Postponed endoscopic necrosectomy results in a lower rate of additional intervention for infected walled-off necrosis.

Although endoscopic necrosectomy (EN) is more frequently used to manage walled-off necrosis (WON), there is still debate over how much time should pass between the initial stent placement and the first necrosectomy. This study aims to determine the effect of performing EN within different timings after placing the initial stent on clinical outcomes for WON. A retrospective study on infected WON patients compared an early necrosectomy within one week after the initial stent placement with a necrosectomy that was postponed after a week. The primary outcomes compared the rate of clinical success and the need for additional intervention after EN to achieve WON resolution. 77 patients were divided into early and postponed necrosectomy groups. The complete resolution of WON within six months of follow-up was attained in 73.7% and 74.3% of patients in both the early and postponed groups. The early group tended to a greater need for additional intervention after EN (26.8% early necrosectomy vs. 8.3% postponed necrosectomy, P = 0.036). Our study does not demonstrate that early necrosectomy is superior to postponed necrosectomy in terms of clinical success rate, total count of necrosectomy procedures, procedure-related complications, length of hospitalization and prognosis. Conversely, patients in the postponed group received fewer additional interventions.

Implementing an electromagnetic tracking navigation system improves the precision of endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy in an ex vivo model.

Endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy is crucial in the management of complications resulting from necrotizing pancreatitis. However, both real-time and visual-spatial information is lacking during the procedure, thereby jeopardizing a precise positioning of the endoscope. We conducted a proof-of-concept study with the aim of overcoming these technical difficulties. For this purpose, a three-dimensional (3D) phantom of a stomach and pancreatic necroses was 3D-printed based on spatial information from individual patient CT scans and subsequently integrated into a silicone torso. An electromagnetic (EM) sensor was adjusted inside the endoscope´s working channel. A software interface enabled real time visualization. The accuracy of this novel assistant system was tested ex vivo by four experienced interventional endoscopists who were supposed to reach seven targets inside the phantom in six different experimental runs of simulated endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy. Supported by endoscopic camera view combined with real-time 3D visualization, all endoscopists reached the targets with a targeting error ranging between 2.6 and 6.5 mm in a maximum of eight minutes. In summary, the EM tracking system might increase efficacy and safety of endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy at the experimental level by enhancing visualization. Yet, a broader feasibility study and further technical improvements are mandatory before aiming at implementation into clinical setting.

Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Debridement and Drainage for Pancreatic Abscess.

In patients with severe necrotizing pancreatitis, pancreatic necrosis and secondary infection of surrounding tissues can quickly spread to the whole retroperitoneal space. Treatment of pancreatic abscess complicating necrotizing pancreatitis is difficult and has a high mortality rate. The well-accepted treatment strategy is early debridement of necrotic tissues, drainage, and postoperative continuous retroperitoneal lavage. However, traditional open surgery has several disadvantages, such as severe trauma, interference with abdominal organs, a high rate of postoperative infection and adhesion, and hardness with repeated debridement. The retroperitoneal laparoscopic approach has the advantages of minimal invasion, a better drainage route, convenient repeated debridement, and avoidance of the spread of retroperitoneal infection to the abdominal cavity. In addition, retroperitoneal drainage leads to fewer drainage tube problems, including miscounting, displacement, or siphon. The debridement and drainage of pancreatic abscess tissue via the retroperitoneal laparoscopic approach plays an increasingly irreplaceable role in improving patient prognosis and saving healthcare resources and costs. The main procedures described here include laying the patient on the right side, raising the lumbar bridge and then arranging the trocar; establishing the pneumoperitoneum and cleaning the pararenal fat tissues; opening the lateral pyramidal fascia and the perirenal fascia outside the peritoneal reflections; opening the anterior renal fascia and entering the anterior pararenal space from the rear; clearing the necrotic tissue and accumulating fluid; and placing drainage tubes and performing postoperative continuous retroperitoneal lavage.

[Direct transfistulous ultrasound in minimally invasive surgical treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis]. / Pryamoe chresfistul'noe ul'trazvukovoe issledovanie pri minimal'no invazivnom khirurgicheskom lechenii patsientov s infitsirovannym pankreonekrozom.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a method for direct transfistulous ultrasound in minimally invasive treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: There were 148 patients with infected pancreatic necrosis between 2015 and 2019 at the Krasnodar City Clinical Hospital No. 2. Drainage with 28-32 Fr tubes was carried out at the first stage, endoscopic transfistulous sequestrectomy - at the second stage (19 (12.8%) patients). In 84 (56.8%) patients, we applied original diagnostic method (transfistulous ultrasonic assessment of inflammatory focus). RESULTS: There were 3 accesses to omental bursa in 93 (62.8%) patients and 2 in 43 (29.1%) patients. We also performed 2 access to retroperitoneal space in 63 (42.6%) patients and 1 access in 38 (25.8%) cases. Transfistulous ultrasound was used once in 19 (22.6%) patients, twice in 28 (33.3%) and 3 times in 37 (44.1%) patients. Examination was not performed in 18 (12.2%) patients due to the following reasons: migration of drainage catheters - 5, non-rectilinear fistulous tract - 13. No complications were observed. CONCLUSION: Transfistulous ultrasound makes it possible to diagnose pathological changes in the pancreas and parapancreatic tissue at various stages of surgical treatment.

Laparoscopic necrosectomy for acute necrotizing pancreatitis: mesocolon-preserving approach and outcomes.

The surgical treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis has significantly evolved in recent years with the advent of enhanced imaging techniques and minimally invasive surgery. Various minimally invasive techniques, such as video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD) and endoscopic transmural necrosectomy (ETN), have been employed in the management of acute necrotizing pancreatitis and are often part of step-up approaches. However, almost all reported step-up approaches only employ a fixed minimally invasive technique prior to open surgery. In contrast, we implemented different minimally invasive techniques during the treatment of acute pancreatitis based on the extent of pancreatic necrosis. For acute necrotizing pancreatitis of the pancreatic bed with or without extension into the left retroperitoneum, we performed mesocolon-preserving laparoscopic necrosectomy for debridment. The quantitative indication for pancreatic debridment in our institute has been described previously. For acute necrotizing pancreatitis of the pancreatic bed with or without extension into the left retroperitoneum, mesocolon-preserving laparoscopic necrosectomy was performed for debridment. To safeguard the mesocolon, the pancreatic bed was entered via the gastrocolic ligament, and the left retroperitoneum was accessed via the lateral peritoneal attachments of the descending colon. Of the 77 patients requiring pancreatic debridment, 41 patients were deemed suitable for mesocolon-preserving laparoscopic necrosectomy by multiple disciplinary team and informed consent was acquired. Of these 41 patients, 27 underwent percutaneous drainage, 10 underwent transluminal drainage, and 2 underwent transluminal necrosectomy prior to laparoscopic necrosectomy. Two patients (4.88%) died of sepsis, three patients (7.32%) required further laparotomic necrosectomy, and five patients (12.20%) required additional percutaneous drainage for residual infection. Three patients (7.32%) experienced duodenal fistula, all of which were cured through non-surgical treatments. Nineteen patients (46.34%) developed pancreatic fistula that persisted for over 3 weeks, with 17 being successfully treated non-surgically. The remaining two patients had pancreatic fistulas that lasted over 3 months; an internal drainage procedure has been planned for them. No patient developed colonic fistula. Mesocolon-preserving laparoscopic necrosectomy proved to be safe and effective in selected patients. It can serve as a supplementary procedure for step-up approaches or as an alternative to other debridment procedures such as VARD, ETN, and laparotomic necrosectomy.

Efficacy and Safety of Anhydrous Ethanol-Assisted Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Transluminal Necrosectomy in Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

AIM: Endoscopic necrosectomy has become the first-line treatment option for infectious necrotizing pancreatitis (INP), especially walled-off necrosis. However, the problems, including operation-related adverse events (AEs) and the need for multiple endoscopic procedures, have not been effectively addressed. We sought to evaluate the clinical safety and efficacy of anhydrous ethanol-assisted endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transluminal necrosectomy in INP. METHODS: A single-center observational cohort study of INP patients was conducted in a tertiary endoscopic center. Anhydrous ethanol-assisted EUS-guided transluminal necrosectomy (modified group) and conventional endoscopic necrosectomy (conventional group) were retrospectively compared in INP patients. The technical and clinical success rates, operation time, perioperative AEs, postoperative hospital stay, and recurrent INP rates were analyzed, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients were enrolled. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding baseline characteristics. Compared to patients in the conventional group, patients in the modified group demonstrated significantly reduced times of endoscopic transluminal necrosectomies (1.96 ± 0.89 vs. 2.73 ± 0.98; P = 0.004) and comparable perioperative AEs (P = 0.35). Meanwhile, no statistically significant differences were observed in the technical and clinical success rates (P = 0.92), operation time (P = 0.59), postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.36), and recurrent INP rates (P = 1.00) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Anhydrous ethanol-assisted EUS-guided transluminal necrosectomy seemed safe and effective in treating INP. Compared with conventional endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy, its advantage was mainly in reducing the number of endoscopic necrosectomies without increasing perioperative AEs.

Early Endoscopic Interventions for Pancreatic Necrosis: Indications, Technique, and Outcomes.

Endoscopic transmural drainage is usually performed for symptomatic well-encapsulated walled-off necrosis (WON) that usually develops in the delayed phase (> 4 weeks after disease onset) of acute necrotising pancreatitis (ANP). Endoscopic drainage is usually not advocated in the early (< 4 weeks after disease onset) stage of illness because of the risk of complications due to an incompletely formed encapsulating wall and poor demarcation of viable from necrotic tissue. However, emerging data from expert tertiary care centres over the last few years shows that the early endoscopic transluminal drainage approach is effective and safe. The development of lumen-apposing metal stents and better accessories for endoscopic necrosectomy has fuelled the expansion of indications of endoscopic drainage of pancreatic necrosis. However, early endoscopic drainage is associated with higher rates of adverse events; therefore, careful patient selection is paramount. This article will review the current indications, techniques and outcomes of early endoscopic transluminal drainage in pancreatic necrotic collections.

A New Step-Up Dual Endoscopic Approach for Large-Size Infected Pancreatic Necrosis: Percutaneous Endoscopic Necrosectomy Followed by Transluminal Endoscopic Drainage/Necrosectomy.

BACKGROUND: Acute pancreatitis in 10% to 20% of cases can be associated with necrosis of the pancreatic gland, peripancreatic tissue, or both. We report a case series of a new endoscopic approach to treat infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with IPN, extending from the perigastric area up to the paracolic gutters or into the pelvis, were prospectively studied from January 2017 to June 2022. The treatment protocol was radiologic percutaneous drainage as the first step, followed by fully covered metal stent placement (FC-SEMS) in the track of the catheter. Percutaneous endoscopic necrosectomy (PEN) was performed 2 to 4 days later using a flexible endoscope through the percutaneous tract. About 2 to 4 weeks later, when a matured sac was visible, EUS-guided endoscopic transluminal drainage (ETD) with lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) was performed. Control of sepsis with resolution of collection(s) was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: We included 18 patients, males in 50% of cases with age 60±12 years old. Most frequent cause of pancreatitis was biliary (7 cases) followed by alcoholic in 6 cases; in 3 cases pancreatitis was caused by hyperlipemia and in 2 cases was idiopathic. Mean size of WON was 18±2 cm. For PEN, SEMSs used were esophageal FC-SEMS. LAMS used for ETD were Hot Axios, Hot Spaxus and Nagistent. Mean time of endoscopic intervention for PEN and ETD was 18±3 and 37±4 days, respectively. In 5 cases adverse events occurred: 3 cases of overinflations resolved with introduction of Verres needles in abdomen. In 2 cases postprocedural GI bleeding required endoscopic intervention. In all cases control of sepsis was reached together with resolution of collections. No cases of deaths were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Step-up percutaneous and transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy therapy is an effective strategy for large-size IPN with combined central and peripheral necrosis.

A core outcome set for acute necrotizing pancreatitis: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma modified Delphi method consensus study.

BACKGROUND: The management of acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) has changed dramatically over the past 20 years including the use of less invasive techniques, the timing of interventions, nutritional management, and antimicrobial management. This study sought to create a core outcome set (COS) to help shape future research by establishing a minimal set of essential outcomes that will facilitate future comparisons and pooling of data while minimizing reporting bias. METHODS: A modified Delphi process was performed through involvement of ANP content experts. Each expert proposed a list of outcomes for consideration, and the panel anonymously scored the outcomes on a 9-point Likert scale. Core outcome consensus defined a priori as >70% of scores receiving 7 to 9 points and <15% of scores receiving 1 to 3 points. Feedback and aggregate data were shared between rounds with interclass correlation trends used to determine the end of the study. RESULTS: A total of 19 experts agreed to participate in the study with 16 (84%) participating through study completion. Forty-three outcomes were initially considered with 16 reaching consensuses after four rounds of the modified Delphi process. The final COS included outcomes related to mortality, organ failure, complications, interventions/management, and social factors. CONCLUSION: Through an iterative consensus process, content experts agreed on a COS for the management of ANP. This will help shape future research to generate data suitable for pooling and other statistical analyses that may guide clinical practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level V.

Is Contemporary Open Pancreatic Necrosectomy Still Useful In The Minimally Invasive Era?

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that open pancreatic necrosectomy for infected pancreatic necrosis was associated with high morbidity and mortality. However, these results were mostly concluded from historical cohorts with traditional early necrosectomy in the absence of a minimally invasive step-up approach. OBJECTIVE: To explore the value of contemporary open pancreatic necrosectomy for infected pancreatic necrosis in the minimally invasive era. METHODS: A post hoc analysis was performed in a prospective maintained database of 320 patients with infected pancreatic necrosis from January 2011 to December 2022 at a large Chinese tertiary hospital. RESULTS: A total of 320 patients with infected pancreatic necrosis received either a minimally invasive step-up approach (245, 76.6%) or open pancreatic necrosectomy (75, 23.4%), which included upfront open pancreatic necrosectomy (32, 10.0%) and salvage open pancreatic necrosectomy (43, 13.4%). Upfront open pancreatic necrosectomy was associated with similar morbidity and mortality rates but fewer surgical interventions compared with a minimally invasive step-up approach. However, salvage open pancreatic necrosectomy was associated with significantly higher mortality (48.8% vs 18.8%, P = .007), gastrointestinal fistula (44.2% vs 18.8%, P = .021), hemorrhage (48.8% vs 15.6%, P = .003), and intensive care unit stay (25 vs 7 days, P = .040) compared with upfront open pancreatic necrosectomy. Multivariate analysis suggested that multiple organ failure (hazard ratio = 5.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-18.2, P = .013) and synchronous critical acute pancreatitis (hazard ratio = 3.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-8.6, P = .040) were 2 independent risk factors of death for patients who received open pancreatic necrosectomy. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing upfront open pancreatic necrosectomy received fewer surgical interventions with comparable efficacy compared to the minimally invasive step-up approach. Salvage open pancreatic necrosectomy was potentially lifesaving, though it carried high morbidity and mortality. Multiple organ failure and synchronous critical acute pancreatitis were 2 independent risk factors of death for patients who received open pancreatic necrosectomy.

Endoscopic and surgical treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis-a comparison of short- and long-term outcome.

BACKGROUND: Acute necrotizing pancreatitis is still related to high morbidity and mortality rates. Minimal-invasive treatment options, such as endoscopic necrosectomy, may decrease peri-interventional morbidity and mortality. This study aims to compare the initial operative with endoscopic treatment on long-term parameters, such as endocrine and exocrine functionality, as well as mortality and recurrence rates. METHODS: We included 114 patients, of whom 69 were treated with initial endoscopy and 45 by initial surgery. Both groups were further assessed for peri-interventional and long-term parameters. RESULTS: In the post-interventional phase, patients in the group of initial surgical treatment (IST) showed significantly higher rates of renal insufficiency (p < 0.001) and dependency on invasive ventilation (p < 0.001). The in-house mortality was higher in the surgical group, with 22% vs. 10.1% in the group of patients following initial endoscopic treatment (IET; p = 0.077). In long-term follow-up, the overall mortality was 45% for IST and 31.3% for IET (p = 0.156). The overall in-hospital stay and intensive care unit (ICU) stay were significantly shorter after IET (p < 0.001). In long-term follow-up, the prevalence of endocrine insufficiency was 50% after IST and 61.7% after IET (p = 0.281). 57.1% of the patients following IST and 16.4% of the patients following IET had persistent exocrine insufficiency at that point (p = < 0.001). 8.9% of the IET and 27.6% of the IST patients showed recurrence of acute pancreatitis (p = 0.023) in the long-term phase. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, an endoscopic step-up approach led to a reduced in-hospital stay and peri-interventional morbidity. The endocrine function appeared comparable in both groups, whereas the exocrine insufficiency seemed to recover in the endoscopic group in the long-term phase. These findings advocate for a preference for endoscopic treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis whenever feasible.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Drainage of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: Not All Queries Are Already Solved.

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are well-known complications of acute pancreatitis. The overinfection of these collections leads to a worsening of the prognosis with an increase in the morbidity and mortality rate. The primary strategy for managing infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) or symptomatic PFCs is a minimally invasive step-up approach, with endosonography-guided (EUS-guided) transmural drainage and debridement as the preferred and less invasive method. Different stents are available to drain PFCs: self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs), double pigtail stents (DPPSs), or lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs). In particular, LAMSs are useful when direct endoscopic necrosectomy is needed, as they allow easy access to the necrotic cavity; however, the rate of adverse events is not negligible, and to date, the superiority over DPPSs is still debated. Moreover, the timing for necrosectomy, the drainage technique, and the concurrent medical management are still debated. In this review, we focus attention on indications, timing, techniques, complications, and particularly on aspects that remain under debate concerning the EUS-guided drainage of PFCs.

Repetitive endoscopic drainage as initial intervention is safe and effective for early treatment of pancreatic necrotic collections.

BACKGROUND: While endoscopic step-up approach with delayed drainage (more than 28 days from diagnosis) was shown to produce the best outcomes in the treatment of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON), we assessed our single centre experience of early versus delayed endoscopic drainage of pancreatic necrotic collections. METHODS: Patients who underwent endoscopic drainage of pancreatic necrotic collections between 2011 and 2022 under Monash Health were identified. They were excluded if below 18 years old or their follow up data were missing. The included patients' medical records, pathology results, and imaging findings were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 60 patients were included. 31.58% required percutaneous drainage and 15% received either endoscopic or surgical necrosectomy. The disease related mortality was 8.47% and the average length of stay (LOS) was 70.92 days. No significant difference was shown in disease-related mortality (10.5% vs. 7.5%, P = 0.697) or LOS (75.35 vs. 68.7, P = 0.644) between early and delayed drainage cohorts, but patients who received early drainage have higher qSOFA score on the day of drainage (2 vs. 0, P = 0.004). DISCUSSION: Repetitive endoscopic drainage with selective percutaneous drainage is effective in the management of pancreatic necrotic collections. Early drainage should be considered in patients who developed severe sepsis.

Long-term follow-up study of necrotising pancreatitis: interventions, complications and quality of life.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the long-term consequences of necrotising pancreatitis, including complications, the need for interventions and the quality of life. DESIGN: Long-term follow-up of a prospective multicentre cohort of 373 necrotising pancreatitis patients (2005-2008) was performed. Patients were prospectively evaluated and received questionnaires. Readmissions (ie, for recurrent or chronic pancreatitis), interventions, pancreatic insufficiency and quality of life were compared between initial treatment groups: conservative, endoscopic/percutaneous drainage alone and necrosectomy. Associations of patient and disease characteristics during index admission with outcomes during follow-up were assessed. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 13.5 years (range 12-15.5 years), 97/373 patients (26%) were readmitted for recurrent pancreatitis. Endoscopic or percutaneous drainage was performed in 47/373 patients (13%), of whom 21/47 patients (45%) were initially treated conservatively. Pancreatic necrosectomy or pancreatic surgery was performed in 31/373 patients (8%), without differences between treatment groups. Endocrine insufficiency (126/373 patients; 34%) and exocrine insufficiency (90/373 patients; 38%), developed less often following conservative treatment (p<0.001 and p=0.016, respectively). Quality of life scores did not differ between groups. Pancreatic gland necrosis >50% during initial admission was associated with percutaneous/endoscopic drainage (OR 4.3 (95% CI 1.5 to 12.2)), pancreatic surgery (OR 3.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 9.5) and development of endocrine insufficiency (OR13.1 (95% CI 5.3 to 32.0) and exocrine insufficiency (OR6.1 (95% CI 2.4 to 15.5) during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Acute necrotising pancreatitis carries a substantial disease burden during long-term follow-up in terms of recurrent disease, the necessity for interventions and development of pancreatic insufficiency, even when treated conservatively during the index admission. Extensive (>50%) pancreatic parenchymal necrosis seems to be an important predictor of interventions and complications during follow-up.

The First Successful Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure Caused by Severe Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Case Report.

Liver transplantation (LT) is the only life-saving option when acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) does not improve with conservative therapy. Acute pancreatitis (AP) can cause chronic liver disease progression to ACLF. However, deceased donor LT for patients with AP has had mixed results, and no consensus has been established regarding the indication for LT. We report the first successful living donor LT (LDLT) for ACLF caused by severe AP. The 38-year-old patient with alcoholic liver disease was transferred to our institute with worsening refractory ascites. During the pretransplant workup, she developed severe acute necrotizing pancreatitis, resulting in grade 3 ACLF. The patient's clinical course was further complicated by high levels of donor-specific antibodies and immune thrombocytopenia. The AP gradually improved after intensive care combined with artificial liver support. The patient successfully underwent urgent LDLT with upfront splenectomy and desensitization therapy, including plasm exchange, high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin, and anti-thymocyte globulin. No infection or recurrence of AP was observed postoperatively. We conclude that LDLT is a feasible option for ACLF patients caused by severe AP if a deceased donor is not readily available.

Contemporary management of acute pancreatitis: What you need to know.

ABSTRACT: Acute pancreatitis and management of its complications is a common consult for the acute care surgeon. With the ongoing development of both operative and endoscopic treatment modalities, management recommendations continue to evolve. We describe the current diagnostic and treatment guidelines for acute pancreatitis through the lens of acute care surgery. Topics, including optimal nutrition, timing of cholecystectomy in gallstone pancreatitis, and the management of peripancreatic fluid collections, are discussed. Although the management severe acute pancreatitis can include advanced interventional modalities including endoscopic, percutaneous, and surgical debridement, the initial management of acute pancreatitis includes fluid resuscitation, early enteral nutrition, and close monitoring with consideration of cross-sectional imaging and antibiotics in the setting of suspected superimposed infection. Several scoring systems including the Revised Atlanta Criteria, the Bedside Index for Severity in Acute Pancreatitis score, and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grade have been devised to classify and predict the development of the severe acute pancreatitis. In biliary pancreatitis, cholecystectomy prior to discharge is recommended in mild disease and within 8 weeks of necrotizing pancreatitis, while early peripancreatic fluid collections should be managed without intervention. Underlying infection or ongoing symptoms warrant delayed intervention with technique selection dependent on local expertise, anatomic location of the fluid collection, and the specific clinical scenario. Landmark trials have shifted therapy from maximally invasive necrosectomy to more minimally invasive step-up approaches. The acute care surgeon should maintain a skill set that includes these minimally invasive techniques to successfully manage these patients. Overall, the management of acute pancreatitis for the acute care surgeon requires a strong understanding of both the clinical decisions and the options for intervention should this be necessary.

Treatment of walled-off necrosis using lumen-apposing metal stents versus plastic stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Walled-off necrosis (WON) is highly morbid disease most effectively managed by endoscopic drainage with lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) or plastic stents, with or without necrosectomy. This meta-analysis compared the clinical outcomes of patients included in randomized trials treated using LAMSs or plastic stents. METHODS: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched to identify all data collected from randomized trials comparing LAMSs and plastic stents for the treatment of WON. The primary outcome measure was need for endoscopic necrosectomy. RESULTS: Three studies comprising 206 patients met inclusion criteria. Except for procedure duration, which was significantly shorter for LAMSs (standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.22, 95%CI -1.64 to -0.79), there was no significant difference in need for necrosectomy (38.5% vs. 41.2%; risk ratio [RR] 1.07, 95%CI 0.79-1.45), number of interventions (SMD -0.09, 95%CI -0.40 to 0.22), treatment success (90.7% vs. 94.5%; RR 0.96, 95%CI 0.87-1.06), recurrence (4.6% vs. 0.6%; RR 3.73, 95%CI 0.42-33.0), readmission (42.6% vs. 50.2%; RR 0.84, 95%CI 0.62-1.14), length of hospitalization (SMD -0.06, 95%CI -0.55 to 0.43), mortality (8.5% vs. 9.8%; RR 0.70, 95%CI 0.30-1.66), new-onset organ failure (10.6% vs. 14.6%; RR 0.72, 95%CI 0.16-3.32), bleeding (11.0% vs. 10.7%; RR 1.09, 95%CI 0.34-3.44), procedural adverse events (23.6% vs. 19.2%; RR 1.38, 95%CI 0.82-2.33), or overall costs (SMD -0.04, 95%CI -0.31 to 0.24) between LAMSs and plastic stents, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Except for procedure duration, there is no significant difference in clinical outcomes for patients with WON treated using LAMSs or plastic stents.