Search

Item does not contain fulltext CONTEXT: Most patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis require necrosectomy. Surgical necrosectomy induces a proinflammatory response and is associated with a high complication rate. Endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy, a form of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, may reduce the proinflammatory response and reduce complications. OBJECTIVE: To compare the proinflammatory response and clinical outcome of endoscopic transgastric and surgical necrosectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Randomized controlled assessor-blinded clinical trial in 3 academic hospitals and 1 regional teaching hospital in The Netherlands between August 20, 2008, and March 3, 2010. Patients had signs of infected necrotizing pancreatitis and an indication for intervention. INTERVENTIONS: Random allocation to endoscopic transgastric or surgical necrosectomy. Endoscopic necrosectomy consisted of transgastric puncture, balloon dilatation, retroperitoneal drainage, and necrosectomy. Surgical necrosectomy consisted of video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement or, if not feasible, laparotomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was the postprocedural proinflammatory response as measured by serum interleukin 6 (IL-6) levels. Secondary clinical end points included a predefined composite end point of major complications (new-onset multiple organ failure, intra-abdominal bleeding, enterocutaneous fistula, or pancreatic fistula) or death. RESULTS: We randomized 22 patients, 2 of whom did not undergo necrosectomy following percutaneous catheter drainage and could not be analyzed for the primary end point. Endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy reduced the postprocedural IL-6 levels compared with surgical necrosectomy (P = .004). The composite clinical end point occurred less often after endoscopic necrosectomy (20% vs 80%; risk difference [RD], 0.60; 95% CI, 0.16-0.80; P = .03). Endoscopic necrosectomy did not cause new-onset multiple organ failure (0% vs 50%, RD, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.12-0.76; P = .03) and reduced the number of pancreatic fistulas (10% vs 70%; RD, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.17-0.81; P = .02). CONCLUSION: In patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis, endoscopic necrosectomy reduced the proinflammatory response as well as the composite clinical end point compared with surgical necrosectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN07091918.

Background The aim of the study was to evaluate recurrent biliary events as a consequence of delay in cholecystectomy following mild biliary pancreatitis. Methods Between 2004 and 2007, patients with acute pancreatitis were registered prospectively in 15 Dutch hospitals. Patients with mild biliary pancreatitis were candidates for cholecystectomy. Recurrent biliary events requiring admission before and after cholecystectomy, and after endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES), were evaluated. Results Of 308 patients with mild biliary pancreatitis, 267 were candidates for cholecystectomy. Eighteen patients underwent cholecystectomy during the initial admission, leaving 249 potential candidates for cholecystectomy after discharge. Cholecystectomy was performed after a median of 6 weeks in 188 patients (75·5 per cent). Before cholecystectomy, 34 patients (13·7 per cent) were readmitted for biliary events, including 24 with recurrent biliary pancreatitis. ES was performed in 108 patients during the initial admission. Eight (7·4 per cent) of these patients suffered from biliary events after ES and before cholecystectomy, compared with 26 (18·4 per cent) of 141 patients who did not have ES (risk ratio 0·51, 95 per cent confidence interval 0·27 to 0·94; P = 0·015). Following cholecystectomy, eight (3·9 per cent) of 206 patients developed biliary events after a median of 31 weeks. Only 142 (53·2 per cent) of 267 patients were treated in accordance with the Dutch guideline, which recommends cholecystectomy or ES during the index admission or within 3 weeks thereafter. Conclusion A delay in cholecystectomy after mild biliary pancreatitis carries a substantial risk of recurrent biliary events. ES reduces the risk of recurrent pancreatitis but not of other biliary events.

Item does not contain fulltext OBJECTIVES: 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. BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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. 01 mei 2012

Background In predicted severe acute pancreatitis, infections have a negative effect on clinical outcome. A start of enteral nutrition (EN) within 24 hours of onset may reduce the number of infections as compared to the current practice of starting an oral diet and EN if necessary at 3-4 days after admission. Methods/Design The PYTHON trial is a randomised controlled, parallel-group, superiority multicenter trial. Patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis (Imrie-score ≥ 3 or APACHE-II score ≥ 8 or CRP > 150 mg/L) will be randomised to EN within 24 hours or an oral diet and EN if necessary, after 72 hours after hospital admission. During a 3-year period, 208 patients will be enrolled from 20 hospitals of the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. The primary endpoint is a composite of mortality or infections (bacteraemia, infected pancreatic or peripancreatic necrosis, pneumonia) during hospital stay or within 6 months following randomisation. Secondary endpoints include other major morbidity (e.g. new onset organ failure, need for intervention), intolerance of enteral feeding and total costs from a societal perspective. Discussion The PYTHON trial is designed to show that a very early (< 24 h) start of EN reduces the combined endpoint of mortality or infections as compared to the current practice of an oral diet and EN if necessary at around 72 hours after admission for predicted severe acute pancreatitis. Trial Registration ISRCTN: ISRCTN18170985

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Treatment of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis has become more conservative and less invasive, but there are few data from prospective studies to support the efficacy of this change. We performed a prospective multicenter study of treatment outcomes among patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. METHODS: We collected data from 639 consecutive patients with necrotizing pancreatitis, from 2004 to 2008, treated at 21 Dutch hospitals. Data were analyzed for disease severity, interventions (radiologic, endoscopic, surgical), and outcome. RESULTS: Overall mortality was 15% (n = 93). Organ failure occurred in 240 patients (38%), with 35% mortality. Treatment was conservative in 397 patients (62%), with 7% mortality. An intervention was performed in 242 patients (38%), with 27% mortality; this included early emergency laparotomy in 32 patients (5%), with 78% mortality. Patients with longer times between admission and intervention had lower mortality: 0 to 14 days, 56%; 14 to 29 days, 26%; and >29 days, 15% (P

Item does not contain fulltext OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether enteral prophylaxis with probiotics in patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis prevents infectious complications. DESIGN: Multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. METHOD: A total of 296 patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis (APACHE II score > or = 8, Imrie score > or = 3 or C-reactive protein concentration > 150 mg/l) were included and randomised to one of two groups. Within 72 hours after symptom onset, patients received a multispecies preparation of probiotics or placebo given twice daily via a jejunal catheter for 28 days. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of one of the following infections during admission and go-day follow-up: infected pancreatic necrosis, bacteraemia, pneumonia, urosepsis or infected ascites. Secondary endpoints were mortality and adverse reactions. The study registration number is ISRCTN38327949. RESULTS: Treatment groups were similar at baseline with regard to patient characteristics and disease severity. Infections occurred in 30% of patients in the probiotics group (46 of 152 patients) and 28% of those in the placebo group (41 of 144 patients; relative risk (RR): 1.1; 95% CI: 0.8-1.5). The mortality rate was 16% in the probiotics group (24 of 152 patients) and 6% (9 of 144 patients) in the placebo group (RR: 2.5; 95% CI: 1.2-5.3). In the probiotics group, 9 patients developed bowel ischaemia (of whom 8 patients died), compared with none in the placebo group (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: In patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis, use of this combination of probiotic strains did not reduce the risk of infections. Probiotic prophylaxis was associated with a more than two-fold increase in mortality and should therefore not be administered in this category of patients.