ObjectiveIn 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.DesignWe 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.ResultsIn 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).ConclusionIn 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.
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.
Objective
We performed a systematic review to assess the outcome of endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy in necrotising pancreatitis with additional focus on indication, disease severity, and ...methodological quality of studies.
Design
We searched the literature published between January 2005 and June 2013. Cohorts, including patients with (infected) necrotising pancreatitis, undergoing endoscopic necrosectomy were included. Indication, disease severity, and methodological quality were described. The main outcomes were mortality, major complications, number of endoscopic sessions, and definitive successful treatment with endoscopic necrosectomy alone.
Results
After screening 581 papers, 14 studies, including 455 patients, fulfilled the eligibility criteria. All included studies were retrospective analyses except for one randomized, controlled trial. Overall methodological quality was moderate to low (mean 5, range 2–9). Less than 50 % of studies reported on pre-procedural severity of disease: mean APACHE-II score before intervention was 8; organ failure was present in 23 % of patients; and infected necrosis in 57 % of patients. On average, four (range 1–23) endoscopic interventions were performed per patient. With endoscopic necrosectomy alone, definitive successful treatment was achieved in 81 % of patients. Mortality was 6 % (28/460 patients) and complications occurred in 36 % of patients. Bleeding was the most common complication.
Conclusions
Endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy is an effective treatment for the majority of patients with necrotising pancreatitis with acceptable mortality and complication rates. It should be noted that methodological quality of the available studies is limited and that the combined patient population of endoscopically treated patients is only moderately ill.
Background and objective The Atlanta classification of acute pancreatitis enabled standardised reporting of research and aided communication between clinicians. Deficiencies identified and improved ...understanding of the disease make a revision necessary. Methods A web-based consultation was undertaken in 2007 to ensure wide participation of pancreatologists. After an initial meeting, the Working Group sent a draft document to 11 national and international pancreatic associations. This working draft was forwarded to all members. Revisions were made in response to comments, and the web-based consultation was repeated three times. The final consensus was reviewed, and only statements based on published evidence were retained. Results The revised classification of acute pancreatitis identified two phases of the disease: early and late. Severity is classified as mild, moderate or severe. Mild acute pancreatitis, the most common form, has no organ failure, local or systemic complications and usually resolves in the first week. Moderately severe acute pancreatitis is defined by the presence of transient organ failure, local complications or exacerbation of co-morbid disease. Severe acute pancreatitis is defined by persistent organ failure, that is, organ failure >48 h. Local complications are peripancreatic fluid collections, pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis (sterile or infected), pseudocyst and walled-off necrosis (sterile or infected). We present a standardised template for reporting CT images. Conclusions This international, web-based consensus provides clear definitions to classify acute pancreatitis using easily identified clinical and radiologic criteria. The wide consultation among pancreatologists to reach this consensus should encourage widespread adoption.
To assess the proportion of registered surgical trials with results published in journals with high-impact factors; compare the primary outcomes specified in trial registries with those reported in ...the published papers; and determine whether primary outcome-reporting bias favored significant outcomes.
Outcome-reporting bias, that is, the selective reporting of a subset of the original registered outcome measures based on their results, has not yet been studied specifically for surgical trials.
We searched PubMed for reports of surgical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indexed between 2007 and 2012 in 10 general medical journals and 10 surgical journals with the highest impact factors. For each article included, we obtained the trial registration information using a standardized data extraction form.
Of the 327 evaluated surgical trials, registration was lacking for 109 (33%) published papers. Two (2%) of these papers were published in general medical journals and 107 (98%) in surgical journals. Twelve (6%) of the trials were still recruiting patients, and 48 (22%) were registered after completion of the study. A total of 152 trials were registered before the end of the trial with the primary outcome clearly specified. Among these papers, 49% (75 of 152) showed some evidence of discrepancies between outcomes registered and the outcomes published, most often related to omitting or introducing a primary outcome. These discrepancies favored statistically significant results in 28% of the papers.
The quality of registration of surgical trials published in surgical journals was inferior to those published in general medical journals. Comparison of the primary outcomes of surgical RCTs registered with their subsequent publication indicated that selective outcome reporting is prevalent and appears to be higher than in general medical trials.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Display omitted
In this randomized trial involving patients with necrotizing pancreatitis, a less invasive step-up approach (percutaneous drainage followed, if necessary, by minimally invasive retroperitoneal ...necrosectomy) was associated with fewer complications than open necrosectomy.
In patients with necrotizing pancreatitis, a less invasive step-up approach (percutaneous drainage followed, if necessary, by minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy) was associated with fewer complications than open necrosectomy.
Acute pancreatitis is the third most common gastrointestinal disorder requiring hospitalization in the United States, with annual costs exceeding $2 billion.
1
,
2
Necrotizing pancreatitis, which is associated with an 8 to 39% rate of death, develops in approximately 20% of patients.
3
The major cause of death, next to early organ failure, is secondary infection of pancreatic or peripancreatic necrotic tissue, leading to sepsis and multiple organ failure.
4
Secondary infection of necrotic tissue in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis is virtually always an indication for intervention.
3
,
5
–
7
The traditional approach to the treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis with secondary infection of necrotic . . .
Patients with a first episode of acute pancreatitis can develop recurrent or chronic pancreatitis (CP). However, little is known about the incidence or risk factors for these events.
We performed a ...cross-sectional study of 669 patients with a first episode of acute pancreatitis admitted to 15 Dutch hospitals from December 2003 through March 2007. We collected information on disease course, outpatient visits, and hospital readmissions, as well as results from imaging, laboratory, and histology studies. Standardized follow-up questionnaires were sent to all available patients to collect information on hospitalizations and interventions for pancreatic disease, abdominal pain, steatorrhea, diabetes mellitus, medications, and alcohol and tobacco use. Patients were followed up for a median time period of 57 months. Primary end points were recurrent pancreatitis and CP. Risk factors were evaluated using regression analysis. The cumulative risk was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis.
Recurrent pancreatitis developed in 117 patients (17%), and CP occurred in 51 patients (7.6%). Recurrent pancreatitis developed in 12% of patients with biliary disease, 24% of patients with alcoholic etiology, and 25% of patients with disease of idiopathic or other etiologies; CP occurred in 3%, 16%, and 10% of these patients, respectively. Etiology, smoking, and necrotizing pancreatitis were independent risk factors for recurrent pancreatitis and CP. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores at admission also were associated independently with recurrent pancreatitis. The cumulative risk for recurrent pancreatitis over 5 years was highest among smokers at 40% (compared with 13% for nonsmokers). For alcohol abusers and current smokers, the cumulative risks for CP were similar-approximately 18%. In contrast, the cumulative risk of CP increased to 30% in patients who smoked and abused alcohol.
Based on a retrospective analysis of patients admitted to Dutch hospitals, a first episode of acute pancreatitis leads to recurrent pancreatitis in 17% of patients, and almost 8% of patients progress to CP within 5 years. Progression was associated independently with alcoholic etiology, smoking, and a history of pancreatic necrosis. Smoking is the predominant risk factor for recurrent disease, whereas the combination of alcohol abuse and smoking produces the highest cumulative risk for chronic pancreatitis.
In February 2008, the results of the PRObiotics in PAncreatitis TRIAl (PROPATRIA) were published. This study investigated the use of probiotics in patients suffering from severe acute pancreatitis. ...No differences between the groups were found for any of the primary endpoints. However, mortality in the probiotics group was significantly higher than in the placebo group. This result was unexpected in light of the results of the animal studies referred to in the trial protocol. We used the methods of systematic review and meta-analysis to take a closer look at the relation between the animal studies on probiotics and pancreatitis and the PROPATRIA-trial, focussing on indications for harmful effects and efficacy.
Both PubMed and Embase were searched for original articles concerning the effects of probiotics in experimental acute pancreatitis, yielding thirteen studies that met the inclusion criteria. Data on mortality, bacterial translocation and histological damage to the pancreas were extracted, as well as study quality indicators. Meta-analysis of the four animal studies published before PROPATRIA showed that probiotic supplementation did not diminish mortality, reduced the overall histopathological score of the pancreas and reduced bacterial translocation to pancreas and mesenteric lymph nodes. Comparable results were found when all relevant studies published so far were taken into account.
A more thorough analysis of all relevant animal studies carried out before (and after) the publication of the study protocol of the PROPATRIA trial could not have predicted the harmful effects of probiotics found in the PROPATRIA-trial. Moreover, meta-analysis of the preclinical animal studies did show evidence for efficacy. It may be suggested, however, that the most appropriate animal experiments in relation to the design of the human trial have not yet been conducted, which compromises a fair comparison between the results of the animal studies and the PROPATRIA trial.
PDF
