Search

The prevalence and factors associated with delayed gastric emptying (DGE) in patients undergoing total pancreatectomy with islet auto transplantation (TP-IAT) for chronic pancreatitis are unknown. A retrospective study of all patients who underwent TP-IAT at Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) from August 2011 to November 2014 was performed. The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) clinical grading of DGE was used in this study. A total of 39 patients with chronic pancreatitis underwent TP-IAT during the study period. The prevalence of DGE following TP-IAT was 35.9 %. Twenty-five patients (64.1 %) had no DGE, 10 (25.6 %) had grade A, 2 (5.1 %) had grade B, and 2 patients (5.1 %) had grade C DGE. Patients with DGE had 5.7-fold higher odds of having a hospital length of stay (LOS) greater than 14 days (OR 5.70, 95 % CI 1.37–23.76, p = 0.02). Patients undergoing laparoscopic TP-IAT had significantly shorter LOS (10.5 vs. 14 days, p = 0.02) and lower need for prokinetics (0.01) during the postoperative course. DGE is common after TP-IAT and can prolong LOS. Laparoscopic TP-IAT lowers LOS and need for prokinetics postoperatively. Further studies are needed to determine if laparoscopic approaches will improve long-term dysmotility.

Acute necrotizing pancreatitis is a complication of acute pancreatitis that carries high morbidity and mortality. The majority of patients have sterile necrosis, which can be managed conservatively. However, in contrast, patients with infected necrosis often require drainage or debridement. Two decades ago, open surgical necrosectomy was the drainage modality of choice but this has largely been replaced by minimally invasive techniques. There have been, controverssies over the use of prophylactic antibiotics to prevent infected necrosis and percutaneous aspiration of necrosis to diagnose infection. This chapter provides an overview of the diagnosis and management of necrotizing pancreatitis. The changes in terminology based on the revised Atlanta classification, current guidelines, as well as the evaluation and management of sterile and infected pancreatic necrosis are discussed in detail.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EGBD) may be a safe, alternative technique to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients who fail ERCP. However, it is currently unknown how both techniques compare in terms of efficacy, safety, and cost. The aims of this study were to compare efficacy, safety, and cost of EGBD to that of PTBD. Jaundiced patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction who underwent EGBD or PTBD after failed ERCP were included. Technical success, clinical success, and adverse events between the two groups were compared. A total of 73 patients with failed ERCP subsequently underwent EGBD (n = 22) or PTBD (n = 51). Although technical success was higher in the PTBD group (100 vs. 86.4 %, p = 0.007), clinical success was equivalent (92.2 vs. 86.4 %, p = 0.40). PTBD was associated with higher adverse event rate (index procedure: 39.2 vs. 18.2 %; all procedures including reinterventions: 80.4 vs. 15.7 %). Stent patency and survival were equivalent between both groups. Total charges were more than two times higher in the PTBD group (p = 0.004) mainly due to significantly higher rate of reinterventions (80.4 vs. 15.7 %, p

Background Data regarding the incidence and severity of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) are primarily from nonrandomized studies. Objective To determine the incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP from a systematic review of the placebo or no-stent arms of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs). Design MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify RCTs evaluating the efficacy of drugs and/or pancreatic stents to prevent PEP. Setting Systematic review of patients enrolled in RCTs evaluating agents for PEP prophylaxis. Patients Patients in the placebo or no-stent arms of the RCTs Intervention ERCP. Main Outcome Measurements Incidence, severity, and mortality of PEP. Results There were 108 RCTs with 13,296 patients in the placebo or no-stent arms. Overall, the PEP incidence was 9.7% and the mortality rate was 0.7%. Severity of PEP was reported for 8857 patients: 5.7%, 2.6%, and 0.5% of cases were mild, moderate, and severe, respectively. The incidence of PEP in 2345 high-risk patients was 14.7% and the severity of PEP was mild, moderate, and severe in 8.6%, 3.9%, and 0.8%, respectively, with a 0.2% mortality rate. The incidence of PEP was 13% in North American RCTs compared with 8.4% in European and 9.9% in Asian RCTs. ERCPs conducted before and after 2000 had a PEP incidence of 7.7% and 10%, respectively. Limitations Difference in PEP risk among patients in the included RCTs. Conclusion The incidence of PEP and severe PEP is similar in high-risk patients and the overall cohort. Discrepancies in the incidence of PEP across geographic regions require further study.

Background Two new classification systems for the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) have been proposed recently, the determinant based classification (DBC) and revised Atlanta classification (RAC). We aimed to validate and compare these classification systems with original Atlanta classification (OAC). Aims To validate and compare the DBC and RAC with original Atlanta classification (OAC) Methods 469 adult patients with AP admitted to a tertiary care center from January 2009-June 2013 were included in the study. The new classification systems were validated and compared in terms of outcomes (need for interventions, total hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay and mortality). Results The mean age of patients was 39.9±13.4 years (331 males) with the commonest etiology being alcohol (161, 34.3%) followed by gall stones (125, 26.6%). There were 119 (25.4%) patients with mild and 250 (74.6%) patients with severe AP as per OAC. Pancreatic necrosis was present in 66.1% and infected pancreatic necrosis in 23.1% patients. 126 (26.9%) patients underwent interventions (endoscopic n= 49, 10.4%, radiological n=95, 20.2% and surgical n=47, 10%). 93 (19.8%) patients died. As per DBC, 97(20.7%), 172 (36.7%), 152 (32.4%), and 48(10.2%) patients were determined to have mild, moderate, severe, and critical AP, respectively. As per RAC, 119 (25.4%), 160 (34.1%), and 190 patients (40.3%) were determined to have mild, moderately severe, and severe AP, respectively. Higher grades of severity were associated with worse outcomes in DBC, RAC and OAC. Predictive accuracies were evaluated using area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUROC) and Somer's D co-efficient. The DBC, RAC and OAC were comparable in predicting the need for interventions (AUROC 0.53, 0.55, 0.54, p=0.36) and length of hospital stay (Somer's D, 0.27, 0.26, 0.23, p=0.41). However, both DBC and RAC had comparable but better accuracy than OAC in predicting need for ICU admission (AUROC 0.73 for both vs. 0.62 for OAC, P