indications and options for transluminal drainage procedures and endoscopic sequestrectomy are presented in detail. The authors analyzed the results of numerous studies devoted to effectiveness of endoscopic interventions and possible combination of treatment options. Modern international clinical guidelines indicating the feasibility of endoscopic treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis in multi-field specialized centers are considered.

The Role of Endoscopic Transpapillary Stenting of the Main Pancreatic Duct during the Endoscopic Treatment of Pancreatic Fluid Collections

Endotherapy is a recognized, widely available, and minimally invasive treatment method for pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) formed in the course of acute pancreatitis (AP). The use of endoscopic techniques in the treatment of main pancreatic duct (MPD) disruption due to AP remains unclear. In this article, a comprehensive review of current literature referencing our observations was performed to identify publications on the role of MPD stenting in patients undergoing endoscopic drainage of PFCs resulting from AP. In this paper, we attempt to clarify this most controversial aspect of endotherapy for PFCs based on existing knowledge and our own experience regarding the endoscopic treatment of AP sequelae. Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography should be performed in all patients undergoing endoscopic drainage of walled-off pancreatic necrosis to assess the integrity of the main pancreatic duct and to implement endotherapy if pancreatic duct disruption is detected. Passive transpapillary drainage is an effective method for treating MPD disruption in the course of necrotizing AP and is one of the key components of endoscopic therapy for local pancreatic necrosis. Conversely, in patients with pancreatic pseudocysts, passive transpapillary drainage reduces the effectiveness of endoscopic treatment and should not be used even in cases of MPD disruption during transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts. In conclusion, the use of transpapillary drainage should depend on the type of the PFC. This conclusion is of great clinical importance, as it can help improve the results of pancreatic endotherapy for fluid collections resulting from AP.