Management of the critically ill patient with severe acute pancreatitis (original) (raw)

Executive summary: management of the critically ill patient with severe acute pancreatitis

Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society, 2004

Acute pancreatitis represents a spectrum of disease ranging from a mild, self-limited course requiring only brief hospitalization to a rapidly progressive, fulminant illness resulting in the multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), with or without accompanying sepsis. The goal of this consensus statement is to provide recommendations regarding the management of the critically ill patient with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). Data Sources and Methods: An international consensus conference was held in April 2004 to develop recommendations for the management of the critically ill patient with SAP. Evidencebased recommendations were developed by a jury of ten persons representing surgery, internal medicine, and critical care after conferring with experts and reviewing the pertinent literature to address specific questions concerning the management of patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Data Synthesis: There were a total of 23 recommendations developed to provide guidance to critical care clinicians caring for the patient with SAP. Topics addressed were as follows. 1) When should the patient admitted with acute pancreatitis be monitored in an ICU or stepdown unit? 2) Should patients with severe acute pancreatitis receive prophylactic antibiotics? 3) What is the optimal mode and timing of nutritional support for the patient with SAP? 4) What are the indications for surgery in acute pancreatitis, what is the optimal timing for intervention, and what are the roles for less invasive approaches including percutaneous drainage and laparoscopy? 5) Under what circumstances should patients with gallstone pancreatitis undergo interventions for clearance of the bile duct? 6) Is there a role for therapy targeting the inflammatory response in the patient with SAP? Some of the recommendations included a recommendation against the routine use of prophylactic systemic antibacterial or antifungal agents in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. The jury also recommended against pancreatic debridement or drainage for sterile necrosis, limiting debridement or drainage to those with infected pancreatic necrosis and/or abscess confirmed by radiologic evidence of gas or results or fine needle aspirate. Furthermore, the jury recommended that whenever possible, operative necrosectomy and/or drainage be delayed at least 2-3 wk to allow for demarcation of the necrotic pancreas. Conclusions: This consensus statement provides 23 different recommendations concerning the management of patients with SAP. These recommendations differ in several ways from previous recommendations because of the release of recent data concerning the management of these patients and also because of the focus on the critically ill patient. There are a number of important questions that could not be answered using an evidence-based approach, and areas in need of further research were identified.

MANAGEMENT OF SEVERE ACUTE PANCREATITIS : Standards and Future Perspectives

The Bombay Hospital journal

Severe acute pancreatitis is an inflammatory disease that often takes a complicated and life-threatening course. There is still much controversial debate over treatment of severe acute pancreatitis. Conservative management comprises early diagnosis, prompt and aggressive fluid replenishment, adequate nutritional support, management of pain, and optimal antibiotic therapy. Administration of such extensive conservative treatment is best undertaken in an intensive care unit (ICU), where the response of the patient to the treatment can be closely monitored and judged. Surgical intervention is warranted when there is supervening infection of the necrotic pancreas. Among all the surgical approaches, necrosectomy and continuous local lavage allow debridement of devitalized and infected tissue with preservation of vital pancreatic tissue, and yield good results if performed at the right time. Clinical and experimental studies aim to target the maintenance of the integrity of the intestinal barrier and function, to preserve pancreatic microcirculation, and to balanced and modulate the inflammatory response. However, whether these new approaches will be of major clinical benefit has to be evaluated in randomized clinical trials in the future.

Treatment of severe acute pancreatitis and its complications

World Journal of Gastroenterology, 2014

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP), which is the most serious type of this disorder, is associated with high morbidity and mortality. SAP runs a biphasic course. During the first 1-2 wk, a pro-inflammatory response results in systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). If the SIRS is severe, it can lead to early multisystem organ failure (MOF). After the first 1-2 wk, a transition from a pro-inflammatory response to an anti-inflammatory response occurs; during this transition, the patient is at risk for intestinal flora translocation and the development of secondary infection of the necrotic tissue, which can result in sepsis and late MOF. Many recommendations have been made regarding SAP management and its complications. However, despite the reduction in overall mortality in the last decade, SAP is still associated with high mortality. In the majority of cases, sterile necrosis should be managed conservatively, whereas in infected necrotizing pancreatitis, the infected non-vital solid tissue should be removed to control the sepsis. Intervention should be delayed for as long as possible to allow better demarcation and liquefaction of the necrosis. Currently, the step-up approach (delay, drain, and debride) may be considered as the reference standard intervention for this disorder.

ICU management of severe acute pancreatitis

European Journal of Internal Medicine, 2004

In intensive care medicine, severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) remains a very challenging disease with multiple complications and high mortality. The main pathophysiological mechanisms determining outcome are an uncontrolled systemic hyperinflammatory response early on and infection of pancreatic necrosis later on in the disease process. Despite a better understanding in recent years of the mechanisms and the mediators involved in the hyperinflammatory response, there is, as yet, no generally recognized specific treatment for this disease. Since early identification and aggressive treatment of associated organ dysfunction can have a major impact on outcome, early assessment of prognosis and severity is important. The evidence available indicates that patients with severe acute pancreatitis do not benefit from therapy with available antisecretory drugs or protease inhibitors. Supportive therapy, such as vigorous hydration, analgesia, correction of electrolyte and glycemia disorders, and pharmacological or mechanical support targeted at specific organs, is still the mainstay of therapy. In spite of meager evidence, prophylactic antibiotics with good penetration in pancreatic tissue are recommended in severe acute pancreatitis. Enteral nutrition via a nasojejunal tube has become the preferred route of feeding. Most patients with sterile necrosis do not benefit from surgical intervention. In patients with proven infection of pancreatic tissue, surgery is necessary. Percutaneous, radiological drainage techniques may eventually become an alternative form of drainage in selected patients.

Contemporary management of infected necrosis complicating severe acute pancreatitis

Critical care (London, England), 2006

Pancreatic necrosis complicating severe acute pancreatitis is a challenging scenario in contemporary critical care practice; it requires multidisciplinary care in a setting where there is a relatively limited evidence base to support decision making. This commentary provides a concise overview of current management of patients with infected necrosis, focusing on detection, the role of pharmacologic intervention, and the timing and nature of surgical interventions. Fine-needle aspiration of necrosis remains the mainstay for establishment of infection. Pharmacological intervention includes antibiotic therapy as an adjunct to surgical debridement/drainage and, more recently, drotrecogin alfa. Specific concerns remain regarding the suitability of drotrecogin alfa in this setting. Early surgical intervention is unhelpful; surgery is indicated when there is strong evidence for infection of necrotic tissue, with the current trend being toward 'less drastic' surgical interventions.

Management of acute pancreatitis: from surgery to interventional intensive care

Gut, 2005

I n recent years, treatment of severe acute pancreatitis has shifted away from early surgical treatment to aggressive intensive care. While the treatment is conservative in the early phase, surgery might be considered in the later phase of the disease. Surgical debridement is still the ''gold standard'' for treatment of infected pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis. Advances in radiological imaging, new developments in interventional radiology, and other minimal access interventions have revolutionised the management of many surgical conditions over the past decades. Several interventional therapy regimens, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and sphincterotomy, fine needle aspiration for bacteriology (FNAB), percutaneous or endoscopic drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections, pseudocysts, and late abscesses, as well as selective angiography and catheter directed embolisation of acute pancreatitis associated bleeding complications have been well established as diagnostic and therapeutic standards in the management of acute pancreatitis. Secondary to recent technical improvements in interventional therapy and minimally invasive surgery, even infected pancreatic necrosis has successfully been treated in selected patients. However, technical feasibility does not obviate sound clinical judgement. We must be cautious in the application of new technologies in the absence of well designed clinical trials. Thus minimally invasive surgery and interventional therapy for infected necrosis should be limited to clinical trials and specific indications in patients who are critically ill and otherwise unfit for conventional surgery.