Surgery Management of Pancreatitis with Complication: A Review Article

Introduction: Acute pancreatitis is an inflammatory disease of the pancreas with clinical manifestations that vary from mild to severe manifestations to death. The incidence of pancreatitis varies in various countries in the world and depends on the cause such as alcohol, gallstones, and metabolic factors. The clinical picture and the main symptom in patients with acute pancreatitis is abdominal pain. Abdominal pain varies from mild to severe and excruciating. Abdominal pain that is felt is constant and dull, and is usually felt in the epigastrium and periumbilicus and often spreads to the back, chest, waist, and lower abdomen. Discussion: The onset of acute pancreatitis, the patient should be evaluated for hemodynamic status immediately and receive the necessary resuscitation measures. Patients with acute pancreatitis should receive aggressive intravenous rehydration (250 - 500 ml/hour with isotonic crystalloid fluid) as early as possible with close monitoring, unless contraindicated with cardiovascular and/or renal comorbidities. It is most effective within the first 12-24 hours, but after that the benefits may diminish. Debridement (necrosectomy) is the gold standard in infected acute necrotizing pancreatitis and peripancreatic necrosis. Indications for intervention either through radiological, endoscopic or surgical procedures in necrotizing pancreatitis are suspected or proven infected necrotizing pancreatitis with clinical deterioration, especially after the necrotic tissue has been encapsulated with thick walls (walled-off necrosis). Sterile necrotizing pancreatitis with persistent organ failure several weeks after the onset of acute pancreatitis, particularly after the necrotic tissue has been encapsulated with thick walls (walled-off necrosis). Conclusion: Surgical management is often used in pancreatitis associated with gallstones. Cholecystectomy within 48 hours of the complaint can increase healing time. In addition, cholecystectomy performed early may not increase the risk of complications secondary to surgery. Surgery is not performed in acute necrotizing pancreatitis until the inflammation is reduced and the fluid accumulation no longer increases in size.

P-P25 Hot Axios stent removal following endoscopic pancreatic necrosectomy

Background Symptomatic pancreatic pseudocysts or walled off necrosis following pancreatitis can be drained via a stoma from the collection to the GI tract, this is typically facilitated by endoscopic stents. These stents are left in-situ until the area has drained, this can take several months. The stent is then ideally removed endoscopically. Little is known about the consequences of failed endoscopic stent removal or factors contributing to this failure. Methods Retrospective analysis of prospective data at LUHFT between 1st January 2018 and 31st December 2019 of patients receiving at least one Hot Axios stent for management of pancreatic collection. Normally distributed data were compared using Student’s two tailed T test, with non-parametric data compared using Mann-Witney U test, categorical data were analysed using Chi2 test Results 131 patients were included in analysis, of which 74 were male with a median age of 56 years (IQR 46-66.5). Failure of endoscopic removal (14 patients) was associated with a longer time to removal; 101 days (IQR 78-121) to first attempt vs. 49 days (IQR 19-104) to first endoscopic attempt where the stent was successfully retrieved endoscopically (p < 0.01). Surgical removal was undertaken in 6 patients, with significant morbidity in 2 of 6 patients. Overall 90-day mortality in patients undergoing Hot Axios stent placement was 8 of 131 (6%). Conclusions Endoscopic stent removal fails more frequently in patients where the stent has remained in situ for a long time before removal is attempted. Surgical removal of Hot Axios Stents is associated with significant morbidity, and this should be balanced against the as yet unknown consequences of leaving Hot Axios stent in-situ permanently.

The Role of EUS-Guided Drainage in the Management of Postoperative Fluid Collections after Pancreatobiliary Surgery

Postoperative fluid collection (POFC) is a challenging complication following pancreatobiliary surgery. Traditional treatment with surgical drainage is associated with significant morbidity, while percutaneous drainage is associated with a higher rate of recurrence and the need for repeated interventions. Studies have shown that endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage may offer a promising solution to this problem. There are limited data on the ideal therapeutic protocol for EUS-guided drainage of POFC including the timing for drainage; type, size, and number of stents to use; and the need for endoscopic debridement and irrigation. Current practices extrapolated from the treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis may not be applicable to POFC. There are increasing data to suggest that drainage procedures may be performed within two weeks after surgery. While most authors advocate the use of double pigtail plastic stents (DPPSs), there have been a number of reports on the use of novel lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs), although no direct comparisons have been made between the two.

Triple guidance of choledochoscopy, ultrasonography, and computed tomography facilitates percutaneous catheter drainage of infected walled-off necrosis

Objectives Percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) is usually performed to treat acute pancreatitis complicated by infected walled-off necrosis (WON). Insufficient drainage of infected WON may lead to a prolonged recovery process. Here, we introduce a modified PCD strategy that uses the triple guidance of choledochoscopy, ultrasonography, and computed tomography (CUC-PCD) to improve the therapeutic efficiency. Methods This study retrospectively analysed 73 patients with acute pancreatitis-related WON from January 2015 to January 2021. The first 38 patients were treated by ultrasonography/computed tomography-guided PCD (UC-PCD), and the next consecutive 35 patients by CUC-PCD. Perioperative data, procedural technical information, treatment outcomes, and follow-up data were collected. Results Demographic characteristics were statistically comparable between the two treatment groups (p > 0.05). After 48 h of PCD treatment, the CUC-PCD group achieved a significantly smaller size of the infected WON (p = 0.023), lower inflammatory response indexes (p = 0.020 for white blood cells, and p = 0.031 for C-reactive protein), and severity scores than the UC-PCD group (p < 0.05). Less catheter duration (p = 0.001), hospitalisation duration (p = 0.000), and global costs (p = 0.000) were observed in the CUC-PCD group compared to the UC-PCD group. There were no differences between the two groups regarding the rate of complications. Conclusions CUC-PCD is a safe and efficient approach with potential clinical applicability for treating infected WON owing to its feasibility in placing the drainage catheter at the optimal location in real time and performing primary necrosectomy without sinus tract formation and enlargement.