scholarly journals From editor of the issue. Pancreatic duct disruption in acute necrotizing pancreatitis and its consequences

Author(s):  
T. G. Dyuzheva

.

Pancreatology ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 958-965 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ji Woong Jang ◽  
Myung-Hwan Kim ◽  
Dongwook Oh ◽  
Dong Hui Cho ◽  
Tae Jun Song ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 90 (2) ◽  
pp. 54-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mateusz Jagielski ◽  
Marian Smoczyński ◽  
Krystian Adrych

The paper presents a description of the course of severe acute necrotizing pancreatitis as well as endoscopic treatment of an extensive infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN), being the consequence of acute pancreatitis. The basic strategy of interventional treatment was to extend access to necrotic areas with use of single transluminal gateway transcystic multiple drainage (SGTMD). Endoscopic transmural access (transgastric) was applied. Endoscopic necrosectomy under fluoroscopic guidance was repeated nine times during active transluminal drainage. Endotherapy with use of SGTMD, as well as endoscopic necrosectomy became a successful and safe technique of treatment. Moreover, the paper proved the efficiency of endotherapy in the treatment of complete pancreatic duct disruption in the course of acute necrotizing pancreatitis.


1993 ◽  
Vol 104 (3) ◽  
pp. 853-861 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus M. Lerch ◽  
Ashok K. Saluja ◽  
Michael Rünzi ◽  
Rajinder Dawra ◽  
Manju Saluja ◽  
...  

Endoscopy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (11) ◽  
pp. 1027-1034 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heikki Karjula ◽  
Palle Nordblad Schmidt ◽  
Jyrki Mäkelä ◽  
Janne H. Liisanantti ◽  
Pasi Ohtonen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Pancreatic duct disruption is common and is associated with high morbidity in cases of acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP). In this study, we tested the feasibility and safety of prophylactic pancreatic duct stenting (PPDS) in ANP and compared PPDS with conservative treatment. Methods We prospectively enrolled patients (aged 18 – 75 years) diagnosed with ANP between February 2011 and July 2015. These patients were prospectively randomized to receive PPDS or conservative treatment at two tertiary centers. PPDS was performed as soon as possible after randomization. Results Concern regarding iatrogenic infections with pancreatic necrosis in the PPDS group prompted interim analysis, which confirmed a highly elevated risk. Thus, the trial was terminated prematurely for ethical reasons. Of the 11 patients in the PPDS group, all patients with successful pancreatic duct placement (5/5, 100 %) presented with infection, compared with only 3 of the 13 patients (23.1 %) in the conservative treatment group (P = 0.01). Analysis revealed success rates of 63.6 % for pancreatic duct cannulation, 45.5 % for pancreatic duct stenting, and 18.2 % for placement of a stent bridging the necrosis. Cannulation and stenting failures were due to duodenal edema and pancreatic duct stenosis. Conclusions PPDS in ANP is associated with an unacceptably high risk of pancreatic necrosis infection. In addition, the procedure is technically challenging due to duodenal edema and ductal stenosis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document