Editor's Choice - Nationwide Analysis of Patients Undergoing Iliac Artery Aneurysm Repair in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

The new 2019 guideline of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) recommends consideration for elective iliac artery aneurysm (eIAA) repair when the iliac diameter exceeds 3.5 cm, as opposed to 3.0 cm previously. The current study assessed diameters at time of eIAA repair and ruptured IAA (rIAA) repair and compared clinical outcomes after open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

This retrospective observational study used the nationwide Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) registry that includes all patients who undergo aorto-iliac aneurysm repair in the Netherlands. All patients who underwent primary IAA repair between 1 January 2014 and 1 January 2018 were included. Diameters at time of eIAA and rIAA repair were compared in a descriptive fashion. The anatomical location of the IAA was not registered in the registry. Patient characteristics and outcomes of OSR and EVAR were compared with appropriate statistical tests.

RESULTS

The DSAA registry comprised 974 patients who underwent IAA repair. A total of 851 patients were included after exclusion of patients undergoing revision surgery and patients with missing essential variables. eIAA repair was carried out in 713 patients, rIAA repair in 102, and symptomatic IAA repair in 36. OSR was performed in 205, EVAR in 618, and hybrid repairs and conversions in 28. The median maximum IAA diameter at the time of eIAA and rIAA repair was 43 (IQR 38-50) mm and 68 (IQR 58-85) mm, respectively. Mortality was 1.3% (95% CI 0.7-2.4) after eIAA repair and 25.5% (95% CI 18.0-34.7) after rIAA repair. Mortality was not significantly different between the OSR and EVAR subgroups. Elective OSR was associated with significantly more complications than EVAR (intra-operative: 9.8% vs. 3.6%, post-operative: 34.0% vs. 13.8%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In the Netherlands, most eIAA repairs are performed at diameters larger than recommended by the ESVS guideline. These findings appear to support the recent increase in the threshold diameter for eIAA repair.

Endoscopic sphincterotomy and cholecystectomy in acute biliary pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

This review discusses current insights with regard to biliary tract management during and after acute biliary pancreatitis.

METHODS

A MEDLINE and EMBASE search was done and studies were selected based on methodological quality and publication date. The recommendations of recent guidelines are incorporated in this review. In absence of consensus in the literature, expert opinion is expressed.

RESULTS

There is no role for early endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with (predicted) mild biliary pancreatitis to improve outcome. In case of persisting choledocholithiasis, ERCP with stone extraction is scheduled electively when the acute event has subsided. Whether early ERCP with sphincterotomy is beneficial in patients with predicted severe pancreatitis remains subject to debate. Regardless of disease severity, in case of concomitant cholangitis urgent endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is recommended. As a definitive treatment to reduce the risk of recurrent biliary events in the long term, ES is inferior to cholecystectomy and should be reserved for patients considered unfit for surgery. After severe biliary pancreatitis, cholecystectomy should be postponed until all signs of inflammation have subsided. In patients with mild pancreatitis, cholecystectomy during the primary admission reduces the risk of recurrent biliary complications.

CONCLUSION

Recent research has provided valuable data to guide biliary tract management in the setting of acute biliary pancreatitis with great value and benefit for patients and clinicians. Some important clinical dilemmas remain, but it is anticipated that on-going clinical trials will deliver some important insights and additional guidance soon.

Staged multidisciplinary step-up management for necrotizing pancreatitis

Background

Some 15 per cent of all patients with acute pancreatitis develop necrotizing pancreatitis, with potentially significant consequences for both patients and healthcare services.

Methods

This review summarizes the latest insights into the surgical and medical management of necrotizing pancreatitis. General management strategies for the treatment of complications are discussed in relation to the stage of the disease.

Results

Frequent clinical evaluation of the patient's condition remains paramount in the first 24–72 h of the disease. Liberal goal-directed fluid resuscitation and early enteral nutrition should be provided. Urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is indicated when cholangitis is suspected, but it is unclear whether this is appropriate in patients with predicted severe biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis. Antibiotic prophylaxis does not prevent infection of necrosis and antibiotics are not indicated as part of initial management. Bacteriologically confirmed infections should receive targeted antibiotics. With the more conservative approach to necrotizing pancreatitis currently advocated, fine-needle aspiration culture of pancreatic or extrapancreatic necrosis will less often lead to a change in management and is therefore indicated less frequently. Optimal treatment of infected necrotizing pancreatitis consists of a staged multidisciplinary ‘step-up’ approach. The initial step is drainage, either percutaneous or transluminal, followed by surgical or endoscopic transluminal debridement only if needed. Debridement is delayed until the acute necrotic collection has become ‘walled-off’.

Conclusion

Outcome following necrotizing pancreatitis has improved substantially in recent years as a result of a shift from early surgical debridement to a staged, minimally invasive, multidisciplinary, step-up approach.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of safety of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy for suspected appendicitis in pregnancy (Br J Surg 2012; 99: 1470–1478)

Possible increased risk with Laparoscopy

Timing of cholecystectomy after mild biliary pancreatitis

Background

The aim of the study was to evaluate recurrent biliary events as a consequence of delay in cholecystectomy following mild biliary pancreatitis.

Methods

Between 2004 and 2007, patients with acute pancreatitis were registered prospectively in 15 Dutch hospitals. Patients with mild biliary pancreatitis were candidates for cholecystectomy. Recurrent biliary events requiring admission before and after cholecystectomy, and after endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES), were evaluated.

Results

Of 308 patients with mild biliary pancreatitis, 267 were candidates for cholecystectomy. Eighteen patients underwent cholecystectomy during the initial admission, leaving 249 potential candidates for cholecystectomy after discharge. Cholecystectomy was performed after a median of 6 weeks in 188 patients (75·5 per cent). Before cholecystectomy, 34 patients (13·7 per cent) were readmitted for biliary events, including 24 with recurrent biliary pancreatitis. ES was performed in 108 patients during the initial admission. Eight (7·4 per cent) of these patients suffered from biliary events after ES and before cholecystectomy, compared with 26 (18·4 per cent) of 141 patients who did not have ES (risk ratio 0·51, 95 per cent confidence interval 0·27 to 0·94; P = 0·015). Following cholecystectomy, eight (3·9 per cent) of 206 patients developed biliary events after a median of 31 weeks. Only 142 (53·2 per cent) of 267 patients were treated in accordance with the Dutch guideline, which recommends cholecystectomy or ES during the index admission or within 3 weeks thereafter.

Conclusion

A delay in cholecystectomy after mild biliary pancreatitis carries a substantial risk of recurrent biliary events. ES reduces the risk of recurrent pancreatitis but not of other biliary events.

Systematic review of percutaneous catheter drainage as primary treatment for necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The role of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) in patients with (infected) necrotizing pancreatitis was evaluated.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed. Inclusion criteria were: consecutive cohort of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis undergoing PCD as primary treatment for peripancreatic collections; indication for PCD either (suspected) infected necrosis or symptomatic sterile pancreatic necrosis; and outcomes reported to include percentage of infected peripancreatic collections, need for additional surgical necrosectomy, complications and deaths. Exclusion criteria were: cohort of fewer than five patients; cohort included patients with chronic pancreatitis; selected subgroup of patients with acute pancreatitis studied, such as those with pseudocysts, pancreatic abscesses and/or exclusively sterile pancreatic necrosis; and cohort in which PCD was combined with another minimally invasive strategy and results for PCD alone not reported separately.

RESULTS

Eleven studies, including 384 patients, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Only one study was a randomized controlled trial; most others were retrospective case series. Four studies reported on the presence of organ failure before PCD; this occurred in 67·2 per cent of 116 patients. Infected necrosis was proven in 271 (70·6 per cent) of 384 patients. No additional surgical necrosectomy was required after PCD in 214 (55·7 per cent) of 384 patients. Complications consisted mostly of internal and external pancreatic fistulas. The overall mortality rate was 17·4 per cent (67 of 384 patients). Nine of 11 studies reported mortality separately for patients with infected necrosis undergoing PCD; the mortality rate in this group was 15·4 per cent (27 of 175).

CONCLUSION

A considerable number of patients can be treated with PCD without the need for surgical necrosectomy.

Prediction of common bile duct stones in the earliest stages of acute biliary pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Accurate prediction of common bile duct (CBD) stones in acute biliary pancreatitis is warranted to select patients for early therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We evaluated commonly used biochemical and radiological predictors of CBD stones in a large prospective cohort of patients with acute biliary pancreatitis who were undergoing early ERCP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

167 patients with acute biliary pancreatitis who were undergoing early ERCP (< 72 hours after symptom onset) in 15 Dutch hospitals in 2004 - 2007 were prospectively included. Abdominal ultrasonography and/or computed tomography (CT) was performed on admission and complete liver biochemistry determined daily. We used univariate logistic regression to assess associations between CBD stones found during ERCP (gold standard) and the following parameters: (1) clinical: age, sex, predicted severity; (2) radiological: dilated CBD, impacted stone in CBD; and (3) biochemical: bilirubin, γ-glutamyltransferase (GGT), alkaline phosphatase, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and aspartate aminotransferase (AST).

RESULTS

Out of 167 patients, 94 (56 %) had predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis, 51 (31%) exhibited a dilated CBD and 15 (9%) had CBD stones on ultrasonography and/or CT. ERCP was performed at a median of 0 days (interquartile range 0 - 1) after admission. CBD stones were found during ERCP in 89/167 patients (53%). In univariate analysis, the only parameters significantly associated with CBD stones were GGT (per 10 units increase: odds ratio 1.02, 95% CI 1.01 - 1.03, P = 0.001) and alkaline phosphatase (per 10 units increase: odds ratio 1.03, 95% CI 1.00 - 1.05, P = 0.028). These and all other tested parameters, however, showed poor positive predictive value (ranging from 0.53 to 0.69) and poor negative predictive value (ranging from 0.46 to 0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that commonly used biochemical and radiological predictors of the presence of CBD stones during ERCP in the earliest stages of acute biliary pancreatitis are unreliable.