Covered versus bare-metal stenting of the mesenteric arteries in patients with chronic mesenteric ischaemia (CoBaGI): a multicentre, patient-blinded and investigator-blinded, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Mesenteric artery stenting with a bare-metal stent is the current treatment for atherosclerotic chronic mesenteric ischaemia. Long-term patency of bare-metal stents is unsatisfactory due to in-stent intimal hyperplasia. Use of covered stents might improve long-term patency. We aimed to compare the patency of covered stents and bare-metal stents in patients with chronic mesenteric ischaemia. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, patient-blinded and investigator-blinded, randomised controlled trial including patients with chronic mesenteric ischaemia undergoing mesenteric artery stenting. Six centres in the Netherlands participated in this study, including two national chronic mesenteric ischaemia expert centres. Patients aged 18 years or older were eligible for inclusion when an endovascular mesenteric artery revascularisation was scheduled and a consensus diagnosis of chronic mesenteric ischaemia was made by a multidisciplinary team of gastroenterologists, interventional radiologists, and vascular surgeons. Exclusion criteria were stenosis length of 25 mm or greater, stenosis caused by median arcuate ligament syndrome or vasculitis, contraindication for CT angiography, or previous target vessel revascularisation. Digital 1:1 block randomisation with block sizes of four or six and stratification by inclusion centre was used to allocate patients to undergo stenting with bare-metal stents or covered stents at the start of the procedure. Patients, physicians performing follow-up, investigators, and radiologists were masked to treatment allocation. Interventionalists performing the procedure were not masked. The primary study outcome was the primary patency of covered stents and bare-metal stents at 24 months of follow-up, evaluated in the modified intention-to-treat population, in which stents with missing data for the outcome were excluded. Loss of primary patency was defined as the performance of a re-intervention to preserve patency, or 75% or greater luminal surface area reduction of the target vessel. CT angiography was performed at 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months post intervention to assess patency. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02428582) and is complete. FINDINGS: Between April 6, 2015, and March 11, 2019, 158 eligible patients underwent mesenteric artery stenting procedures, of whom 94 patients (with 128 stents) provided consent and were included in the study. 47 patients (62 stents) were assigned to the covered stents group (median age 69·0 years [IQR 63·0-76·5], 28 [60%] female) and 47 patients (66 stents) were assigned to the bare-metal stents group (median age 70·0 years [63·5-76·5], 33 [70%] female). At 24 months, the primary patency of covered stents (42 [81%] of 52 stents) was superior to that of bare-metal stents (26 [49%] of 53; odds ratio [OR] 4·4 [95% CI 1·8-10·5]; p<0·0001). A procedure-related adverse event occurred in 17 (36%) of 47 patients in the covered stents group versus nine (19%) of 47 in the bare-metal stent group (OR 2·4 [95% CI 0·9-6·3]; p=0·065). Most adverse events were related to the access site, including haematoma (five [11%] in the covered stents group vs six [13%] in the bare-metal stents group), pseudoaneurysm (five [11%] vs two [4%]), radial artery thrombosis (one [2%] vs none), and intravascular closure device (none vs one [2%]). Six (13%) patients in the covered stent group versus one (2%) in the bare-metal stent group had procedure-related adverse events not related to the access site, including stent luxation (three [6%] vs none), major bleeding (two (4%) vs none), mesenteric artery perforation (one [2%] vs one [2%]), mesenteric artery dissection (one [2%] vs one [2%]), and death (one [2%] vs none). INTERPRETATION: The findings of this trial support the use of covered stents for mesenteric artery stenting in patients with chronic mesenteric ischaemia. FUNDING: Atrium Maquet Getinge Group.

The Dutch chronic lower limb-threatening ischemia registry (THRILLER): A study protocol for popliteal and infrapopliteal endovascular interventions.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is the end stage of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and is associated with high amputation rates, mortality and disease-related health care costs. In infrapopliteal arterial disease (IPAD), endovascular revascularization should be considered for the majority of anatomical and clinical subgroups of CLTI. However, a gap of high-quality evidence exists in this field. The aim of the Dutch Chronic Lower Limb-Threatening Ischemia Registry (THRILLER) is to collect real world data on popliteal and infrapopliteal endovascular interventions. METHODS: THRILLER is a clinician-driven, prospective, multicenter, observational registry including all consecutive patients that undergo a popliteal or infrapopliteal endovascular intervention in seven Dutch hospitals. We estimate that THRILLER will include 400-500 interventions annually. Standardized follow-up visits with wound monitoring, toe pressure measurement and duplex ultrasonography will be scheduled at 6-8 weeks and 12 months after the intervention. The independent primary endpoints are primary patency, limb salvage and amputation free survival. Patients must give informed consent before participation and will be included according to predefined reporting standards. A data log of patients who meet the inclusion criteria but are not included in the registry will be maintained. We intend to conduct the first interim analysis two years after the start of inclusion. The results will be published in a scientific journal. DISCUSSION: Despite innovations in medical therapy and revascularization techniques, patients with CLTI undergoing endovascular revascularization still have a moderate prognosis. Previous prospective cohort studies were hampered by small sample sizes or heterogeneous reporting. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have high costs, potential conflicts of interest and give a limited reflection of daily practice. THRILLER aims to provide the largest prospective well phenotyped up-to-date dataset on treatment outcomes in CLTI patients to answer multiple underexplored research questions regarding diagnostics, medication, patient selection, treatment strategies and post intervention follow-up.

Patient selection for urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography by endoscopic ultrasound in predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis (APEC-2): a multicentre prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Routine urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (ES) does not improve outcome in patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis. Improved patient selection for ERCP by means of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) for stone/sludge detection may challenge these findings. DESIGN: A multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis. Patients underwent urgent EUS, followed by ERCP with ES in case of common bile duct stones/sludge, within 24 hours after hospital presentation and within 72 hours after symptom onset. The primary endpoint was a composite of major complications or mortality within 6 months after inclusion. The historical control group was the conservative treatment arm (n=113) of the randomised APEC trial (Acute biliary Pancreatitis: urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment, patient inclusion 2013-2017) applying the same study design. RESULTS: Overall, 83 patients underwent urgent EUS at a median of 21 hours (IQR 17-23) after hospital presentation and at a median of 29 hours (IQR 23-41) after start of symptoms. Gallstones/sludge in the bile ducts were detected by EUS in 48/83 patients (58%), all of whom underwent immediate ERCP with ES. The primary endpoint occurred in 34/83 patients (41%) in the urgent EUS-guided ERCP group. This was not different from the 44% rate (50/113 patients) in the historical conservative treatment group (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.29; p=0.65). Sensitivity analysis to correct for baseline differences using a logistic regression model also showed no significant beneficial effect of the intervention on the primary outcome (adjusted OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.90, p=0.92). CONCLUSION: In patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis, urgent EUS-guided ERCP with ES did not reduce the composite endpoint of major complications or mortality, as compared with conservative treatment in a historical control group. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN15545919.

Vessel Preparation in Infrapopliteal Arterial Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Infrapopliteal lesions are generally complex to treat due to small vessel diameter, long lesion length, multilevel disease, and severe calcification. Therefore, different vessel preparation devices have been developed to contribute to better peri- and postprocedural outcomes. This systematic review aims to compare different vessel preparation techniques prior to plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) or drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty with POBA or DCB alone in infrapopliteal arterial disease. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies published between 2000 and 2022 assessing the value of adjunctive vessel preparation in infrapopliteal arterial disease. The primary outcomes were 12-month primary patency and limb salvage. RESULTS: A total of 1685 patients with 1913 lesions were included in 11 POBA studies. Methodological quality was assessed as poor to moderate in these studies. Only 2 studies with 144 patients assessed vessel preparation in conjunction with DCB angioplasty. These randomized trials were assessed as high quality and found no significant benefit of adjunctive atherectomy to DCB angioplasty. The pooled Kaplan-Meier estimates of 12-month primary patency and limb salvage in the POBA studies were 67.8% and 80.9% for POBA, 62.1% and 86.4% for scoring balloons, 67.9% and 79.6% for mechanical atherectomy (MA), and 79.7% and 82.6% for laser atherectomy, respectively. Within the pooled data only scoring balloons and MA demonstrated significantly improved 12-month limb salvage compared to POBA. CONCLUSIONS: Different forms of adjunctive vessel preparation demonstrate similar 12-month outcomes compared to POBA and DCB angioplasty alone in infrapopliteal disease, with the exception of improved 12-month limb salvage in scoring balloons and MA. However, since the included studies were heterogeneous and assessed as poor to moderate methodological quality, selection bias may have played an important role. Main conclusion is that this systematic review found no additional value of standard use of vessel preparation. CLINICAL IMPACT: Infrapopliteal arterial disease is associated with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and generally complex to treat due to small vessel diameter, long lesion length, multilevel disease and severe calcification. A wide range of vessel preparation devices have been developed to contribute to improved peri- and postprocedural outcomes in these complex lesions. This systematic review aims to compare different vessel preparation techniques prior to plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) or drug coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty with POBA or DCB angioplasty alone in infrapopliteal arterial disease. Different forms of adjunctive vessel preparation demonstrate similar 12-month outcomes compared to POBA and DCB angioplasty alone in infrapopliteal disease, with the exception of improved 12-month limb salvage in scoring balloons and mechanical atherectomy (MA). However, since the included studies were heterogeneous and assessed as poor to moderate methodological quality, selection bias may have played an important role. Main conclusion is that this systematic review found no additional value of standard use of vessel preparation.

Optimal timing of cholecystectomy after necrotising biliary pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: Following an episode of acute biliary pancreatitis, cholecystectomy is advised to prevent recurrent biliary events. There is limited evidence regarding the optimal timing and safety of cholecystectomy in patients with necrotising biliary pancreatitis. DESIGN: A post hoc analysis of a multicentre prospective cohort. Patients with biliary pancreatitis and a CT severity score of three or more were included in 27 Dutch hospitals between 2005 and 2014. Primary outcome was the optimal timing of cholecystectomy in patients with necrotising biliary pancreatitis, defined as: the optimal point in time with the lowest risk of recurrent biliary events and the lowest risk of complications of cholecystectomy. Secondary outcomes were the number of recurrent biliary events, periprocedural complications of cholecystectomy and the protective value of endoscopic sphincterotomy for the recurrence of biliary events. RESULTS: Overall, 248 patients were included in the analysis. Cholecystectomy was performed in 191 patients (77%) at a median of 103 days (P25-P75: 46-222) after discharge. Infected necrosis after cholecystectomy occurred in four (2%) patients with persistent peripancreatic collections. Before cholecystectomy, 66 patients (27%) developed biliary events. The risk of overall recurrent biliary events prior to cholecystectomy was significantly lower before 10 weeks after discharge (risk ratio 0.49 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.90); p=0.02). The risk of recurrent pancreatitis before cholecystectomy was significantly lower before 8 weeks after discharge (risk ratio 0.14 (95% CI 0.02 to 1.0); p=0.02). The complication rate of cholecystectomy did not decrease over time. Endoscopic sphincterotomy did not reduce the risk of recurrent biliary events (OR 1.40 (95% CI 0.74 to 2.83)). CONCLUSION: The optimal timing of cholecystectomy after necrotising biliary pancreatitis, in the absence of peripancreatic collections, is within 8 weeks after discharge.

Short-Term Clinical Outcomes of Single Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Infrainguinal Endovascular Treatment for Peripheral Arterial Disease.

After infrainguinal endovascular treatment for peripheral arterial disease (PAD), it is uncertain whether single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) or dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) should be preferred. This study investigated major adverse limb events (MALE) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) between patients receiving SAPT and DAPT. Patient data from three centers in the Netherlands were retrospectively collected and analyzed. All patients treated for PAD by endovascular revascularization of the superficial femoral, popliteal, or below-the-knee (BTK) arteries and who were prescribed acetylsalicylic acid or clopidogrel, were included. End points were 1-, 3-, and 12-month MALE and MACE, and bleeding complications. In total, 237 patients (258 limbs treated) were included, with 149 patients receiving SAPT (63%) and 88 DAPT (37%). No significant differences were found after univariate and multivariate analyses between SAPT and DAPT on 1-, 3-, and 12-month MALE and MACE, or bleeding outcomes. Subgroup analyses of patients with BTK treatment showed a significantly lower 12-month MALE rate when treated with DAPT (hazard ratio 0.33; 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.95; p = 0.04). In conclusion, although patient numbers were small, no differences were found between SAPT and DAPT regarding MALE, MACE, or bleeding complications. DAPT should, however, be considered over SAPT for the subgroup of patients with below-the-knee endovascular treatment.

Urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment in predicted severe acute gallstone pancreatitis (APEC): a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with biliary sphincterotomy improves the outcome of patients with gallstone pancreatitis without concomitant cholangitis. We did a randomised trial to compare urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment in patients with predicted severe acute gallstone pancreatitis. METHODS: In this multicentre, parallel-group, assessor-masked, randomised controlled superiority trial, patients with predicted severe (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score ≥8, Imrie score ≥3, or C-reactive protein concentration >150 mg/L) gallstone pancreatitis without cholangitis were assessed for eligibility in 26 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a web-based randomisation module with randomly varying block sizes to urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy (within 24 h after hospital presentation) or conservative treatment. The primary endpoint was a composite of mortality or major complications (new-onset persistent organ failure, cholangitis, bacteraemia, pneumonia, pancreatic necrosis, or pancreatic insufficiency) within 6 months of randomisation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN97372133. FINDINGS: Between Feb 28, 2013, and March 1, 2017, 232 patients were randomly assigned to urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy (n=118) or conservative treatment (n=114). One patient from each group was excluded from the final analysis because of cholangitis (urgent ERCP group) and chronic pancreatitis (conservative treatment group) at admission. The primary endpoint occurred in 45 (38%) of 117 patients in the urgent ERCP group and in 50 (44%) of 113 patients in the conservative treatment group (risk ratio [RR] 0·87, 95% CI 0·64-1·18; p=0·37). No relevant differences in the individual components of the primary endpoint were recorded between groups, apart from the occurrence of cholangitis (two [2%] of 117 in the urgent ERCP group vs 11 [10%] of 113 in the conservative treatment group; RR 0·18, 95% CI 0·04-0·78; p=0·010). Adverse events were reported in 87 (74%) of 118 patients in the urgent ERCP group versus 91 (80%) of 114 patients in the conservative treatment group. INTERPRETATION: In patients with predicted severe gallstone pancreatitis but without cholangitis, urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy did not reduce the composite endpoint of major complications or mortality, compared with conservative treatment. Our findings support a conservative strategy in patients with predicted severe acute gallstone pancreatitis with an ERCP indicated only in patients with cholangitis or persistent cholestasis. FUNDING: The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, Fonds NutsOhra, and the Dutch Patient Organization for Pancreatic Diseases.

European guidelines on chronic mesenteric ischaemia - joint United European Gastroenterology, European Association for Gastroenterology, Endoscopy and Nutrition, European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology, Netherlands Association of Hepatogastroenterologists, Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology, Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe, and Dutch Mesenteric Ischemia Study group clinical guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of patients with chronic mesenteric ischaemia.

Chronic mesenteric ischaemia is a severe and incapacitating disease, causing complaints of post-prandial pain, fear of eating and weight loss. Even though chronic mesenteric ischaemia may progress to acute mesenteric ischaemia, chronic mesenteric ischaemia remains an underappreciated and undertreated disease entity. Probable explanations are the lack of knowledge and awareness among physicians and the lack of a gold standard diagnostic test. The underappreciation of this disease results in diagnostic delays, underdiagnosis and undertreating of patients with chronic mesenteric ischaemia, potentially resulting in fatal acute mesenteric ischaemia. This guideline provides a comprehensive overview and repository of the current evidence and multidisciplinary expert agreement on pertinent issues regarding diagnosis and treatment, and provides guidance in the multidisciplinary field of chronic mesenteric ischaemia.

Isolated left vertebral artery and its consequences for aortic arch repair.

A left vertebral artery (LVA) originating directly from the aortic arch is the second most common supra-aortic branching anomaly. This isolated LVA can also terminate in the posterior inferior cerebellar artery without contributing to the circle of Willis, limiting treatment options, especially in cases with an incomplete circle. Here, we describe our consideration of the treatment options for a 79-year-old patient with a large distal aortic arch aneurysm combined with an isolated LVA and incomplete circle of Willis that may endanger adequate (intraoperative) cerebral perfusion.

Impact of characteristics of organ failure and infected necrosis on mortality in necrotising pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with pancreatitis, early persisting organ failure is believed to be the most important cause of mortality. This study investigates the relation between the timing (onset and duration) of organ failure and mortality and its association with infected pancreatic necrosis in patients with necrotising pancreatitis. DESIGN: We performed a post hoc analysis of a prospective database of 639 patients with necrotising pancreatitis from 21 hospitals. We evaluated the onset, duration and type of organ failure (ie, respiratory, cardiovascular and renal failure) and its association with mortality and infected pancreatic necrosis. RESULTS: In total, 240 of 639 (38%) patients with necrotising pancreatitis developed organ failure. Persistent organ failure (ie, any type or combination) started in the first week in 51% of patients with 42% mortality, in 13% during the second week with 46% mortality and in 36% after the second week with 29% mortality. Mortality in patients with persistent multiple organ failure lasting <1 week, 1-2 weeks, 2-3 weeks or longer than 3 weeks was 43%, 38%, 46% and 52%, respectively (p=0.68). Mortality was higher in patients with organ failure alone than in patients with organ failure and infected pancreatic necrosis (44% vs 29%, p=0.04). However, when excluding patients with very early mortality (within 10 days of admission), patients with organ failure with or without infected pancreatic necrosis had similar mortality rates (28% vs 34%, p=0.33). CONCLUSION: In patients with necrotising pancreatitis, early persistent organ failure is not associated with increased mortality when compared with persistent organ failure which develops further on during the disease course. Furthermore, no association was found between the duration of organ failure and mortality.

Superiority of Step-up Approach vs Open Necrosectomy in Long-term Follow-up of Patients With Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In a 2010 randomized trial (the PANTER trial), a surgical step-up approach for infected necrotizing pancreatitis was found to reduce the composite endpoint of death or major complications compared with open necrosectomy; 35% of patients were successfully treated with simple catheter drainage only. There is concern, however, that minimally invasive treatment increases the need for reinterventions for residual peripancreatic necrotic collections and other complications during the long term. We therefore performed a long-term follow-up study. METHODS: We reevaluated all the 73 patients (of the 88 patients randomly assigned to groups) who were still alive after the index admission, at a mean 86 months (±11 months) of follow-up. We collected data on all clinical and health care resource utilization endpoints through this follow-up period. The primary endpoint was death or major complications (the same as for the PANTER trial). We also measured exocrine insufficiency, quality of life (using the Short Form-36 and EuroQol 5 dimensions forms), and Izbicki pain scores. RESULTS: From index admission to long-term follow-up, 19 patients (44%) died or had major complications in the step-up group compared with 33 patients (73%) in the open-necrosectomy group (P = .005). Significantly lower proportions of patients in the step-up group had incisional hernias (23% vs 53%; P = .004), pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (29% vs 56%; P = .03), or endocrine insufficiency (40% vs 64%; P = .05). There were no significant differences between groups in proportions of patients requiring additional drainage procedures (11% vs 13%; P = .99) or pancreatic surgery (11% vs 5%; P = .43), or in recurrent acute pancreatitis, chronic pancreatitis, Izbicki pain scores, or medical costs. Quality of life increased during follow-up without a significant difference between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of long-term outcomes of trial participants, we found the step-up approach for necrotizing pancreatitis to be superior to open necrosectomy, without increased risk of reinterventions.

Below-the-Knee Retrograde Access for Peripheral Interventions: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To investigate the hypothesis that interventions involving retrograde below-the-knee (BTK) vessel punctures have an acceptably low complication rate and high procedural success. METHODS: A systematic review was performed of the MEDLINE and Scopus databases for articles describing the results of BTK retrograde access for peripheral interventions. Outcome measures were access success, procedure success, and complications. A predefined subgroup analysis was performed of prospective studies to reduce the influence of possible reporting bias on outcomes. RESULTS: Nineteen articles, including 3 prospective studies, were selected, including a total of 1905 interventions in 1395 patients (mean age 69.5 years; 918 men). The BTK vessels were punctured in 1168 (61.3%) of these interventions. Access was successful in 94.0% of BTK attempts, 86.0% of all lesions were successfully crossed using a retrograde access, and 84.0% of interventions achieved technical success. Forty-eight (4.1%) distal access site complications were reported. Vessel perforations were seen in 13 (1.1%) interventions, vasospasm in 5 (0.4%), and acute distal occlusions in 5 (0.4%). Predefined subgroup analysis of prospective studies showed similar results (p=0.24). CONCLUSION: A retrograde approach to facilitate peripheral endovascular interventions is a safe and successful technique and should be considered when an antegrade approach is not possible or fails to cross the lesion. Because of missing data on long-term outcomes and methodological shortcomings, real world data of retrograde access in nonexpert centers remains necessary before this technique can be advised to all interventionists dealing with peripheral artery disease.

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

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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 composite of major complications or death during 6-month follow-up. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN09186711. FINDINGS: Between Sept 20, 2011, and Jan 29, 2015, we screened 418 patients with pancreatic or extrapancreatic necrosis, of which 98 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the endoscopic step-up approach (n=51) or the surgical step-up approach (n=47). The primary endpoint occurred in 22 (43%) of 51 patients in the endoscopy group and in 21 (45%) of 47 patients in the surgery group (risk ratio [RR] 0·97, 95% CI 0·62-1·51; p=0·88). Mortality did not differ between groups (nine [18%] patients in the endoscopy group vs six [13%] patients in the surgery group; RR 1·38, 95% CI 0·53-3·59, p=0·50), nor did any of the major complications included in the primary endpoint. INTERPRETATION: In patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis, the endoscopic step-up approach was not superior to the surgical step-up approach in reducing major complications or death. The rate of pancreatic fistulas and length of hospital stay were lower in the endoscopy group. The outcome of this trial will probably result in a shift to the endoscopic step-up approach as treatment preference. FUNDING: The Dutch Digestive Disease Foundation, Fonds NutsOhra, and the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.

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

OBJECTIVE: 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. DESIGN: 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%). RESULTS: Among 1980 patients with necrotising pancreatitis, 1167 underwent open necrosectomy and 813 underwent minimally invasive surgical (n=467) or endoscopic (n=346) necrosectomy. There was a lower risk of death for minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy (OR, 0.53; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.84; p=0.006) and endoscopic necrosectomy (OR, 0.20; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.63; p=0.006). After propensity score matching with risk stratification, minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy remained associated with a lower risk of death than open necrosectomy in the very high-risk group (42/111 vs 59/111; risk ratio, 0.70; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.95; p=0.02). Endoscopic necrosectomy was associated with a lower risk of death than open necrosectomy in the high-risk group (3/40 vs 12/40; risk ratio, 0.27; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.88; p=0.03) and in the very high-risk group (12/57 vs 28/57; risk ratio, 0.43; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.77; p=0.005). CONCLUSION: In high-risk patients with necrotising pancreatitis, minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic necrosectomy are associated with reduced death rates compared with open necrosectomy.

Risk of Pancreatic Cancer After a Primary Episode of Acute Pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: Acute pancreatitis may be the first manifestation of pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the risk of pancreatic cancer after a first episode of acute pancreatitis. METHODS: Between March 2004 and March 2007, all consecutive patients with a first episode of acute pancreatitis were prospectively registered. Follow-up was based on hospital records audit, radiological imaging, and patient questionnaires. Outcome was stratified based on the development of chronic pancreatitis. RESULTS: We included 731 patients. The median follow-up time was 55 months. Progression to chronic pancreatitis was diagnosed in 51 patients (7.0%). In this group, the incidence rate per 1000 person-years for developing pancreatic cancer was 9.0 (95% confidence interval, 2.3-35.7). In the group of 680 patients who did not develop chronic pancreatitis, the incidence rate per 1000 person-years for developing pancreatic cancer in this group was 1.1 (95% confidence interval, 0.3-3.3). Hence, the rate ratio of pancreatic cancer was almost 9 times higher in patients who developed chronic pancreatitis compared with those who did not (P = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Although a first episode of acute pancreatitis may be related to pancreatic cancer, this risk is mainly present in patients who progress to chronic pancreatitis.

A Feasibility Study of Off-the-Shelf Scalloped Stent-Grafts in Acute Type B Aortic Dissection.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the applicability of an off-the-shelf scalloped stent-graft to preserve left subclavian artery (LSA) flow in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for acute type B aortic dissection. METHODS: The computed tomography angiograms (CTA) of 70 consecutive patients (median age 64 years; 44 men) with acute Stanford type B aortic dissection were retrospectively analyzed to identify patients in whom a short proximal landing zone (<15 mm from the retrogradely dissected wall layers) would require LSA overstenting during TEVAR. A scalloped stent-graft was deemed possible in those patients with the intimal entry tear located at least 20 mm distant from the LSA ostium. RESULTS: The LSA needed to be covered in 56 (80%) patients. Of these, an off-the-shelf scalloped stent-graft would have been applicable in 23 (41%) patients. In the latter group, the median aortic diameter was 31 mm (range 26-37), the median length of the LSA ostium was 13 mm (range 10-20), and the median width of the LSA ostium was 15 mm (range 11-24). Three differently sized off-the-shelf stent-grafts with the largest scallop possible could have adequately treated 20 (36%) of the 56 patients in the acute phase. CONCLUSION: In this single-center imaging-based study, involvement of the LSA in the setting of acute type B aortic dissection was seen in 80% of patients treated with TEVAR. Three off-the-shelf stent-grafts would suffice to treat one-third of these acute type B aortic dissections and may offer a relatively simple solution to preserve LSA flow, thereby lowering the risk of malperfusion of the (posterior) cerebrum, spinal cord, and left arm in an urgent/emergent setting.

Describing Peripancreatic Collections According to the Revised Atlanta Classification of Acute Pancreatitis: An International Interobserver Agreement Study.

OBJECTIVES: Severe acute pancreatitis is associated with peripancreatic morphologic changes as seen on imaging. Uniform communication regarding these morphologic findings is crucial for accurate diagnosis and treatment. For the original 1992 Atlanta classification, interobserver agreement is poor. We hypothesized that for the revised Atlanta classification, interobserver agreement will be better. METHODS: An international, interobserver agreement study was performed among expert and nonexpert radiologists (n = 14), surgeons (n = 15), and gastroenterologists (n = 8). Representative computed tomographies of all stages of acute pancreatitis were selected from 55 patients and were assessed according to the revised Atlanta classification. The interobserver agreement was calculated among all reviewers and subgroups, that is, expert and nonexpert reviewers; interobserver agreement was defined as poor (≤0.20), fair (0.21-0.40), moderate (0.41-0.60), good (0.61-0.80), or very good (0.81-1.00). RESULTS: Interobserver agreement among all reviewers was good (0.75 [standard deviation, 0.21]) for describing the type of acute pancreatitis and good (0.62 [standard deviation, 0.19]) for the type of peripancreatic collection. Expert radiologists showed the best and nonexpert clinicians the lowest interobserver agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Interobserver agreement was good for the revised Atlanta classification, supporting the importance for widespread adaption of this revised classification for clinical and research communications.