New-onset Organ Failure Research Articles

When to Intervene in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Narrative Review of the Optimal Timing for Intervention Strategies.

Introduction: Acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) is the acute inflammation of pancreatic parenchyma, most commonly due to alcohol abuse or cholelithiasis. The treatment can be either conservative or invasive, including a variety of techniques; however, it has not yet been established if the intervention should be early or if it should be delayed. The aim of this review is to investigate the optimal time for intervention in ANP. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus from inception until September 2024 for studies reporting the comparison between early and late intervention. Results: Early intervention, within 4 weeks of symptom onset, often involves drainage via percutaneous, endoscopic, or combined methods. Delayed intervention occurs after 4 weeks of symptom onset. This can be conducted either surgically or via minimally invasive means. The results of this review reveal that the time of intervention for ANP plays an important role in the prognosis and the course of the disease. In particular, early intervention is associated with higher mortality, which is also the primary clinical outcome. Delayed intervention is also superior regarding secondary clinical outcomes, specifically the complications associated with the intervention. Thus, it is accompanied by fewer episodes of new-onset organ failure, bleeding, gastrointestinal fistula, pancreatic fistula, wound infection, endocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and other complications. Finally, delayed intervention results in shorter stays, both in hospitals and the ICU. Conclusions: Delayed intervention is clearly more effective than early intervention and should be preferred. However, early intervention appears to be both safe and effective, and it is feasible.

The Potential Clinical Benefits of Direct Surgical Transgastric Pancreatic Necrosectomy for Patients With Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

Surgical transgastric pancreatic necrosectomy (STGN) has the potential to overcome the shortcomings (ie, repeat interventions, prolonged hospitalization) of the step-up approach for infected necrotizing pancreatitis. We aimed to determine the outcomes of STGN for infected necrotizing pancreatitis. This observational cohort study included adult patients who underwent STGN for infected necrosis at two centers from 2008 to 2022. Patients with a procedure for pancreatic necrosis before STGN were excluded. Primary outcomes included mortality, length of hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay, new-onset organ failure, repeat interventions, pancreatic fistulas, readmissions, and time to episode closure. Forty-three patients underwent STGN at a median of 48 days (interquartile range [IQR] 32-70) after disease onset. Mortality rate was 7% (n = 3). After STGN, the median length of hospital was 8 days (IQR 6-17), 23 patients (53.5%) required ICU admission (2 days [IQR 1-7]), and new-onset organ failure occurred in 8 patients (18.6%). Three patients (7%) required a reintervention, 1 (2.3%) developed a pancreatic fistula, and 11 (25.6%) were readmitted. The median time to episode closure was 11 days (IQR 6-22). STGN allows for treatment of retrogastric infected necrosis in one procedure and with rapid episode resolution. With these advantages and few pancreatic fistulas, direct STGN challenges the step-up approach.

Sepsis in surgical patients: Personalized medicine in the future treatment of sepsis

Sepsis results when a severe infection overwhelms the normal regulatory mechanisms of the immune system, resulting in a dysregulated host response characterized by new-onset organ failure. A wide range of infectious challenges can induce sepsis, resulting in an even wider range of maladaptive immune responses. This makes sepsis a syndromic diagnosis without a unifying, underlying molecular mechanism. The next step toward personalized medicine for sepsis is to resolve the heterogeneity across the universe of septic patients in order to establish pathobiologically homogenous sepsis “endotypes” that have uniformly defined changes in physiology and immunology. Defining the mechanisms of immune dysfunction within these endotypes will provide a roadmap for the application of immunomodulatory therapies for sepsis. This approach can drive in a paradigm shift in sepsis treatment, moving beyond supportive care and toward active efforts to restore normal immune function.

Minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy: how do we do it?

: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is an inflammatory condition that includes local and systemic manifestations, showing a mild behavior in most patients. Infected pancreatic necrosis is the most aggressive scenario with a high mortality rate. According to the PANTER trial, the “step-up approach” has shown a lower rate of new-onset organ failure compared with open necrosectomy. Whenever possible, major surgical interventions in infected pancreatitis should be delayed as long as possible, ideally until the fourth week since the onset of symptoms. The selection and timing of the procedure are key points, taking into account the clinical condition of the patient, the location, the availability of equipment, and the experience of the surgical team. The technical description of the laparoscopic retroperitoneal necrosectomy is presented focused on the path to the retroperitoneum, anatomical aspects, and tips and tricks. Furthermore, the step-up approach flowchart, indications, contraindications, patient’s workup, post-operative management, advantages, complications, and technique video are included. Although laparoscopic necrosectomy requires mastery of retroperitoneal anatomy and good laparoscopic skills, it is an exceptional tool for the surgeon within the arsenal for this difficult and serious condition. The authors have adopted the laparoscopic retroperitoneal necrosectomy as part of the step-up approach and have found it very replicable and ergonomic.

Conservative oxygen supplementation during helmet continuous positive airway pressure therapy in patients with COVID-19 and respiratory failure: a pilot study.

Respiratory failure is a severe complication in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia that, in addition to oxygen therapy, may require continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) support. It has been postulated that COVID-19 lung injury may share some features with those observed in hyperoxic acute lung injury. Thus, a correct target arterial oxygen tension (P aO2 ) during oxygen supplementation may be crucial to protect the lung from further tissue damage. The aims of this study were: 1) to evaluate the effects of conservative oxygen supplementation during helmet CPAP therapy on mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in patients with COVID-19 and respiratory failure, and 2) to evaluate the effect of conservative oxygen supplementation on new-onset organ failure and secondary pulmonary infections. This was a single-centre, historically controlled study of patients with severe respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia, receiving either conservative or nonconservative oxygen supplementation during helmet CPAP. A cohort receiving conservative oxygen supplementation was studied prospectively in which oxygen supplementation was administered with a target P aO2 <100 mmHg. Results of this cohort were compared with those of a cohort who had received liberal oxygen supplementation. 71 patients were included in the conservative cohort and 75 in the nonconservative cohort. Mortality rate was lower in the conservative cohort (22.5% versus 62.7%; p<0.001). Rates of ICU admission and new-onset organ failure were lower in the conservative cohort (14.1% versus 37.3%; p=0.001 and 9.9% versus 45.3%; p<0.001, respectively). In patients with COVID-19 and severe respiratory failure, conservative oxygen supplementation during helmet CPAP was associated with improved survival, lower ICU admission rate and less new-onset organ failure.

Timing, approach, and treatment strategies for infected pancreatic necrosis: a narrative review

Timing, approach, and treatment strategies for infected pancreatic necrosis: a narrative review

Endoscopic step up: When and how

The management of (peri)pancreatic collections has undergone a paradigm shift from open surgical drainage to minimally invasive endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical interventions. Minimally invasive interventions are associated with less morbidity and mortality compared to open necrosectomy. The (peri)pancreatic collections are currently treated with a “step-up approach” of an initial drainage procedure followed, if necessary, by a more invasive debridement. The step-up approach for management of (peri)pancreatic collections is mainly of two types, namely, surgical and endoscopic. Surgical step up includes initial image-guided percutaneous catheter drainage followed, if necessary, by minimally invasive video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement. Endoscopic step-up approach includes endoscopic transluminal drainage followed, if necessary by direct endoscopic necrosectomy. The development of endoscopic ultrasound and lumen apposing metal stents (LAMSs) has revolutionized the endoscopic management of (peri)pancreatic collections. Compared to surgical step-up approach, endoscopic step-up treatment approach has been reported to be associated with less new-onset organ failure, pancreatic fistula, enterocutaneous fistula, or perforation of visceral organ and shorter hospital/intensive care unit stay. This review will mainly focus on indications, techniques, timing, and recent advances related to endoscopic step-up approach in management of symptomatic(peri)pancreatic collections.

Use of Albumin as a Resuscitative Fluid in the Intensive Care Unit.

Use of Albumin as a Resuscitative Fluid in the Intensive Care Unit.

Stenting of the pancreatic duct in the early phase of acute pancreatitis: a retrospective study

BackgroundThe effectiveness of pancreatic duct (PD) stenting in the early stages of acute pancreatitis (AP) remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of PD stenting in the early stages of AP.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study. The clinical data of 131 patients with AP from 2018 to 2019 were analysed and divided into two groups: the study group (n = 46, PD stenting) and the control group (n = 85, standard treatment).ResultsThere was a statistically significant reduction in pain relief, oral refeeding, hospitalization, and intensive care unit (ICU) stay in the study group compared with that of the control group (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the incidence of complications between the two groups. Further multivariate analysis of risk factors for new-onset organ failure showed that the control group (odds ratio [OR] (95% confidence interval [CI]): 6.533 (1.104–70.181)) and a higher level of haematocrit (HCT) at admission (HCT > 46.1%, OR (95%CI): 8.728 (1.264–116.767)) were independent risk factors.ConclusionsIn the early phase of AP, PD stenting has the potential to reduce pain relief time, oral refeeding time, ICU stay time, and overall hospital stay time. This finding highlights a new route for the treatment of AP.

Immune enhancement in patients with predicted severe acute necrotising pancreatitis: a multicentre double-blind randomised controlled trial.

PurposeInfected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) is a highly morbid complication of acute necrotising pancreatitis (ANP). Since there is evidence of early-onset immunosuppression in acute pancreatitis, immune enhancement may be a therapeutic option. This trial aimed to evaluate whether early immune-enhancing Thymosin alpha 1 (Tα1) treatment reduces the incidence of IPN in patients with predicted severe ANP.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial involving ANP patients with an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score ≥ 8 and a computed tomography (CT) severity score ≥ 5 admitted within 7 days of the advent of symptoms. Enrolled patients were assigned to receive a subcutaneous injection of Tα1 1.6 mg every 12 h for the first 7 days and 1.6 mg once a day for the subsequent 7 days or matching placebos (normal saline). The primary outcome was the development of IPN during the index admission.ResultsA total of 508 patients were randomised, of whom 254 were assigned to receive Tα1 and 254 placebo. The vast majority of the participants required admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) (479/508, 94.3%). During the index admission, 40/254(15.7%) patients in the Tα1 group developed IPN compared with 46/254 patients (18.1%) in the placebo group (difference -2.4% [95% CI − 7.4 to 5.1%]; p = 0.48). The results were similar across four predefined subgroups. There was no difference in other major complications, including new-onset organ failure (10.6% vs. 15%), bleeding (6.3% vs. 3.5%), and gastrointestinal fistula (2% vs. 2.4%).ConclusionThe immune-enhancing Tα1 treatment of patients with predicted severe ANP did not reduce the incidence of IPN during the index admission.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-022-06745-7.

The clinical outcome from early versus delayed minimally invasive intervention for infected pancreatic necrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

While the management of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) has evolved in the last two decades with the adoption of minimally invasive interventions (drainage ± debridement), it is unknown whether the principle of delaying intervention inherited from the open surgery era still applies. The aim of the current study was to investigate the impact of the timing of minimally invasive intervention on the outcomes of patients with IPN requiring intervention. PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE and Web of Science databases were searched for appropriate studies. The primary outcome of interest was hospital mortality, the secondary outcomes were the incidence of complications during the hospitalization, including new-onset organ failure, gastrointestinal fistula or perforation, bleeding and length of hospital or intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Seven clinical studies were included with a total of 742 patients with IPN requiring intervention, of whom 321 received early intervention and 421 delayed intervention. Results from the meta-analysis showed that early minimally invasive intervention did not increase hospital mortality (odds ratio 1.65, 95% confidence interval 0.97-2.81; p = 0.06) but was associated with a remarkably prolonged hospital stay and an increased incidence of gastrointestinal fistula or perforation when compared with delayed intervention. Although no firm conclusion can be drawn because of the quality of available studies, it does appear that timing of intervention is a risk factor for adverse outcomes and ought to be investigated more rigorously in prospective studies.

The Effect of Plasma Triglyceride-Lowering Therapy on the Evolution of Organ Function in Early Hypertriglyceridemia-Induced Acute Pancreatitis Patients With Worrisome Features (PERFORM Study): Rationale and Design of a Multicenter, Prospective, Observational, Cohort Study.

Background: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a potentially life-threatening inflammatory disease with multiple etiologies. The prevalence of hypertriglyceridemia-induced acute pancreatitis (HTG-AP) has been increasing in recent years. It is reported that early triglyceride (TG) levels were associated with the severity of the disease, and TG- lowering therapies, including medical treatment and blood purification, may impact the clinical outcomes. However, there is no consensus regarding the optimal TG-lowering therapy, and clinical practice varies greatly among different centers. Our objective is to evaluate the TG-lowering effects of different therapies and their impact on clinical outcomes in HTG-AP patients with worrisome features.Methods: This is a multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study. A total of approximately 300 patients with HTG-AP with worrisome features are planned to be enrolled. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the relationship between TG decline and the evolution of organ failure, and patients will be dichotomized depending on the rate of TG decline. The primary outcome is organ failure (OF) free days to 14 days after enrollment. Secondary outcomes include new-onset organ failure, new-onset multiple-organ failure (MOF), new-onset persistent organ failure (POF), new receipt of organ support, requirement of ICU admission, ICU free days to day 14, hospital free days to day 14, 60-day mortality, AP severity grade (Based on the Revised Atlanta Classification), and incidence of systemic and local complications. Generalized linear model (GLM), Fine and Gray competing risk regression, and propensity score matching will be used for statistical analysis.Discussion: Results of this study will reveal the current practice of TG-lowering therapy in HTG-AP and provide necessary data for future trials.

Comparison of safety, efficacy, and long-term follow-up between "one-step" and "step-up" approaches for infected pancreatic necrosis.

BACKGROUNDAlthough the “Step-up” strategy is the primary surgical treatment for infected pancreatic necrosis, it is not suitable for all such patients. The “One-step” strategy represents a novel treatment, but the safety, efficacy, and long-term follow-up have not yet been compared between these two approaches.AIMTo compare the safety, efficacy, and long-term follow-up of two surgical approaches to provide a reference for infected pancreatic necrosis treatment.METHODSThis was a retrospective analysis of infectious pancreatic necrosis patients who underwent “One-step” or “Step-up” necrosectomy at Xuan Wu Hospital, Capital Medical University, from May 2014 to December 2020. The primary outcome was the composite endpoint of severe complications or death. Patients were followed up every 6 mo after discharge until death or June 30, 2021. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 21.0 and GraphPad Prism 8.0, and statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.RESULTSOne-hundred-and-fifty-eight patients were enrolled, of whom 61 patients underwent “One-step” necrosectomy and 97 patients underwent “Step-up” necrosectomy. During the long-term follow-up period, 40 patients in the “One-step” group and 63 patients in the “Step-up” group survived. The time from disease onset to hospital admission (53.69 ± 38.14 vs 32.20 ± 20.75, P < 0.001) and to initial surgical treatment was longer in the “Step-up” than in the “One-step” group (54.38 ± 10.46 vs 76.58 ± 17.03, P < 0.001). Patients who underwent “Step-up” necrosectomy had a longer hospitalization duration (65.41 ± 28.14 vs 52.76 ± 24.71, P = 0.02), and more interventions (4.26 ± 1.71 vs 3.18 ± 1.39, P < 0.001). Postoperative inflammatory indicator levels were significantly lower than preoperative levels in each group. Although the incisional hernia incidence was higher in the “One-step” group, no significant difference was found in the composite outcomes of severe complications or death, new-onset organ failure, postoperative complications, inflammatory indicators, long-term complications, quality of life, and medical costs between the groups (P > 0.05).CONCLUSIONCompared with the “Step-up” approach, the “One-step” approach is a safe and effective treatment method with better long-term quality of life and prognosis. It also provides an alternative surgical treatment strategy for patients with infected pancreatic necrosis.

Handoffs and transitions in critical care\u2014understanding scalability: study protocol for a multicenter stepped wedge type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial

BackgroundThe implementation of evidence-based practices in critical care faces specific challenges, including intense time pressure and patient acuity. These challenges result in evidence-to-practice gaps that diminish the impact of proven-effective interventions for patients requiring intensive care unit support. Research is needed to understand and address implementation determinants in critical care settings.MethodsThe Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care—Understanding Scalability (HATRICC-US) study is a Type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of standardized operating room (OR) to intensive care unit (ICU) handoffs. This mixed methods study will use a stepped wedge design with randomized roll out to test the effectiveness of a customized protocol for structuring communication between clinicians in the OR and the ICU. The study will be conducted in twelve ICUs (10 adult, 2 pediatric) based in five United States academic health systems. Contextual inquiry incorporating implementation science, systems engineering, and human factors engineering approaches will guide both protocol customization and identification of protocol implementation determinants. Implementation mapping will be used to select appropriate implementation strategies for each setting. Human-centered design will be used to create a digital toolkit for dissemination of study findings. The primary implementation outcome will be fidelity to the customized handoff protocol (unit of analysis: handoff). The primary effectiveness outcome will be a composite measure of new-onset organ failure cases (unit of analysis: ICU).DiscussionThe HATRICC-US study will customize, implement, and evaluate standardized procedures for OR to ICU handoffs in a heterogenous group of United States academic medical center intensive care units. Findings from this study have the potential to improve postsurgical communication, decrease adverse clinical outcomes, and inform the implementation of other evidence-based practices in critical care settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04571749. Date of registration: October 1, 2020.

Efficacy and Safety of Early Systemic Anticoagulation for Preventing Splanchnic Thrombosis in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

Splanchnic venous thrombosis (SVT) is a relevant complication in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis. So far, no specific treatment for preventing development of SVT exists, and the effect of systemic anticoagulation (SAC) is unclear. Patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis admitted to our center within 7 days from onset of abdominal pain were screened. In the historic group, during which period, most patients received no SAC. Patients in the study group received SAC therapy considering the risk of deep vein thrombosis and SVT. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of SVT. Splenic vein was involved in 71% of all 84 SVT patients. Compared with the historic cohort, patients who received SAC experienced lower incidence of SVT (P < 0.001), especially for splenic venous thrombosis (P = 0.002). Patients in the study group also showed lower mortality (P = 0.04) and incidence of new-onset organ failure (P = 0.03). The incidence of bleeding shows no statistical significance between 2 groups. Application of SAC seems to reduce the incidence of SVT and improve clinical outcomes without increasing the risk of bleeding. Randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm our findings.

Thymosin alpha 1 in the prevention of infected pancreatic necrosis following acute necrotising pancreatitis (TRACE trial): protocol of a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial

IntroductionInfected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) and its related septic complications are the major causes of death in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (ANP). Therefore, the prevention of IPN is of great...

Care after pancreatic resection according to an algorithm for early detection and minimally invasive management of pancreatic fistula versus current practice (PORSCH-trial): design and rationale of a nationwide stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial

BackgroundPancreatic resection is a major abdominal operation with 50% risk of postoperative complications. A common complication is pancreatic fistula, which may have severe clinical consequences such as postoperative bleeding, organ failure and death. The objective of this study is to investigate whether implementation of an algorithm for early detection and minimally invasive management of pancreatic fistula may improve outcomes after pancreatic resection.MethodsThis is a nationwide stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized, superiority trial, designed in adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. During a period of 22 months, all Dutch centers performing pancreatic surgery will cross over in a randomized order from current practice to best practice according to the algorithm. This evidence-based and consensus-based algorithm will provide daily multilevel advice on the management of patients after pancreatic resection (i.e. indication for abdominal imaging, antibiotic treatment, percutaneous drainage and removal of abdominal drains). The algorithm is designed to aid early detection and minimally invasive step-up management of postoperative pancreatic fistula. Outcomes of current practice will be compared with outcomes after implementation of the algorithm. The primary outcome is a composite of major complications (i.e. post-pancreatectomy bleeding, new-onset organ failure and death) and will be measured in a sample size of at least 1600 patients undergoing pancreatic resection. Secondary endpoints include the individual components of the primary endpoint and other clinical outcomes, healthcare resource utilization and costs analysis. Follow up will be up to 90 days after pancreatic resection.DiscussionIt is hypothesized that a structured nationwide implementation of a dedicated algorithm for early detection and minimally invasive step-up management of postoperative pancreatic fistula will reduce the risk of major complications and death after pancreatic resection, as compared to current practice.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register: NL 6671. Registered on 16 December 2017.

Role of Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Catheter Drainage in the Management of Infected Pancreatic Necrosis

Background: Percutaneous catheter drainage has been widely accepted in infected necrotizing pancreatitis. Aims: We evaluated clinical safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided percutaneous catheter drainage in patients with infected pancreatic necrosis. Subjects: Our prospective study included 44 patients who developed infection of peri/pancreatic necrosis. Of these patients, 25 cases received ultrasound-guided PCD study group) whereas 21 cases underwent surgery (control group). Intervention: On admission all patients were treated with fluid therapy, nutritional support, antibiotics, gastrointestinal decompression and analgesics. Ultrasound-guided PCD or surgery were performed in patients who suspected infection of necrotic collection. Conversion to surgery were considered in patients who failed to PCD. Clinical outcomes: primary outcomes were changes in laboratory parameters before and after treatment, recovery days of inflammatory parameters (WBC, CRP). Secondary outcomes were the incidence of complication, mortality and hospital stay. Results: In the study group PCD period was 30 (median) days (9-91, range). PCD was unsuccessful in 9 (36.0%) patients, who required eventually cross over to necrosectomy. All laboratory parameters (WBC, CRP, serum amylase, blood glucose, serum calcium) were improved after therapy compared to before therapy in both groups (p<0.05). The post treatment comparison showed the level of WBC, CRP, serum amylase and blood glucose in the study group were significantly lower than those in the control group (p<0.05). In PCD group recovery days of WBC, CRP was significantly decreased compared to control group (p<0.05). In study group incidence of new-onset organ failure, intra-abdominal bleeding and incisional hernia significantly reduced than those in the control group (p<0.05). Finally, the mortality rate in the study group was lower than control group and study group had shorter hospital stays compared to control group (p<0.05). Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided PCD can reduce the need of surgical treatment and step-up approach (PCD followed by surgery) may decrease mortality than primary necrosectomy by minimizing pancreatic injury.

Comparison between minimally invasive and open surgical treatment in necrotizing pancreatitis

BackgroundMinimal access techniques have gained popularity for the management of necrotizing pancreatitis, but only a few studies compared open necrosectomy with a less invasive treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of minimally invasive treatment for necrotizing pancreatitis in comparison with open necrosectomy. Materials and methodsThis retrospective study included 70 patients who underwent minimally invasive intervention or open surgical debridement for necrotizing pancreatitis between January 2007 and December 2014. Data were analyzed for postoperative morbidity and outcome. ResultsOf 70 patients, 22 patients underwent primary open necrosectomy and 48 patients were treated with minimally invasive techniques. Percutaneous and endoscopic drainage were successful in 34.9% and 75.0% of patients, respectively. The rates of postoperative new-onset organ failure and intensive care unit stay were significantly lower in the minimally invasive group (25.0% versus 54.5%; P = 0.016, and 29.2% versus 54.5%; P = 0.041, respectively). Gastrointestinal fistulas occurred more frequently after primary open necrosectomy (36.4% versus 10.4%; P = 0.009). Mortality was comparable in both groups (18.6% versus 27.3%; P = 0.420). Mortality for salvage open necrosectomy was similar to that for primary open debridement (28.6% versus 27.3%; P = 0.924). The independent risk factors for major postoperative complications were primary open necrosectomy (P = 0.028) and shorter interval to first intervention (P = 0.020). Mortality was independently associated only with older age (P = 0.009). ConclusionsMinimally invasive treatment should be preferred over open necrosectomy for initial management of necrotizing pancreatitis.

Improving the Outcome of Acute Pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is the most common indication for hospital admission and its incidence is rising. It has a variable prognosis, which is mainly dependent upon the development of persistent organ failure and infected necrotizing pancreatitis. In the past few years, based on large-scale multicenter randomized trials, some novel insights regarding clinical management have emerged. In patients with infected pancreatic necrosis, a step-up approach of percutaneous catheter drainage followed by necrosectomy only when the patient does not improve, reduces new-onset organ failure and prevents the need for necrosectomy in about a third of patients. A randomized pilot study comparing surgical to endoscopic necrosectomy in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis showed a striking reduction of the pro-inflammatory response following endoscopic necrosectomy. These promising results have recently been tested in a large multicenter randomized trial whose results are eagerly awaited. Contrary to earlier data from uncontrolled studies, a large multicenter randomized trial comparing early (within 24 h) nasoenteric tube feeding compared with an oral diet after 72 h, did not show that early nasoenteric tube feeding was superior in reducing the rate of infection or death in patients with AP at high risk for complications. Although early ERCP does not have a role in the treatment of predicted mild pancreatitis, except in the case of concomitant cholangitis, it may ameliorate the disease course in patients with predicted severe pancreatitis. Currently, a large-scale randomized study is underway and results are expected in 2017.