One-step laparoscopic pancreatic necrosectomy verse surgical step-up approach for infected pancreatic necrosis: a case-control study

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.

Effect of the Step-Jump Approach in Infected Pancreatic Necrosis: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

Purpose

The effects of the step-jump approach on the survival and prognosis of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) patients have not yet been determined.

Patients and Methods

Between November 2018 and June 2023, 188 patients were included in this study. There were 144 patients in the step-up group (the SU group) and 44 in the step-jump group (the SJ group). In the SU group, patients successfully treated with percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) alone were classified into the SU-1 group (n=101), while those requiring additional surgery after PCD were categorized into the SU-2 group (n=43). In the SJ group, patients who underwent minimally invasive necrosectomy (MIN) without PCD were assigned to the SJ-1 group (n=34), whereas those who initially underwent PCD followed by immediate open surgery were placed in the SJ-2 group (n=10). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to mitigate bias.

Results

After PSM, a total of 34 pairs were successfully matched. A comparison of the SU group with the SJ-1 group (upfront MIN without PCD) revealed similar mortality rates (P=0.239); however, the incidences of multiple drug-resistant organisms (MDROs) (P=0.029) and surgical complications (P<0.001) were significantly lower in the SJ-1 group. After comparing the SU-2 and SJ-2 groups (patients who underwent direct open necrosectomy without MIN after PCD failure), the incidences of surgical complications and MDRO in the SJ-2 group were significantly lower (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with the step-up approach, the step-jump approach is safer and more effective and can significantly reduce the incidence of MDRO and surgical complications.

Endoscopic versus minimally invasive surgical approach for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Acute pancreatitis is a common condition of the digestive system, but sometimes it develops into severe cases. In about 10-20% of patients, necrosis of the pancreas or its periphery occurs. Although most have aseptic necrosis, 30% of cases will develop infectious necrotizing pancreatitis. Infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) requires a critical treatment approach. Minimally invasive surgical approach (MIS) and endoscopy are the management methods. This meta-analysis compares the outcomes of MIS and endoscopic treatments.

METHODS

We searched a medical database until December 2022 to compare the results of endoscopic and MIS procedures for INP. We selected eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported treatment complications for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Five RCTs comparing a total of 284 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Among them, 139 patients underwent MIS, while 145 underwent endoscopic procedures. The results showed significant differences (p < 0.05) in the risk ratios (RRs) for major complications (RR: 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49-0.97), new onset of organ failure (RR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.11-0.82), surgical site infection (RR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.07-0.92), fistula or perforation (RR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.12-0.64), and pancreatic fistula (RR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.05-0.45). The hospital stay was significantly shorter for the endoscopic group compared to the MIS group, with a mean difference of 6.74 days (95% CI: -12.94 to -0.54). There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the RR for death, bleeding, incisional hernia, percutaneous drainage, pancreatic endocrine deficiency, pancreatic exocrine deficiency, or the need for enzyme use.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic management of INP performs better compared to surgical treatment due to its lower complication rate and higher patient life quality.

Surgical management of acute pancreatitis: Historical perspectives, challenges, and current management approaches

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a serious condition presenting catastrophic consequences. In severe AP, the mortality rate is high, and some patients initially diagnosed with mild-to-moderate AP can progress to a life-threatening severe state. Treatment of AP has evolved over the years. Drainage was the first surgical procedure performed for AP; however, later, surgical approaches were replaced by more conservative approaches due to the availability of advanced medical care and improved understanding of the course of AP. Currently, surgery is used to manage several complications of AP, such as pseudocysts, pancreatic fistulas, and biliary tract obstruction. Patients who are unresponsive to conservative treatment or have complications are typically considered for surgical intervention. This review focuses on the surgical approaches (endoscopic, percutaneous, and open) that have been established in recent studies to treat this acute condition and summarizes the common management guidelines for AP, discussing the relevant indications, significance, and complications. It is evident that despite their reduced involvement, surgeons lead the multidisciplinary care of patients with AP; however, given the gaps in existing knowledge, more research is required to standardize surgical protocols for AP.

Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting survival in patients with acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a complex and heterogeneous disease. We aimed to design and validate a prognostic nomogram for improving the prediction of short-term survival in patients with AP.

METHODS

The clinical data of 632 patients with AP were obtained from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-IV database. The nomogram for the prediction of 30-day, 60-day and 90-day survival was developed by incorporating the risk factors identified by multivariate Cox analyses.

RESULTS

Multivariate Cox proportional hazard model analysis showed that age (hazard ratio [HR]=1.06, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.03-1.08, P<0.001), white blood cell count (HR=1.03, 95% CI 1.00-1.06, P=0.046), systolic blood pressure (HR=0.99, 95% CI 0.97-1.00, P=0.015), serum lactate level (HR=1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20, P=0.023), and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (HR=1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.06, P<0.001) were independent predictors of 90-day mortality in patients with AP. A prognostic nomogram model for 30-day, 60-day, and 90-day survival based on these variables was built. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis demonstrated that the nomogram had good accuracy for predicting 30-day, 60-day, and 90-day survival (area under the ROC curve: 0.796, 0.812, and 0.854, respectively; bootstrap-corrected C-index value: 0.782, 0.799, and 0.846, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The nomogram-based prognostic model was able to accurately predict 30-day, 60-day, and 90-day survival outcomes and thus may be of value for risk stratification and clinical decision-making for critically ill patients with AP.