EUS-Guided Endoscopic Transgastric Necrosectomy in Patients with Infected Necrosis in Acute Pancreatitis (original) (raw)

Minimally invasive operations for acute necrotizing pancreatitis: Comparison of minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy with endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy

Surgery, 2012

A ''step-up'' approach is currently the treatment of choice for acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Our aim was to evaluate the outcome of minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy (MINE) and endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy (ETG) and to compare it to open necrosectomy (ONE). Methods. Patients with acute pancreatitis admitted to our institution from 1998 to 2010 (n = 334) were identified. From these, patients who underwent either ONE, MINE, or ETG were selected for further analysis. Statistical analysis employed 2-sided Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U-test. Results. From 2002 to 2010, 32 patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis were treated by minimally invasive procedures including MINE (n = 14) and ETG (n = 18) or with the classic technique of ONE (n = 30). Time from onset of symptoms to intervention was less for ONE than for MINE or ETG (median, 11 vs 39 vs 54 days; P < .05). The rate of critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock was greatest in ONE (93%) and MINE (71%) compared with ETG (17%; P < .05). Problems after ONE and MINE were ongoing sepsis (ONE 73% vs MINE 29% vs ETG 11%) and bleeding requiring intervention (ONE 26% vs MINE 21% vs ETG 17%). A specific complication of ETG was gastric perforation into the peritoneal cavity during the procedure (28%), requiring immediate open pseudocystogastrostomy. Laparotomy was necessary in 21% after MINE and 28% after ETG owing to specific complications or persistent infected necrosis. Overall mortality was greatest after ONE (ONE 63% vs MINE 21% vs ETG 6%; P < .05). Conclusion. Morbidity and mortality remains high in acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Operative procedures should be delayed as long as possible to decrease morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive procedures can avoid laparotomy, but also introduce specific complications requiring immediate or secondary open operative treatment. Minimally invasive procedures require unique expertise and therefore should only be performed at specialized centers. (Surgery 2012;152:S128-34.)

Percutaneous minimally invasive necrosectomy following endoscopic transgastric drainage in acute necrotising pancreatitis

BMJ case reports, 2012

A patient who had undergone failed transgastric placement of two cystgastrostomy stents referred to the regional pancreatic unit with ongoing sepsis for further management. Following stabilisation, percutaneous minimally invasive necrosectomy (MIN) was performed. MIN resulted in sustained clinical resolution of the sepsis and normalisation of serum C reactive protein levels. The transgastric drains were removed by MIN and, importantly, the patient did not develop a gastric fistula. To our knowledge, this is the first report of MIN following endoscopic cystgastrostomy stent placement. Pancreatic necrosis progresses from solid to semisolid to liquid states over a period of several months. Transgastric drainage should be reserved for subjects with either a pancreatic abscess or predominantly liquid necrosis reserving MIN for patients with systemic sepsis and those with semisolid necrosis. As increasing strategies to treat pancreatic necrosis become available clinicians must be alert to...

Focused open necrosectomy in necrotizing pancreatitis

HPB, 2013

Background: The control of sepsis is the primary goal of surgical intervention in patients with infected necrosis. Simple surgical approaches that are easy to reproduce may improve outcomes when specialists in endoscopy are not available. The aim of the present study was to describe the experience with a focused open necrosectomy (FON) in patients with infected necrosis.

Endoscopic or surgical step-up approach for infected necrotising pancreatitis: a multicentre randomised trial

Lancet (London, England), 2017

Infected necrotising pancreatitis is a potentially lethal disease and an indication for invasive intervention. The surgical step-up approach is the standard treatment. A promising alternative is the endoscopic step-up approach. We compared both approaches to see whether the endoscopic step-up approach was superior to the surgical step-up approach in terms of clinical and economic outcomes. In this multicentre, randomised, superiority trial, we recruited adult patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis and an indication for invasive intervention from 19 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned to either the endoscopic or the surgical step-up approach. The endoscopic approach consisted of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transluminal drainage followed, if necessary, by endoscopic necrosectomy. The surgical approach consisted of percutaneous catheter drainage followed, if necessary, by video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement. The primary endpoint was a composit...

Minimally invasive and endoscopic versus open necrosectomy for necrotising pancreatitis: a pooled analysis of individual data for 1980 patients

Gut, 2017

Minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy and endoscopic necrosectomy, compared with open necrosectomy, might improve outcomes in necrotising pancreatitis, especially in critically ill patients. Evidence from large comparative studies is lacking. We combined original and newly collected data from 15 published and unpublished patient cohorts (51 hospitals; 8 countries) on pancreatic necrosectomy for necrotising pancreatitis. Death rates were compared in patients undergoing open necrosectomy versus minimally invasive surgical or endoscopic necrosectomy. To adjust for confounding and to study effect modification by clinical severity, we performed two types of analyses: logistic multivariable regression and propensity score matching with stratification according to predicted risk of death at baseline (low: <5%; intermediate: ≥5% to <15%; high: ≥15% to <35%; and very high: ≥35%). Among 1980 patients with necrotising pancreatitis, 1167 underwent open necrosectomy and 813 underwent...

Transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy after acute pancreatitis: a multicentre study with long-term follow-up (the GEPARD Study)

Gut, 2009

Background: As with endoscopic transmural drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections, the same transluminal access can be expanded to introduce an endoscope through the gastrointestinal wall into the retroperitoneum and remove infected pancreatic necroses under direct visual control. This study reports the first large series with long-term follow-up. Methods: Data for all patients undergoing transluminal endoscopic removal of (peri)pancreatic necroses between 1999 and 2005 in six different centres were collected retrospectively, and the patients were followed up prospectively until 2008. The initial patient and treatment outcome data were recorded, as were long-term results. Results: Ninety-three patients (63 men, 30 women; mean age 57 years) underwent a mean of six interventions starting at a mean of 43 days after an attack of severe acute pancreatitis. After establishment of transluminal access to the necrotic cavity and subsequent endoscopic necrosectomy, initial clinical success was obtained in 80% of the patients, with a 26% complication and a 7.5% mortality rate at 30 days. After a mean follow-up period of 43 months, 84% of the initially successfully treated patients had sustained clinical improvement, with 10% receiving further endoscopic and 4% receiving surgical treatment for recurrent cavities; 16% suffered recurrent pancreatitis. Conclusions: Direct transluminal endoscopic removal of pancreatic necroses is associated with good long-term maintenance of the high initial efficacy; complications can occur, with an associated mortality of around 7.5%. Further studies are necessary in order to optimise endotherapy and define its role in relation to surgery in the clinical management of such patients.

Endoscopic Management of Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis: an Evidence-Based Approach

Current treatment options in gastroenterology, 2018

Endoscopic management of infected necrotizing pancreatitis has evolved rapidly over the past years and there have been interesting innovations in this field. This review provides an update on the most recently published literature regarding endoscopic management of infected necrotizing pancreatitis. A recent randomized trial demonstrated no difference in mortality and major morbidity between endoscopic and surgical step-up treatment of infected necrotizing pancreatitis. However, endoscopic therapy resulted in shorter hospital stay and less pancreatic fistulas. Various innovations have been investigated with the aim to further optimize endoscopic therapy, in particular lumen-apposing metal stents. While major stent-related complications were also reported, findings from recent studies indicated that their use was associated with higher resolution rates of walled-off necrosis compared to double-pigtail stents. Other innovations, such as the multiple gateway technique and dual-modality...

Endoscopic management of acute necrotizing pancreatitis: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) evidence-based multidisciplinary guidelines

Endoscopy, 2018

1: ESGE suggests using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) as the first-line imaging modality on admission when indicated and up to the 4th week from onset in the absence of contraindications. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be used instead of CT in patients with contraindications to contrast-enhanced CT, and after the 4th week from onset when invasive intervention is considered because the contents (liquid vs. solid) of pancreatic collections are better characterized by MRI and evaluation of pancreatic duct integrity is possible. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends against routine percutaneous fine needle aspiration (FNA) of (peri)pancreatic collections. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. FNA should be performed only if there is suspicion of infection and clinical/imaging signs are unclear. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends initial goal-directed intravenous fluid therapy with Ringer's lactate (e...

Minimally Invasive Necrosectomy Versus Conventional Surgery in the Treatment of Infected Pancreatic Necrosis

Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques, 2013

The purpose of this meta-analysis and systematic review is to compare minimally invasive necrosectomy (MIN) versus open necrosectomy (ON) surgery for infected necrosis of acute pancreatitis. Methods: One randomized controlled trial and 3 clinical controlled trials were selected, with a total of 336 patients (215 patients who underwent MIN and 121 patients underwent ON) included after searching in the following databases: