Diagnosis and Management of Pancreatic Necrosis Infection (original) (raw)
Related papers
Management of infected pancreatic necrosis: state of the art
Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões
Pancreatic necrosis occurs in 15% of acute pancreatitis. The presence of infection is the most important factor in the evolution of pancreatitis. The diagnosis of infection is still challenging. Mortality in infected necrosis is 20%; in the presence of organic dysfunction, mortality reaches 60%. In the last three decades, there has been a real revolution in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis. However, the challenges persist and there are many unsolved questions: antibiotic treatment alone, tomography-guided percutaneous drainage, endoscopic drainage, video-assisted extraperitoneal debridement, extraperitoneal access, open necrosectomy? A step up approach has been proposed, beginning with less invasive procedures and reserving the operative intervention for patients in which the previous procedure did not solve the problem definitively. Indication and timing of the intervention should be determined by the clinical course. Ideally, the intervention should be done only after...
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.
Progress in the management of necrotizing pancreatitis
Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 2010
Pancreatic necrosis, a complication of severe pancreatitis, may become infected, resulting in significant morbidity and potential mortality. Infected necrosis was heretofore considered a surgical condition, and despite aggressive operative management, the mortality remained high. With a better understanding of the natural history of necrosis, established methods to diagnose infection and the increasing use of minimally invasive techniques, less aggressive therapies have been utilized with some success. The present study evaluated a step-up approach for the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis, utilizing endoscopic and percutaneous techniques, and if ineffective, necrosectomy with a minimally invasive retroperitoneal approach. They compared this step-up approach to the standard open necrosectomy. They demonstrated that when using such an approach compared with open necrosectomy, the frequency of major complications such as organ failure, perforation, fistula or even death was significantly less than in those who received conventional open necrosectomy. Indeed, for those randomized to the step-up approach, roughly a third of the patients were successfully treated with percutaneous drainage alone. In the long-term, development of diabetes was also less frequent in those receiving less aggressive therapy. These findings, in combination with other reports, suggest that the dogma that open necrosectomy is mandatory for all patients with infected necrosis should be re-evaluated, and that less aggressive treatments as part of a multidisciplinary approach can reduce morbidity and mortality.
Can infected pancreatic necrosis really be managed conservatively?
European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology, 2018
Guidelines advocate minimally invasive drainage rather than open surgery for infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) after acute pancreatitis. We hypothesized that the conservative approach could be extended even further by treating patients using an antibiotics-only protocol. Between June 2009 and July 2017, patients with IPN were selectively managed with carbapenem antibiotics for a minimum of 6 weeks. We compared these patients with patients who underwent minimal access retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy (MARPN) for IPN to identify characteristics of this patient group. Of 33 patients with radiologically proven IPN, 13 patients received antibiotics without any surgical or radiological intervention and resulted in no disease-specific mortality and one case of pancreatic insufficiency. In comparison, 44 patients underwent MARPN with a mortality of 20%, and 81.8% developed pancreatic insufficiency. The modified Glasgow score and computed tomography severity score was less in the ant...
HPB, 2015
Background: The optimal diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in infected necrotizing pancreatitis is subject to debate. We performed a survey on these topics amongst a group of international expert pancreatologists. Methods: An online survey including case vignettes was sent to 118 international pancreatologists. We evaluated the use and timing of fine needle aspiration (FNA), antibiotics, catheter drainage and (minimally invasive) necrosectomy. Results: The response rate was 74% (N = 87). None of the respondents use FNA routinely, 85% selectively and 15% never. Most respondents (87%) use a step-up approach in patients with infected necrosis. Walled-off necrosis (WON) is considered a prerequisite for endoscopic drainage and percutaneous drainage by 66% and 12%, respectively. After diagnosing infected necrosis, 55% routinely postpone invasive interventions, whereas 45% proceed immediately to intervention. Lack of consensus about timing of intervention was apparent on day 14 with proven infected necrosis (58% intervention vs. 42% non-invasive) as well as on day 20 with only clinically suspected infected necrosis (59% intervention vs. 41% non-invasive). Discussion: The step-up approach is the preferred treatment strategy in infected necrotizing pancreatitis amongst expert pancreatologists. There is no uniformity regarding the use of FNA and timing of intervention in the first 2-3 weeks of infected necrotizing pancreatitis.
Management of necrotizing pancreatitis
World journal of gastroenterology : WJG, 2001
Infection complicating pancreatic necrosis leads to persisting sepsis, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome and accounts for about half the deaths that occur following acute pancreatitis. Severe cases due to gallstones require urgent endoscopic sphincterotomy. Patients with pancreatic necrosis should be followed with serial contrast enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) and if infection is suspected fine needle aspiration of the necrotic area for bacteriology (FNAB) should be undertaken. Treatment of sterile necrosis should initially be nonoperative. In the presence of infection necrosectomy is indicated. Although traditionally this has been by open surgery, minimally invasive procedures are a promising new alternative. There are many unresolved issues in the management of pancreatic necrosis. These include, the use of antibiotic prophylaxis, the precise indications for and frequency of repeat CE-CT and FNAB, and the role of enteral feeding.
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2013
Objectives This study aimed to compare primary surgical versus nonsurgical treatment in a series of patients with infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) and to investigate whether the success of nonsurgical approach is related to a less severe disease. Methods Thirty-nine consecutive patients with IPN have been included and further subdivided into two groups: primary surgical (n=21) versus nonsurgical (n=18). Outcome measures were the differences in mortality, morbidity, and pancreatic function. Comorbidity, organ failure, and other severity indexes were compared between the two groups. Results Mortality occurred in 16.7 % of cases in the nonsurgical group versus 42.9 % in the surgical group. In the primary nonsurgical group, seven were operated on due to failure of initial conservative treatment. In this latter group, mortality was 28.6 % and was performed significantly later than in the primary surgical group. The group of primary surgical treatment was associated with a significant higher rate of multiple organ failure (MOF) at IPN diagnosis, new onset or worsening of organ failure, and MOF and nosocomial infection after surgery. Conclusions Initial nonsurgical approach in IPN is associated with better results both in cases which respond to this treatment as well as in those who, failing this conservative approach, have to be operated on after a delayed period. Primary surgically treated patients had a more severe disease at the time of IPN.