Should surgeon-performed intraoperative ultrasound be the preferred test for detecting main pancreatic duct injuries in operative trauma cases?

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic performance of multiple tests for detecting the presence of a main pancreatic duct injury remains poor. Given the central importance of main duct integrity for both subsequent treatment algorithms and patient outcomes, poor test reliability is problematic. The primary aim was to evaluate the comparative test performance of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) for detecting main pancreatic duct injuries. METHODS: All severely injured adult patients with pancreatic trauma (2010-2021) were evaluated. Patients who received an IOUS pancreas-focused evaluation, with Grades III, IV, and V injuries (main duct injury) were compared with those with Grade I and Grade II trauma (no main duct injury). Test performances were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 248 pancreatic injuries, 74 underwent an IOUS. The additional mix of diagnostic studies (CT, MRCP, ERCP) was variable across grade of injury. Of these 74 IOUS cases for pancreatic injuries, 48 (64.8%) were confirmed as Grades III, IV, or V main duct injuries. The patients were predominantly young (median age = 33, IQR:21-45) blunt injured (70%) males (74%) with severe injury demographics (injury severity score = 28, (IQR:19-36); 30% hemodynamic instability; 91% synchronous intra-abdominal injuries). Thirty-five percent of patients required damage-control surgery. Patient outcomes included a median 13-day hospital length of stay and 1% mortality rate. Test performance was variable across groups (CT = 58% sensitive/77% specific; MRCP = 71% sensitive/100% specific; ERCP = 100% sensitive; IOUS = 98% sensitive/100% specific). CONCLUSION: Intraoperative ultrasound is a highly sensitive and specific test for detecting main pancreatic duct injuries. This technology is simple to learn, readily available, and should be considered in patients who require concurrent non-damage-control abdominal operations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test/Criteria; Level III.

Current use and utility of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and pancreatic duct stents: A secondary analysis from the Western Trauma Association multicenter trials group on pancreatic injuries.

INTRODUCTION: The single most important predictor of pancreas-specific complications (PSCs) after pancreatic trauma is injury to the main pancreatic duct (MPD). Pancreatography has been recommended to evaluate the integrity of the MPD. In addition, pancreatic duct stents have been proposed to prevent or treat PSC. The primary purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in diagnosing MPD injury. We further sought to determine whether stents were effective in preventing PSC or facilitated the resolution of pancreatic leaks or fistulae. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a multicenter retrospective review of pancreatic injuries in patients 15 years and older from 2010 to 2018, focusing on patients who underwent MRCP or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), was performed. Final pancreatic injury grade was determined based on all available assessments, ultimately adjudicated by the site principal investigator. Data were analyzed using various statistical tests where appropriate. RESULTS: Thirty-three centers reported on 1,243 patients. A total of 216 underwent pancreatography-137 had MRCP and 115 ERCP, with 36 having both. The sensitivity of MRCP for MPD injury was 37%, the specificity was 94%, the positive predictive value was 77%, and the negative predictive value was 73%. When compared with ERCP, MRCP findings were discordant in 64% of cases. Pancreatic stents were placed in 77 patients; 48 (62%) were to treat PSC, with no clear benefit. Twenty-nine had prophylactic stents placed. There did not appear to be benefit in reduced PSC compared with the entire study group or among patients with high-grade pancreatic injuries. CONCLUSION: The accuracy of MRCP to evaluate the integrity of the MPD does not appear to be superior to computed tomography scan. Consequently, the results of MRCP should be interpreted with caution. The current data do not support prophylactic use of pancreatic stents; they should be studied in a prospective trial. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

[Diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic trauma]. / Diagnóstico y tratamiento del traumatismo de páncreas.

Pancreatic trauma is a rare but potentially lethal entity which requires a high level of clinical suspicion. Early diagnosis and assessment of the integrity of the pancreatic duct are essential since ductal injury is a crucial predictor of morbimortality. Overall mortality is 19%, which can rise to 30% in cases of ductal injury. The diagnostic and therapeutic approach is multidisciplinary and guided by a surgeon, imaging specialist and ICU physician. Laboratory analysis shows that pancreatic enzymes are frequently elevated, which is a low specificity finding. In hemodynamically stable patients, the posttraumatic condition of the pancreas is firstly evaluated by the multidetector computed tomography. Moreover, in case of suspicion of ductal injury, more sensitive studies such as Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography or cholangioresonance are needed. This narrative review aims to analyze the etiopathogenesis and pathophysiology of pancreatic trauma and discuss its diagnosis and treatment. Also, the most clinically relevant complications will be summarized.

Inviting a friend to evaluate potential grade III pancreatic injuries: Are they truly occult, or simply missed on CT?

Traumatic inuries to the pancreas are notoriously challenging to diagnose and treat. Detecting a main pancreatic ductal injury can be particularly difficult on screening computed tomography (CT). Twenty-four blinded faculty clinicians from 4 differing specialties and 6 institutions reviewed 9 video CT cases of potential pancreatic ductal injuries. Clinician performance in detection of confirmed grade III pancreatic injuries varied widely among specialties. This heterogeneity confirms the critical need for multidisciplinary care and image interpretation for even "minor" (i.e., not grade IV or V) potential pancreatic injuries to optimize outcomes for injured patients. The ubiquitous availability of electronic devices allows real-time collegial second opinions to be easily available.

Duodenopancreatectomía cefálica y tutorización externa del conducto de Wirsung. Resultados de una serie de 80 casos consecutivos / Pancreaticoduodenectomy and external Wirsung stenting: our outcomes in 80 cases

Introducción: Existe controversia respecto a la técnica ideal de reconstrucción pancreático-yeyunal posresección duodeno-pancreática. La tutorización externa del Wirsung se ha considerado por muchos autores como una técnica con menor incidencia de fístulas y morbimortalidad. Analizamos nuestra experiencia con esta técnica. Pacientes y métodos: Análisis retrospectivo de la morbimortalidad, de una serie de 80 pacientes consecutivos intervenidos, durante 6,5 años, por tumores pancreáticos cefálicos o periampulares realizando resección y pancreático-yeyunostomía con tutorización externa del Wirsung. Resultados: La edad media de los pacientes fue 68,3 ± 9 años y la tasa de resecabilidad del 78%. La consistencia del páncreas era blanda en 51,2% de pacientes y dura en 48,8%. Se preservó el píloro en 43,8%. El tumor más frecuente fue el adenocarcinoma (68,8%) y se consiguió un R0 en 70%. La fístula bioquímica se presentó en 11,2%, la fístula pancreática grado B en 12,5% y la C en 2,5%, mientras que la tasa de reintervención abdominal fue del 10%. La mediana de estancia hospitalaria fue de 16 días y la mortalidad postoperatoria y a 90 días fue del 2,5%. La tasa de retraso del vaciamiento gástrico fue del 36,3%, diabetes de novo del 12,5% e insuficiencia exocrina del 30%. La supervivencia a uno, tres y cinco años fue 80,2, 53,6 y 19,2%. Conclusiones: Aunque nuestras tasas de morbimortalidad con la tutorización externa del Wirsung son bajas, coincidiendo con series más amplias recientemente publicadas, se precisa un análisis comparativo con otras técnicas reconstructivas, con más casos, para elegir la mejor opción después de una duodenopancreatectomía cefálica. (AU)

Introduction: There is controversy regarding the ideal pancreaticojejunostomy technique after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Many authors consider the external Wirsung stenting technique to be associated with a low incidence of fistula, morbidity and mortality. We analyse our experience with this technique. Patients and methods: A retrospective analysis of the morbidity and mortality of a series of 80 consecutive patients who had been treated surgically over a 6.5-year period for pancreatic head or periampullary tumors, performing pancreaticoduodenectomy and pancreaticojejunostomy with external Wirsung duct stenting. Results: Mean patient age was 68.3 ± 9 years, and the resectability rate was 78%. The texture of the pancreas was soft in 51.2% of patients and hard in 48.8%. Pylorus-preserving resection was performed in 43.8%. Adenocarcinoma was the most frequent tumor (68.8%), and R0 was confirmed in 70% of patients. Biochemical fistula was observed in 11.2%, pancreatic fistula grade B in 12.5% and C in 2.5%, whereas the abdominal reoperation rate was 10%. Median postoperative hospital stay was 16 days, and postoperative and 90-day mortality was 2.5%. Delayed gastric emptying was observed in 36.3% of patients, de novo diabetes in 12.5%, and exocrine insufficiency in 3. Patient survival rates after 1, 3 and 5 years were 80.2, 53.6 and 19.2%, respectively. Conclusions: Although our low rates of postoperative complications and mortality using external Wirsung duct stenting coincides with other more numerous recent series, it is necessary to perform a comparative analysis with other techniques, including more cases, to choose the best reconstruction technique after pancreaticoduodenectomy. (AU)

A multicenter trial of current trends in the diagnosis and management of high-grade pancreatic injuries.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes following pancreatic trauma have not improved significantly over the past two decades. A 2013 Western Trauma Association algorithm highlighted emerging data that might improve the diagnosis and management of high-grade pancreatic injuries (HGPIs; grades III-V). We hypothesized that the use of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, pancreatic duct stenting, operative drainage versus resection, and nonoperative management of HGPIs increased over time. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective review of diagnosis, management, and outcomes of adult pancreatic injuries from 2010 to 2018 was performed. Data were analyzed by grade and time period (PRE, 2010-2013; POST, 2014-2018) using various statistical tests where appropriate. RESULTS: Thirty-two centers reported data on 515 HGPI patients. A total of 270 (53%) had penetrating trauma, and 58% went directly to the operating room without imaging. Eighty-nine (17%) died within 24 hours. Management and outcomes of 426 24-hour survivors were evaluated. Agreement between computed tomography and operating room grading was 38%. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography use doubled in grade IV/V injuries over time but was still low.Overall HGPI treatment and outcomes did not change over time. Resection was performed in 78% of grade III injuries and remained stable over time, while resection of grade IV/V injuries trended downward (56% to 39%, p = 0.11). Pancreas-related complications (PRCs) occurred more frequently in grade IV/V injuries managed with drainage versus resection (61% vs. 32%, p = 0.0051), but there was no difference in PRCs for grade III injuries between resection and drainage.Pancreatectomy closure had no impact on PRCs. Pancreatic duct stenting increased over time in grade IV/V injuries, with 76% used to treat PRCs. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative and computed tomography grading are different in the majority of HGPI cases. Resection is still used for most patients with grade III injuries; however, drainage may be a noninferior alternative. Drainage trended upward for grade IV/V injuries, but the higher rate of PRCs calls for caution in this practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective diagnostic/therapeutic study, level III.

Successful nonoperative management by endoscopic and percutaneous drainage for penetrating pancreatic duct injury: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic trauma is a rare condition with a wide presentation, ranging from hematoma or laceration without main pancreatic duct involvement, to massive destruction of the pancreatic head. The optimal diagnosis of pancreatic trauma and its management approaches are still under debate. The East Association of Surgery for Trauma (EAST) guidelines recommend operative management for high-grade pancreatic trauma; however, several reports have reported successful outcomes with nonoperative management (NOM) for grade III/IV pancreatic injuries. Herein, we report a case of grade IV pancreatic injury that was nonoperatively managed through endoscopic and percutaneous drainage. CASE PRESENTATION: A 47-year-old Japanese man was stabbed in the back with a knife; upon blood examination, both serum amylase and lipase levels were within normal limits. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) showed extravasation of the contrast medium around the pancreatic head and a hematoma behind the pancreas. Abdominal arterial angiography revealed a pseudo aneurysm in the inferior pancreatoduodenal artery, as well as extravasation of the contrast medium in that artery; coil embolization was thus performed. On day 12, CT revealed a wedge-shaped, low-density area in the pancreatic head, as well as consecutive pseudocysts behind the pancreas; thereafter, percutaneous drainage was performed via the stab wound. On day 22, contrast radiography through the percutaneous drain revealed the proximal and distal parts of the main pancreatic duct. The injury was thus diagnosed as a grade IV pancreatic injury based on the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma guidelines. On day 26, an endoscopic nasopancreatic drainage tube was inserted across the disruption; on day 38, contrast-enhanced CT showed a marked reduction in the fluid collection. Finally, on day 61, the patient was discharged. CONCLUSIONS: Although the EAST guidelines recommend operative treatment for high-grade pancreatic trauma, NOM with appropriate drainage by endoscopic and/or percutaneous approaches may be a promising treatment for grade III or IV trauma.

The bridge stenting-based internal drainage in pancreatic trauma patients with main pancreatic duct injury.

Pancreatic trauma is associated with high mortality and morbidity, especially in main pancreatic duct (MPD) injuries. Here, we introduce a novel technique via the placement of bridge stenting-based internal drainage (BSID) along the injured MPD to restore pancreatic tissue integrity. Twelve patients with MPD injury underwent unobstructed BSID as physical support for healing. Six patients with peripheral organ injuries underwent operative end-to-end anastomosis of the MPD by using a polyurethane central venous catheter for the BSID, and the other six patients with isolated proximal MPD rupture received BSID via endoscopic pancreatic stent placement. The BSID technique was successfully performed in all pancreatic trauma patients without the need for a second open surgery. With this simplified BSID-based operation, a short procedure duration (242.7 ± 38.71 min in the surgical group and 100.2 ± 16.24 min in the endoscopic group) and a short hospital stay (13.0 ± 7.05 days) were achieved. However, a few complications (41.67%) still occurred, including pancreatitis, fistula, abscess, pseudocyst, cholangitis, and haemorrhage. Except for the deceased case, all postoperative courses were marked by decreases in the peripancreatic fluid collection, blood amylase recovery, and normal endocrine function. The BSID approach is a feasible surgical approach for the treatment of MPD injury and can be used endoscopically in isolated MPD injuries for its safety and convenience.

Extrinsic compression of pancreactic duct by intragastric balloon treatment and its potential to cause acute pancreatitis: two case reports and clinical discussion.

We describe two cases of increased pancreatic enzyme levels after intragastric balloon (IGB) placement possibly related to extrinsic pancreatic duct compression, followed by a short review of the literature. Case 1 is the first, to our knowledge, of a patient with asymptomatic increase of pancreatic enzymes due to pancreatic duct compression, with unknown clinical significance. We hypothesize that this finding maybe can be relatively common in IGB users and almost certainly an important risk factor for the development of acute pancreatitis (AP). On the other hand, case 2 reports an AP that occurred one day after IGB placement, presented with nausea and vomiting, making AP a differential diagnosis of initial IGB intolerance.

Treatment of walled-off pancreatic necrosis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the current management of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN). RECENT FINDINGS: The management of WOPN has evolved. Many collections do not require intervention and may resolve over time. Nutritional support and treatment of infection are two critical components of medical management. For collections requiring drainage, minimally invasive endoscopic therapies now play a primary role. Endoscopic transmural puncture with stent placement may provide access for drainage and decompression. More complex collections may require transluminal instrumentation with lavage, debridement, and necrosectomy. Concurrent pancreatic duct injuries including strictures, leaks, and disconnections are very common. Addressing the pancreatic ductal injury is a key component in the long-term success of management strategies. Providing high-level care for patients requires a multidisciplinary approach with providers specialized in the management of severe acute pancreatitis and associated complications. SUMMARY: Minimally invasive management strategies improve the outcomes for patients with WOPN. Close follow-up, medical therapy, and nutritional support are required for most patients. Endoscopic transmural drainage and necrosectomy are the primary approaches for collections requiring intervention. Protocols for endoscopic drainage are being refined to reduce side effects and decrease the number of interventions required for resolution.

A rare case of acute obstructive suppurative pancreatic ductitis associated with ERCP

No disponible

Comparison of diagnostic imaging modalities for the evaluation of pancreatic duct injury in children: a multi-institutional analysis from the Pancreatic Trauma Study Group.

PURPOSE: Determining the integrity of the pancreatic duct is important in high-grade pancreatic trauma to guide decision making for operative vs non-operative management. Computed tomography (CT) is generally an inadequate study for this purpose, and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is sometimes obtained to gain additional information regarding the duct. The purpose of this multi-institutional study was to directly compare the results from CT and MRCP for evaluating pancreatic duct disruption in children with these rare injuries. METHODS: Retrospective study of data obtained from eleven pediatric trauma centers from 2010 to 2015. Children up to age 18 with suspected blunt pancreatic duct injury who had both CT and MRCP within 1 week of injury were included. Imaging findings of both studies were directly compared and analyzed using descriptive statistics, Chi square, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and McNemar's tests. RESULTS: Data were collected for 21 patients (mean age 7.8 years). The duct was visualized more often on MRCP than CT (48 vs 5%, p < 0.05). Duct disruption was confirmed more often on MRCP than CT (24 vs 0%), suspected based on secondary findings equally (38 vs 38%), and more often indeterminate on CT (62 vs 38%). Overall, MRCP was not superior to CT for determining duct integrity (62 vs 38%, p = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: In children with blunt pancreatic injury, MRCP is more useful than CT for identifying the pancreatic duct but may not be superior for confirmation of duct integrity. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiogram (ERCP) may be necessary to confirm duct disruption when considering pancreatic resection. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Long-term pancreatic exocrine and endometabolic functionality after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Comparison between pancreaticojejunostomy and pancreatic duct occlusion with fibrin glue.

OBJECTIVE: Even if pancreatic pathologies, residual fibrosis, residual amount of parenchyma, and anastomotic patency are recognized as main causes of exocrine and glycemic impairment after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), few data are reported concerning the role of the different pancreatic remnant treatment techniques. The objective of the study is to assess and compare exocrine functionality, glycemic pattern, nutritional status, and quality of life (QoL) after PD between pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) and pancreatic duct occlusion (PDO), both in an objective and a subjective manner. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-two patients (16 PJ and 16 PDO) were evaluated after a mean follow-up of 21 months after surgery. Exocrine insufficiency was objectively evaluated through the 13C-labelled mixed triglyceride breath test. Fasting glucose, fasting insulin, HbA1c and HOMA-IR values were used to assess glucose metabolism. For these two outcomes, anamnestic data were also collected. QoL was assessed with GIQLI, SF-36, EORTC-QLQ-C30, and EORTC-PAN-26 questionnaires. RESULTS: The 13C-labelled mixed triglyceride breath test detected a lipid digestive insufficiency in 56% of patients after PJ and 100% after PDO respectively (p = 0.007). However, no difference was observed between the two groups regarding postoperative necessity of substitutive pancreatic enzymes. Nutritional status, fasting plasma glucose, fasting insulin, HbA1c levels, HOMA-IR values and postoperative necessity of insulin or oral antidiabetic agents were comparable between the two groups. QoL measurements showed similar results. However, in the subdomains analysis, better outcomes were reported regarding digestive symptoms and physical functioning for PJ and PDO respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Even if an objective exocrine major impairment was evidenced after PDO, this result did not impact the need for a higher rate of postoperative substitutive enzymes. In terms of glycemic pattern, nutritional status, and QoL, the two techniques turn out to be comparable.

Detection of traumatic pancreatic duct disruption in the modern era.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic trauma management hinges upon the presence or absence of pancreatic duct injury, but the optimal method of assessment is unclear. This study endeavored to evaluate the methods of pancreatic duct assessment in modern practice. METHODS: Patients presenting to LAC + USC Medical Center (01/2008-06/2015) with a pancreatic injury were identified (ICD-9 codes). Demographics, clinical data, technique of duct evaluation, and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: 71 patients with pancreatic injury were identified. 21 patients (30%) underwent CT scan (sensitivity 76%). Sixteen (76%) then underwent laparotomy while 5 (24%) were managed successfully nonoperatively. Most (n = 50, 70%) underwent immediate laparotomy. Overall, 66 patients (93%) were managed operatively. The majority were assessed intraoperatively for ductal injury with visual inspection alone (n = 62, 94%). Four (6%) underwent intraoperative pancreatography via duodenotomy/cholecystotomy, which were all inconclusive. CONCLUSION: In the evaluation of pancreatic duct injury, intraoperative pancreatography is frequently inconclusive and should have a limited role. Clinical suspicion for ductal injury based on intraoperative visual inspection alone should guide the management of pancreatic injuries.

An AAST-MITC analysis of pancreatic trauma: Staple or sew? Resect or drain?

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic trauma results in high morbidity and mortality, in part caused by the delay in diagnosis and subsequent organ dysfunction. Optimal operative management strategies remain unclear. We therefore sought to determine CT accuracy in diagnosing pancreatic injury and the morbidity and mortality associated with varying operative strategies. METHODS: We created a multicenter, pancreatic trauma registry from 18 Level 1 and 2 trauma centers. Adult, blunt or penetrating injured patients from 2005 to 2012 were analyzed. Sensitivity and specificity of CT scan identification of main pancreatic duct injury was calculated against operative findings. Independent predictors for mortality, adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and pancreatic fistula and/or pseudocyst were identified through multivariate regression analysis. The association between outcomes and operative management was measured. RESULTS: We identified 704 pancreatic injury patients of whom 584 (83%) underwent a pancreas-related procedure. CT grade modestly correlated with OR grade (r 0.39) missing 10 ductal injuries (9 grade III, 1 grade IV) providing 78.7% sensitivity and 61.6% specificity. Independent predictors of mortality were age, Injury Severity Score (ISS), lactate, and number of packed red blood cells transfused. Independent predictors of ARDS were ISS, Glasgow Coma Scale score, and pancreatic fistula (OR 5.2, 2.6-10.1). Among grade III injuries (n = 158, 22.4%), the risk of pancreatic fistula/pseudocyst was reduced when the end of the pancreas was stapled (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05-0.9) compared with sewn and was not affected by duct stitch placement. Drainage alone in grades IV (n = 25) and V (n = 24) injuries carried increased risk of pancreatic fistula/pseudocyst (OR 8.3, 95% CI 2.2-32.9). CONCLUSION: CT is insufficiently sensitive to reliably identify pancreatic duct injury. Patients with grade III injuries should have their resection site stapled instead of sewn and a duct stitch is unnecessary. Further study is needed to determine if drainage alone should be employed in grades IV and V injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiologic/Diagnostic study, level III.

Bracy procedure with ductal mucosal pancreaticogastrostomy and an internal stent for pancreatic complex deep injury: how to do it.

Pancreatic complex deep injury extending to the main pancreatic duct (MPD), caused by strong external forces such as traffic accidents, is lethal without emergency surgery. However, the best surgical procedure for this serious injury has not been established. The Bracey procedure is a relatively simple reconstructive technique involving pancreaticogastrostomy, but it is often followed by postoperative complications, such as dilatation of the MPD caused by anastomotic stenosis, as well as subsequent serious sequela such as repetitive pancreatitis and new-onset pancreatic diabetes. It is possible that the combination of ductal mucosal pancreaticogastrostomy (DMPG) and an internal stent might prevent anastomotic stenosis of the MPD. We found that the Bracey procedure was a safe and effective reconstructive procedure for five patients who suffered a pancreatic complex deep injury with MPD involvement. In three of these patients, postoperative dilatation of the MPD was prevented by combining the Bracey procedure with DMPG including an internal stent. Our experience suggests that this procedure is one of the best techniques for treating pancreatic complex deep injury extending to the MPD.

Pancreatic stent insertion after an unintentional guidewire cannulation of the pancreatic duct during ERCP.

INTRODUCTION: the guidewire (GW) may enter the pancreatic duct during common bile duct (CBD) cannulation attempts in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). After GW passage into the pancreas, the most effective maneuver for CBD cannulation and pancreatitis prevention has not been determined. AIM: to study CBD cannulation and post-ERCP pancreatitis rates when a pancreatic stent is inserted after an unintentional GW cannulation of the pancreatic duct. MATERIAL AND METHODS: a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing ERCP for biliary drainage that were included prospectively into a database. After unintentional GW cannulation of the pancreatic duct, a straight 5-Fr and 4-cm long plastic stent was inserted. The stents had no internal flaps to facilitate expulsion. CBD cannulation attempts were made above the stent. A pancreatic sphincterotomy was performed in patients older than 60 years before stent insertion. RESULTS: a total of 46 pancreatic stents were inserted during 154 ERCP (29.8%) procedures. In the stent group, CBD cannulation was accomplished in 44/46 (95.6%) subjects. A total of 21/46 (45.6%) pancreatic sphincterotomies were performed. Only 1/46 (2.17%) mild pancreatitis cases were observed and most stents were spontaneously expelled. CONCLUSIONS: in this study, the CBD was eventually reached with the insertion of a plastic pancreatic stent after an unintentional GW passage into the pancreatic duct while attempting a CBD cannulation. No adverse events were observed following pancreatic stent insertion.

Spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy in isolated pancreatic trauma.

INTRODUCTION: Isolated pancreatic trauma is a rare condition and commonly come up in children or young adults.The poor initial symptoms lead to delay diagnosis and treatment. The treatment of isolated distal pancreatic trauma including the Wirsung's duct is generally distal pancreatectomy. In an emergency setting, splenectomy is a common additional organ resection requirement with the distal pancreatectomy. However, in circumstances, spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy can provide advantages in these age groups even in emergency conditions. CASE REPORT: Twenty-four-year old male was referred two days after a traffic accident. Acute abdominal findings required laparotomy and preoperative computed tomography revealed a isolated distal pancreatic trauma including the Wirsung. In the hemodynamically stable patient, a spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) was performed uneventfully. CONCLUSION: Spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy is a beneficial and safe surgical option in isolated distal pancreatic trauma. We propose this surgical procedure for children and young patients, who have good general condition, stable vital findings and without another intraabdominal injury. KEY WORDS: Distal pancreatectomy, Isolated pancreatic injury, Spleen preservation.