Japanese guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis: Japanese Guidelines 2015.

BACKGROUND: Japanese (JPN) guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis were published in 2006. The severity assessment criteria for acute pancreatitis were later revised by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) in 2008, leading to their publication as the JPN Guidelines 2010. Following the 2012 revision of the Atlanta Classifications of Acute Pancreatitis, in which the classifications of regional complications of pancreatitis were revised, the development of a minimally invasive method for local complications of pancreatitis spread, and emerging evidence was gathered and revised into the JPN Guidelines. METHODS: A comprehensive evaluation was carried out on the evidence for epidemiology, diagnosis, severity, treatment, post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis and clinical indicators, based on the concepts of the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). With the graded recommendations, where the evidence was unclear, Meta-Analysis team for JPN Guidelines 2015 conducted an additional new meta-analysis, the results of which were included in the guidelines. RESULTS: Thirty-nine questions were prepared in 17 subject areas, for which 43 recommendations were made. The 17 subject areas were: Diagnosis, Diagnostic imaging, Etiology, Severity assessment, Transfer indication, Fluid therapy, Nasogastric tube, Pain control, Antibiotics prophylaxis, Protease inhibitor, Nutritional support, Intensive care, management of Biliary Pancreatitis, management of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome, Interventions for the local complications, Post-ERCP pancreatitis and Clinical Indicator (Pancreatitis Bundles 2015). Meta-analysis was conducted in the following four subject areas based on randomized controlled trials: (1) prophylactic antibiotics use; (2) prophylactic pancreatic stent placement for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis; (3) prophylactic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis; and (4) peritoneal lavage. Using the results of the meta-analysis, recommendations were graded to create useful information. In addition, a mobile application was developed, which made it possible to diagnose, assess severity and check pancreatitis bundles. CONCLUSIONS: The JPN Guidelines 2015 were prepared using the most up-to-date methods, and including the latest recommended medical treatments, and we are confident that this will make them easy for many clinicians to use, and will provide a useful tool in the decision-making process for the treatment of patients, and optimal medical support. The free mobile application and calculator for the JPN Guidelines 2015 is available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/jpn-guideline2015.html.

[Retropharyngo-esophageal hematoma treated by open paramedian tracheostomy].

Forty eight year-old woman with untreated liver cirrhosis was transferred to our critical care and emergency center because of airway crisis due to retropharyngo-esophageal hematoma after slight chest contusion. We performed emergency tracheal intubation beyond stenotic part of the trachea. The hematoma did not diminished in a few days. Although we considered tracheostomy, we hesitated to perform conventional median tracheostomy because of the risk of complication of infection of the hematoma which might require drainage or removal resulting in contamination between tracheostomy site and cervical wound. We performed paramedian tracheostomy by antero-lateral skin incision to avoid these risks. Fortunately, the patient did not require drainage of the retropharyngo-esophageal hematoma. Paramedian tracheostomy should be taken into account for patients with presumably contaminated cervical wound.

Duodenal perforation due to compression necrosis by the tip of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube.

Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is a common and safe procedure for enteral nutrition. There are few reports concerning its complications. We managed a 31-y-old bedridden case with punched out duodenal perforation without inflammation, from which the tip of the PEG tube protruded. Simple x-ray and computed tomography showed incarceration of the balloon in the duodenal bulb and extravasation of the tip of the tube. We performed simple closure with omental patching for duodenal perforation. Postoperative gastrointestinal fiberscopy on the 11th day revealed scar phase. Some PEG tubes have a balloon, which can prevent the removal of the tube, fix the position of the tube, and prevent the leakage of gastric contents from fistula. However, in our case, the inflated balloon was transferred into the duodenal bulb according to gastric strong peristalsis. This pathophysiologic mechanism is the same as ball bulb syndrome, which is known as gastroduodenal obstruction by incarceration of the gastric submucosal tumor. There is a risk of wedging of the inflated balloon of the PEG tube and perforation of the duodenum. We must not insert the tube too deeply, must not continue to inflate the balloon for a long time, and must check its position using a stethoscope, simple x-ray examination, or ultrasound.

Outcomes from prehospital cardiac arrest in blunt trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: There are few strategies for treating patients who have suffered cardiopulmonary arrest due to blunt trauma (BT-CPA). The aim of this population-based case series observational study was to clarify the outcome of BT-CPA patients treated with a standardized strategy that included an emergency department thoracotomy (EDT) under an emergency medical service (EMS) system with a rapid transportation system. METHODS: The 477 BT-CPA registry data were augmented by a review of the detailed medical records in our emergency department (ED) and action reports in the prehospital EMS records. RESULTS: Of those, 76% were witnessed and 20% were CPA after leaving the scene. In all, 18% of the patients went to the intensive care unit (ICU), the transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) room, or the operating room (OR). Only 3% survived to be discharged. Among the 363 witnessed patients-11 of whom had ventricular fibrillation (VF) as the initial rhythm, 134 exhibiting pulseless electrical activity (PEA), and 221 with asystole-13, 1, and 3%, respectively, survived to discharge. The most common initial rhythm just after collapse was not VF but PEA, and asystole increased over the 7 min after collapse. There were no differences in the interval between arrival at the hospital and the return of spontaneous circulation between the patients that survived to discharge and deceased patients in the ED, OR, TAE room, or ICU. The longest interval was 17 min. CONCLUSIONS: In BT-CPA patients, a 20-min resuscitation effort and termination of the effort are thought to be relevant. The initial rhythm is not a prognostic indicator. We believe that the decision on whether to undertake aggressive resuscitation efforts should be made on a case-by-case basis.

Post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Pancreatitis remains the most common severe complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Detailed information about the findings of previous studies concerning post-ERCP pancreatitis has not been utilized sufficiently. The purpose of the present article was to present guidelines for the diagnostic criteria of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and its incidence, risk factors, and prophylactic procedures that are supported by evidence. To achieve this purpose, a critical examination was made of the articles on post-ERCP pancreatitis, based on the data obtained by research studies published up to 2009. At present, there are no standardized diagnostic criteria for post-ERCP pancreatitis. It is appropriate that post-ERCP pancreatitis is defined as acute pancreatitis that has developed following ERCP, and its diagnosis and severity assessment should be made according to the diagnostic criteria and severity assessment of the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. The incidence of acute pancreatitis associated with diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP is 0.4-1.5 and 1.6-5.4%, respectively. Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation is associated with a high risk of acute pancreatitis compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy. It was made clear that important risk factors include dysfunction of the Oddi sphincter, being of the female sex, past history of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and performance of pancreaticography. Temporary prophylactic placement of pancreatic stents in the high-risk group is useful for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis [odds ratio (OR) 3.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-6.4, number needed to treat (NNT) 10]. Use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is associated with a reduction in the development of post-ERCP pancreatitis (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.32-0.65). Single rectal administration of NSAIDs is useful for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis [relative risk (RR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.22-0.60, NNT 15] and decreases the development of pancreatitis in both the low-risk group (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.12-0.71) and the high-risk group (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23-0.72) of post-ERCP pancreatitis. As for somatostatin, a bolus injection may be most useful compared with short- or long-term infusion (OR 0.271, 95% CI 0.138-0.536, risk difference 8.2%, 95% CI 4.4-12.0%). The usefulness of gabexate mesilate was not apparent in any of the following conditions: acute pancreatitis (control 5.7 vs. 4.8% for gabexate mesilate), hyperamylasemia (40.6 vs. 36.9%), and abdominal pain (1.7 vs. 8.9%). Formulation of diagnostic criteria for post-ERCP pancreatitis is needed. Temporary prophylactic placement of pancreatic stents in the high-risk group offers the most promise as a means of preventing post-ERCP pancreatitis. As for pharmacological attempts, there are high expectations concerning NSAIDs because they are excellent in terms of cost-effectiveness, ease of use, and safety. There was no evidence of effective prophylaxis with the use of protease inhibitors, especially gabexate mesilate.

Therapeutic intervention and surgery of acute pancreatitis.

The clinical course of acute pancreatitis varies from mild to severe. Assessment of severity and etiology of acute pancreatitis is important to determine the strategy of management for acute pancreatitis. Acute pancreatitis is classified according to its morphology into edematous pancreatitis and necrotizing pancreatitis. Edematous pancreatitis accounts for 80-90% of acute pancreatitis and remission can be achieved in most of the patients without receiving any special treatment. Necrotizing pancreatitis occupies 10-20% of acute pancreatitis and the mortality rate is reported to be 14-25%. The mortality rate is particularly high (34-40%) for infected pancreatic necrosis that is accompanied by bacterial infection in the necrotic tissue of the pancreas (Widdison and Karanjia in Br J Surg 80:148-154, 1993; Ogawa et al. in Research of the actual situations of acute pancreatitis. Research Group for Specific Retractable Diseases, Specific Disease Measure Research Work Sponsored by Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare. Heisei 12 Research Report, pp 17-33, 2001). On the other hand, the mortality rate is reported to be 0-11% for sterile pancreatic necrosis which is not accompanied by bacterial infection (Ogawa et al. 2001; Bradely and Allen in Am J Surg 161:19-24, 1991; Rattner et al. in Am J Surg 163:105-109, 1992). The Japanese (JPN) Guidelines were designed to provide recommendations regarding the management of acute pancreatitis in patients having a variety of clinical characteristics. This article describes the guidelines for the surgical management and interventional therapy of acute pancreatitis by incorporating the latest evidence for the management of acute pancreatitis in the Japanese-language version of JPN guidelines 2010. Eleven clinical questions (CQ) are proposed: (1) worsening clinical manifestations and hematological data, positive blood bacteria culture test, positive blood endotoxin test, and the presence of gas bubbles in and around the pancreas on CT scan are indirect findings of infected pancreatic necrosis; (2) bacteriological examination by fine needle aspiration is useful for making a definitive diagnosis of infected pancreatic necrosis; (3) conservative treatment should be performed in sterile pancreatic necrosis; (4) infected pancreatic necrosis is an indication for interventional therapy. However, conservative treatment by antibiotic administration is also available in patients who are in stable general condition; (5) early surgery for necrotizing pancreatitis is not recommended, and it should be delayed as long as possible; (6) necrosectomy is recommended as a surgical procedure for infected necrosis; (7) after necrosectomy, a long-term follow-up paying attention to pancreatic function and complications including the stricture of the bile duct and the pancreatic duct is necessary; (8) drainage including percutaneous, endoscopic and surgical procedure should be performed for pancreatic abscess; (9) if the clinical findings of pancreatic abscess are not improved by percutaneous or endoscopic drainage, surgical drainage should be performed; (10) interventional treatment should be performed for pancreatic pseudocysts that give rise to symptoms, accompany complications or increase the diameter of cysts and (11) percutaneous drainage, endoscopic drainage or surgical procedures are selected in accordance with the conditions of individual cases.

Lethal perianal infection with septic shock: how should we manage this critical condition?

Some patients with perianal infection fall into a critical condition with severe sepsis and septic shock (lethal perianal infection). The objective of this study is to clarify the clinicopathological characteristics of, and treatment strategies for, lethal perianal infection. The clinical records of 7 patients with lethal perianal infection were examined. For two rapidly dying cases (within 3 days), we performed resection of the rectum or local anal drainage as a primary management of damage control. These patients were transferred to our center because of septic shock and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) and had received insufficient fluid resuscitation in the previous hospital. Another nonsurviving case who died on the 16th day was transferred without MODS and underwent perianal drainage but could not recover from shock, even after repeated surgical procedures were performed. To prevent a perianal infection from becoming lethal, it should be managed as early as possible with sufficient fluid resuscitation with adequate drainage.

Gastrointestinal fiberscopic findings after simple closure for perforated duodenal ulcer in the early postoperative phase: from experience to evidence by evaluation of the healing process.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Today, in light of widespread adoption of H2-RA and PPI, the standard surgical procedure for perforated duodenal ulcer (PDU) is simple closure and/or omental patch (SC). However, the healing process after these techniques has not been fully examined. We have not yet confirmed the propriety of simple suture of the bottom of the ulcer. This technique has been performed based only on experience, and there is insufficient evidence to conclude that this procedure can be definitively considered a safe therapeutic technique for the majority of patients with PDU. The aim of this study is to clarify the macroscopic findings of the healing process after SC for PDU. METHODOLOGY: Thirteen patients with PDU who were treated with SC underwent postoperative gastroduodenal fiberscopy (GF) at the 7th-16th postoperative day and the healing process was monitored under sufficient informed consent. Patients with severe preoperative disease were excluded from the study. Healing condition of the ulcer and stitches, deformity, and stenosis were evaluated by postoperative endoscopy. Possible adverse effects that were evaluated included: perforation, rise in fever, worsening of inflammation on laboratory data, gastrointestinal symptoms such as abdominal pain, sense of fullness, and vomiting. The indications for SC were as follows: PDU with 1) no stenosis and 2) no prominent ulcer ridge. The surgical technique was as follows: 1) interrupted simple closure with no trimming and debridement of wound (4-5 stitches) with absorbable monofilament suture, and/or 2) omental patch, 3) administration of H2-RA (or PPI) just after operation, and 4) oral feeding 4-5 days after operation independent of postoperative GF. RESULTS: GF findings in 2 patients showed active and healing stage, in whom surgical technique was thought to be insufficient; the ulcer had been large and included a descending portion, or a small perforation had occurred in the large ulcer bottom (the distance between the stitches and the edge of the ulcer was insufficient). In the other 11 patients, GF findings showed scar phase. There was no morbidity related to endoscopic procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Sutured PDU with SC will be in the scar phase in 1 or 2 weeks. Postoperative GF 1 week after SC for PDU is thought to be a safe examination. This study is a primitive study of a small group, and more cases that can adequately show the frequency of complications and indicate the overall safety of the procedure are needed.