Clinical Outcomes of the Endoscopic Step-Up Approach with or without Radiology-Guided Percutaneous Drainage for Symptomatic Walled-Off Pancreatic Necrosis

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background and objectives: Symptomatic walled-off pancreatic necrosis is a serious local complication of acute necrotising pancreatitis. The endoscopic step-up approach is the standard treatment for symptomatic walled-off pancreatic necrosis; however, adjunctive radiologic percutaneous drainage for this condition is controversial. This study compared the clinical and radiologic resolution of walled-off pancreatic necrosis achieved with the endoscopic step-up approach with or without radiology-guided percutaneous drainage. Material and Methods: This retrospective, single-centre cohort study enrolled patients with symptomatic walled-off pancreatic necrosis who underwent endoscopic transmural drainage (ETD) followed by directed endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) with or without radiology-guided drainage. A total of 34 patients (endoscopic approach, n = 22; combined modality approach, n = 12) underwent the endoscopic step-up approach (ETD followed by DEN). Baseline characteristics, clinical success, and resolution of necrosis were compared between groups. Results: All patients achieved symptom resolution from walled-off pancreatic necrosis. The mean patient age was 58.4 years, and 21 (61.8%) were men. Following treatment with the endoscopic approach and combined modality approach, clinical success was achieved in 90.9% of patients within 11.5 days, and 66.7% of patients within 16.5 days, respectively. Both length of hospital stay (55 days vs. 71 days; p = 0.071) and time to complete radiologic resolution were shorter (93 days vs. 124 days; p = 0.23) in the endoscopic approach group. Conclusion: Both the endoscopic step-up approach and the CMD approach resulted in a favourably high clinical resolution rates in patients with symptomatic WON. However, clinical success rates seemed to be higher, and the length of hospital stay tended to be shorter in the endoscopic approach than in the CMD approach, as well as the significantly shorter necrosectomy time in each procedure was observed. Of note, these findings might be from some inherited differences in baseline characteristics of the patients between the two groups, and a randomized controlled trial with a larger sample size to verify these results is warranted.

Related collections

Most cited references 27

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Classification of acute pancreatitis--2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus.

Peter A Banks, Thomas Bollen, CHRISTOS DERVENIS … (2012)

The Atlanta classification of acute pancreatitis enabled standardised reporting of research and aided communication between clinicians. Deficiencies identified and improved understanding of the disease make a revision necessary. A web-based consultation was undertaken in 2007 to ensure wide participation of pancreatologists. After an initial meeting, the Working Group sent a draft document to 11 national and international pancreatic associations. This working draft was forwarded to all members. Revisions were made in response to comments, and the web-based consultation was repeated three times. The final consensus was reviewed, and only statements based on published evidence were retained. The revised classification of acute pancreatitis identified two phases of the disease: early and late. Severity is classified as mild, moderate or severe. Mild acute pancreatitis, the most common form, has no organ failure, local or systemic complications and usually resolves in the first week. Moderately severe acute pancreatitis is defined by the presence of transient organ failure, local complications or exacerbation of co-morbid disease. Severe acute pancreatitis is defined by persistent organ failure, that is, organ failure >48 h. Local complications are peripancreatic fluid collections, pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis (sterile or infected), pseudocyst and walled-off necrosis (sterile or infected). We present a standardised template for reporting CT images. This international, web-based consensus provides clear definitions to classify acute pancreatitis using easily identified clinical and radiologic criteria. The wide consultation among pancreatologists to reach this consensus should encourage widespread adoption.

0 comments Cited 1065 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

IAP/APA evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis.

(2013)

There have been substantial improvements in the management of acute pancreatitis since the publication of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) treatment guidelines in 2002. A collaboration of the IAP and the American Pancreatic Association (APA) was undertaken to revise these guidelines using an evidence-based approach. Twelve multidisciplinary review groups performed systematic literature reviews to answer 38 predefined clinical questions. Recommendations were graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The review groups presented their recommendations during the 2012 joint IAP/APA meeting. At this one-day, interactive conference, relevant remarks were voiced and overall agreement on each recommendation was quantified using plenary voting. The 38 recommendations covered 12 topics related to the clinical management of acute pancreatitis: A) diagnosis of acute pancreatitis and etiology, B) prognostication/predicting severity, C) imaging, D) fluid therapy, E) intensive care management, F) preventing infectious complications, G) nutritional support, H) biliary tract management, I) indications for intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis, J) timing of intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis, K) intervention strategies in necrotizing pancreatitis, and L) timing of cholecystectomy. Using the GRADE system, 21 of the 38 (55%) recommendations, were rated as 'strong' and plenary voting revealed 'strong agreement' for 34 (89%) recommendations. The 2012 IAP/APA guidelines provide recommendations concerning key aspects of medical and surgical management of acute pancreatitis based on the currently available evidence. These recommendations should serve as a reference standard for current management and guide future clinical research on acute pancreatitis. Copyright © 2013 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 293 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A step-up approach or open necrosectomy for necrotizing pancreatitis.

Marja Boermeester, O. Bakker, Vincent B Nieuwenhuijs … (2010)

Necrotizing pancreatitis with infected necrotic tissue is associated with a high rate of complications and death. Standard treatment is open necrosectomy. The outcome may be improved by a minimally invasive step-up approach. In this multicenter study, we randomly assigned 88 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis and suspected or confirmed infected necrotic tissue to undergo primary open necrosectomy or a step-up approach to treatment. The step-up approach consisted of percutaneous drainage followed, if necessary, by minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy. The primary end point was a composite of major complications (new-onset multiple-organ failure or multiple systemic complications, perforation of a visceral organ or enterocutaneous fistula, or bleeding) or death. The primary end point occurred in 31 of 45 patients (69%) assigned to open necrosectomy and in 17 of 43 patients (40%) assigned to the step-up approach (risk ratio with the step-up approach, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.38 to 0.87; P=0.006). Of the patients assigned to the step-up approach, 35% were treated with percutaneous drainage only. New-onset multiple-organ failure occurred less often in patients assigned to the step-up approach than in those assigned to open necrosectomy (12% vs. 40%, P=0.002). The rate of death did not differ significantly between groups (19% vs. 16%, P=0.70). Patients assigned to the step-up approach had a lower rate of incisional hernias (7% vs. 24%, P=0.03) and new-onset diabetes (16% vs. 38%, P=0.02). A minimally invasive step-up approach, as compared with open necrosectomy, reduced the rate of the composite end point of major complications or death among patients with necrotizing pancreatitis and infected necrotic tissue. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN13975868.) 2010 Massachusetts Medical Society