The incidence of acute pancreatitis continues to rise, inducing substantial medical and social burden, with annual costs exceeding $2 billion in the United States alone. Although most patients ...develop mild pancreatitis, 20% develop severe and/or necrotizing pancreatitis, requiring advanced medical and interventional care. Morbidity resulting from local and systemic complications as well as invasive interventions result in mortality rates historically as high as 30%. There has been substantial evolution of strategies for interventions in recent years, from open surgery to minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic step-up approaches. In contrast to the advances in invasive procedures for complications, early management still lacks curative options and consists of adequate fluid resuscitation, analgesics, and monitoring. Many challenges remain, including comprehensive management of the entire spectrum of the disease, which requires close involvement of multiple disciplines at specialized centers.
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.
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.
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).
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.
Acute pancreatitis is one of the most common GI conditions requiring acute hospitalisation and has a rising incidence. In recent years, important insights on the management of acute pancreatitis have ...been obtained through numerous randomised controlled trials. Based on this evidence, the treatment of acute pancreatitis has gradually developed towards a tailored, multidisciplinary effort, with distinctive roles for gastroenterologists, radiologists and surgeons. This review summarises how to diagnose, classify and manage patients with acute pancreatitis, emphasising the evidence obtained through randomised controlled trials.
To determine the risk of recurrent biliary events in the period after mild biliary pancreatitis but before interval cholecystectomy and to determine the safety of cholecystectomy during the index ...admission.
Although current guidelines recommend performing cholecystectomy early after mild biliary pancreatitis, consensus on the definition of early (ie, during index admission or within the first weeks after hospital discharge) is lacking.
We performed a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for studies published from January 1992 to July 2010. Included were cohort studies of patients with mild biliary pancreatitis reporting on the timing of cholecystectomy, number of readmissions for recurrent biliary events before cholecystectomy, operative complications (eg, bile duct injury, bleeding), and mortality. Study quality and risks of bias were assessed.
After screening 2413 studies, 8 cohort studies and 1 randomized trial describing 998 patients were included. Cholecystectomy was performed during index admission in 483 patients (48%) without any reported readmissions. Interval cholecystectomy was performed in 515 patients (52%) after 40 days (median; interquartile range: 19-58 days). Before interval cholecystectomy, 95 patients (18%) were readmitted for recurrent biliary events (0% vs 18%, P < 0.0001). These included recurrent biliary pancreatitis (n = 43, 8%), acute cholecystitis (n = 17), and biliary colics (n = 35). Patients who had an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography had fewer recurrent biliary events (10% vs 24%, P = 0.001), especially less recurrent biliary pancreatitis (1% vs 9%). There were no differences in operative complications, conversion rate (7%), and mortality (0%) between index and interval cholecystectomy. Because baseline characteristics were only reported in 26% of patients, study populations could not be compared.
Interval cholecystectomy after mild biliary pancreatitis is associated with a high risk of readmission for recurrent biliary events, especially recurrent biliary pancreatitis. Cholecystectomy during index admission for mild biliary pancreatitis appears safe, but selection bias could not be excluded.
Neoadjuvant therapy may improve survival compared with upfront surgery in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, but high-quality evidence is lacking.
We systematically ...searched for randomised trials comparing neoadjuvant therapy with upfront surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer published since database inception until December 2020. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) by intention-to-treat with subgroup analyses for resectability status. Meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
Seven trials with 938 patients were included. All trials included a neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemo(radio)therapy arm. None of the studies used adjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Neoadjuvant therapy improved OS (hazard ratio HR 0.66, 95% confidence interval CI 0.52–0.85; P = 0.001; I2 = 46%) compared with upfront surgery. This represents an increase in median OS from 19 to 29 months. In the subgroup of resectable pancreatic cancer (i.e., venous contact ≤180°, no arterial contact), no statistically significant difference in OS was observed (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.53–1.12; P = 0.18; I2 = 20%). In the subgroup of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (i.e. venous contact >180°, any arterial contact), neoadjuvant therapy improved OS (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44–0.85; P = 0.004; I2 = 59%). The GRADE certainty of evidence was high for the outcome of OS.
Neoadjuvant therapy improves OS compared with upfront surgery in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. More evidence is required on whether neoadjuvant therapy improves survival for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.
•Neoadjuvant therapy was superior for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.•For patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, no difference was demonstrated.•More evidence is required for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.•A limitation of the study is the use of gemcitabine-based adjuvant regimens.
Background Diagnosing infected necrotizing pancreatitis (INP) may be challenging. The aim of this study was to determine the added value of routine fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in addition to ...clinical and imaging signs of infection in patients who underwent intervention for suspected INP. Methods We conducted a post hoc analysis of 208 consecutive patients from a prospective, multicenter database who underwent intervention because of suspected INP. In retrospect, 3 groups were constructed based on the patients preoperative characteristics: Clinical, imaging, and FNA. Patients in the clinical group had clinical signs of infection but no gas on preoperative computed tomography (CT) and no FNA performed before intervention. Patients in the imaging group had gas bubbles on the preoperative CT but no was FNA performed, whereas patients in the FNA group had a positive FNA before intervention. The reference standard for infection was the culture taken during the first intervention (either catheter drainage or necrosectomy). Results The initial intervention for INP was performed a median of 27 days (interquartile range, 20–39) after admission without difference between the 3 groups ( P = .15). Infection was confirmed in 80% of 92 patients of the clinical group, in 94% of 88 patients of the imaging group, and in 86% of 28 patients of the FNA group ( P = .07). Mortality was 19% and was not different between groups ( P = .39). Conclusion INP can generally be diagnosed based on clinical or imaging signs of infection. FNA may be useful in patients with unclear clinical signs and no imaging signs of INP.
Predicting severe acute pancreatitis (AP) remains a challenge. The present study compares admission blood urea nitrogen (BUN), hematocrit, and creatinine, as well as changes in their levels over 24 ...h, aiming to determine the most accurate laboratory test for predicting persistent organ failure and pancreatic necrosis.
Clinical data of 1,612 AP patients, enrolled prospectively in three independent cohorts (University of Pittsburgh, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group), were abstracted. The predictive accuracy of the studied laboratories was measured using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis. A pooled analysis was conducted to determine their impact on the risk for persistent organ failure and pancreatic necrosis. Finally, a classification tree was developed on the basis of the most accurate laboratory parameters.
Admission hematocrit ≥44% and rise in BUN at 24 h were the most accurate in predicting persistent organ failure (AUC: 0.67 and 0.71, respectively) and pancreatic necrosis (0.66 and 0.67, respectively), outperforming the other laboratory parameters and the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation-II score. In a pooled analysis, admission hematocrit ≥44% and rise in BUN at 24 h were associated with an odds ratio of 3.54 and 5.84 for persistent organ failure, and 3.11 and 4.07, respectively, for pancreatic necrosis. In addition, the classification tree illustrated that when both admission hematocrit was ≥44% and BUN levels increased at 24 h, the rates of persistent organ failure and pancreatic necrosis reached 53.6% and 60.3%, respectively.
Admission hematocrit ≥44% and rise in BUN at 24 h may be the optimal predictive tools in clinical practice among existing laboratory parameters and scoring systems.
Background
Severe pancreatitis may result in a disrupted pancreatic duct, which is associated with a complicated clinical course. Diagnosis of a disrupted pancreatic duct is not standardized in ...clinical practice or international guidelines. We performed a systematic review of the literature on imaging modalities for diagnosing a disrupted pancreatic duct in patients with acute pancreatitis.
Methods
A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library databases to identify all studies evaluating diagnostic modalities for the diagnosis of a disrupted pancreatic duct in acute pancreatitis. All data regarding diagnostic accuracy were extracted.
Results
We included 8 studies, evaluating five different diagnostic modalities in 142 patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Study quality was assessed, with proportionally divided high and low risk of bias and low applicability concerns in 75% of the studies. A sensitivity of 100% was reported for endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. The sensitivity of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with or without secretin was 83%. A sensitivity of 92% was demonstrated for a combined cohort of secretin-magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. A sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 50% was found for amylase measurements in drain fluid compared with ERCP.
Conclusions
This review suggests that various diagnostic modalities are accurate in diagnosing a disrupted pancreatic duct in patients with acute pancreatitis. Amylase measurement in drain fluid should be standardized. Given the invasive nature of other modalities, secretin-magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography would be recommended as first diagnostic modality. Further prospective studies, however, are needed.
OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to develop an alternative fistula risk score (a-FRS) for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy, without blood loss as a predictor.
...BACKGROUND:Blood loss, one of the predictors of the original-FRS, was not a significant factor during 2 recent external validations.
METHODS:The a-FRS was developed in 2 databasesthe Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (18 centers) and the University Hospital Southampton NHS. Primary outcome was grade B/C POPF according to the 2005 International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. The score was externally validated in 2 independent databases (University Hospital of Verona and University Hospital of Pennsylvania), using both 2005 and 2016 ISGPS definitions. The a-FRS was also compared with the original-FRS.
RESULTS:For model design, 1924 patients were included of whom 12% developed POPF. Three predictors were strongly associated with POPFsoft pancreatic texture odds ratio (OR) 2.58, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.80–3.69, small pancreatic duct diameter (per mm increase, OR0.68, 95% CI0.61–0.76), and high body mass index (BMI) (per kg/m increase, OR1.07, 95% CI1.04–1.11). Discrimination was adequate with an area under curve (AUC) of 0.75 (95% CI0.71–0.78) after internal validation, and 0.78 (0.74–0.82) after external validation. The predictive capacity of a-FRS was comparable with the original-FRS, both for the 2005 definition (AUC 0.78 vs 0.75, P = 0.03), and 2016 definition (AUC 0.72 vs 0.70, P = 0.05).
CONCLUSION:The a-FRS predicts POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy based on 3 easily available variables (pancreatic texture, duct diameter, BMI) without blood loss and pathology, and was successfully validated for both the 2005 and 2016 POPF definition. The online calculator is available at www.pancreascalculator.com.
PDF
