Role Of Percutaneous Catheter Drainage Research Articles

Infected pancreatic necrosis-Current trends in management.

Acute necrotizing pancreatitis is a common gastrointestinal disease requiring hospitalization and multiple interventions resulting in higher morbidity and mortality. Development of infection in such necrotic tissue is one of the sentinel events in natural history of necrotizing pancreatitis. Infected necrosis develops in around 1/3rd of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis resulting in higher mortality. So, timely diagnosis of infected necrosis using clinical, laboratory and radiological parameters is of utmost importance. Though initial conservative management with antibiotics and organ support system is effective in some patients, amajority of patients still requires drainage of the collection by various modalities. Mode of drainage of infected pancreatic necrosis depends on various factors such as the clinical status of the patient, location and characteristics of collection and availability of the expertise and includes endoscopic, percutaneous and minimally invasive or open surgical approaches. Endoscopic drainage has proved to be a game changer in the management of infected pancreatic necrosis in the last decade with rapid evolution in procedure techniques, development of novel metal stent and dedicated necrosectomy devices for better clinical outcome. Despite widespread adoption of endoscopic transluminal drainage of pancreatic necrosis with excellent clinical outcomes, peripheral collections are still not amenable for endoscopic drainage and in such scenario, the role of percutaneous catheter drainage or minimally invasive surgical necrosectomy cannot be understated. In a nutshell, the management of patients with infected pancreatic necrosis involves a multi-disciplinary team including a gastroenterologist, an intensivist, an interventional radiologist and a surgeon for optimum clinical outcomes.

Staying the Surgeon’s Hand: Role of Percutaneous Catheter Drainage in Acute Necrotising Pancreatitis

Introduction Acute necrotising pancreatitis (NP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Patients with infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) require some form of intervention in addition to medical management. Although there is no accepted consensus, it is generally agreed that the infected non-vital solid tissue needs to be removed in order to control the sepsis. The results of early surgery have not been encouraging, compared with cases where surgery was delayed or avoided. The placement of percutaneous catheter drains in such a situation helps to decrease the systemic inflammatory response and reverse organ dysfunction.

Survey of trends in minimally invasive intervention for necrotizing pancreatitis

Minimally invasive techniques to manage infected pancreatic necrosis have been recently developed and changes in their pattern of use are unknown. The aims of this survey were to determine the trends in the role of minimally invasive techniques to manage infected complications of necrotizing pancreatitis and the barriers to performing minimally invasive necrosectomy in Australia and New Zealand. Members of the Australian and New Zealand Hepatic Pancreatic and Biliary Association were surveyed. Participant demographics and necrotizing pancreatitis caseload were determined. The perceived role of percutaneous catheter drainage and minimally invasive necrosectomy for pancreatic abscess, infected pseudocyst and infected pancreatic necrosis were scored on Likert scales, comparing 2002 with 2007. Barriers to performing minimally invasive necrosectomy were scored. The response rate was 49% (44/90). Between 2002 and 2007, the role of percutaneous catheter drainage became more important as primary (P= 0.05) and secondary (P= 0.01) treatment for pancreatic abscess, and prior to minimally invasive necrosectomy for abscess, pseudocyst and necrosis (P < 0.01). Minimally invasive necrosectomy became increasingly important as primary treatment for infected necrosis (P < 0.01) and had been used by 47% of respondents. The greatest barriers to performing minimally invasive necrosectomy were lack of training and experience in the techniques, and the anatomical position and complexity of the target lesion. Minimally invasive techniques have an increasingly important perceived role in the management of pancreatic abscess, infected pseudocyst and infected pancreatic necrosis. Further evidence is required to determine the best techniques for treating each form of infection associated with necrotizing pancreatitis.

Systematic review of percutaneous catheter drainage as primary treatment for necrotizing pancreatitis

The role of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) in patients with (infected) necrotizing pancreatitis was evaluated. A systematic literature search was performed. Inclusion criteria were: consecutive cohort of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis undergoing PCD as primary treatment for peripancreatic collections; indication for PCD either (suspected) infected necrosis or symptomatic sterile pancreatic necrosis; and outcomes reported to include percentage of infected peripancreatic collections, need for additional surgical necrosectomy, complications and deaths. Exclusion criteria were: cohort of fewer than five patients; cohort included patients with chronic pancreatitis; selected subgroup of patients with acute pancreatitis studied, such as those with pseudocysts, pancreatic abscesses and/or exclusively sterile pancreatic necrosis; and cohort in which PCD was combined with another minimally invasive strategy and results for PCD alone not reported separately. Eleven studies, including 384 patients, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Only one study was a randomized controlled trial; most others were retrospective case series. Four studies reported on the presence of organ failure before PCD; this occurred in 67·2 per cent of 116 patients. Infected necrosis was proven in 271 (70·6 per cent) of 384 patients. No additional surgical necrosectomy was required after PCD in 214 (55·7 per cent) of 384 patients. Complications consisted mostly of internal and external pancreatic fistulas. The overall mortality rate was 17·4 per cent (67 of 384 patients). Nine of 11 studies reported mortality separately for patients with infected necrosis undergoing PCD; the mortality rate in this group was 15·4 per cent (27 of 175). A considerable number of patients can be treated with PCD without the need for surgical necrosectomy.

T1297 Role of Percutaneous Catheter Drainage in the Management of Severe Acute Pancreatitis

T1297 Role of Percutaneous Catheter Drainage in the Management of Severe Acute Pancreatitis

HP06 *TRENDS IN THE MINIMALLY INVASIVE MANAGEMENT OF NECROTIZING PANCREATITIS: A SURVEY OF AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND SURGEONS

Purpose: Minimally invasive techniques to manage infected pancreatic necrosis have been recently developed, and changes in their pattern of use are not known. This study aimed to determine, in Australia and New Zealand the trends in the role of minimally invasive techniques to manage infected complications of necrotizing pancreatitis; and barriers to using minimally invasive necrosectomy.Methodology: In 2007, members of the Australian and New Zealand Hepatic Pancreatic and Biliary Association were surveyed. Participant demographics and necrotizing pancreatitis caseload were determined. The role of percutaneous catheter drainage and minimally invasive necrosectomy in the management of pancreatic abscess, pseudocyst and necrosis were scored on Likert scales, comparing 2002 with 2007. Barriers to using minimally invasive necrosectomy were scored.Results: The response rate was 49% (44/90). Between 2002 and 2007, percutaneous catheter drainage became more important as primary (p = 0.05) and secondary (p &lt; 0.01) treatment for pancreatic abscess, and prior to minimally invasive necrosectomy for abscess, pseudocyst and necrosis (p &lt; 0.01). Minimally invasive necrosectomy became increasingly important as primary treatment for infected necrosis (p &lt; 0.01), and had been used by 47% of respondents. The greatest barriers to using minimally invasive necrosectomy were lack of training and experience, and the anatomical position and complexity of the target lesion.Conclusion: Minimally invasive techniques are becoming increasingly important to manage pancreatic abscess, pseudocyst and necrosis. Further evidence is required to determine the best techniques for treating each form of infection associated with necrotizing pancreatitis.

HP28P MINIMALLY INVASIVE MANAGEMENT OF PANCREATIC ABSCESS, PSEUDOCYST AND NECROSIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF CURRENT GUIDELINES

Purpose: Minimally invasive techniques have been used to manage infected pancreatic necrosis and its local complications, although no randomised trials exist to evaluate these techniques. This study aims to review the scope and quality of recommendations in current clinical guidelines on the role of percutaneous catheter drainage and endoscopic techniques for pancreatic abscess, pseudocyst, and infected pancreatic necrosis; and identify the degree of consensus between guidelines.Methodology: A MEDLINE search identified current guidelines published in English from any professional body. Guidelines were analysed to determine their recommendations for using percutaneous catheter drainage and endoscopic techniques to manage pancreatic abscess, infected pseudocyst, and infected necrosis.Results: Sixteen guidelines were reviewed. Percutaneous catheter drainage was recommended by eight guidelines for pancreatic abscess; for infected pseudocysts, one guideline did not recommend its use, and six recommended its use; for infected necrosis, two guidelines did not recommend its use, and four recommended its use. Endoscopic management of both pancreatic abscess and infected pseudocyst was recommended by seven guidelines; for infected necrosis endoscopic management was recommended by ten guidelines. Ten guidelines did not include levels of evidence to support their recommendations.Conclusion: Guidelines lacked consensus in their recommendations for minimally invasive management of pancreatic abscess, infected pseudocyst and infected necrosis, and few recommendations included evidence grading. More prospective trials are needed to provide evidence where it is lacking, which should be incorporated into clinical practice guidelines.

Minimally Invasive Management of Pancreatic Abscess, Pseudocyst, and Necrosis: A Systematic Review of Current Guidelines

Minimally invasive techniques have been used to manage infected pancreatic necrosis and its local complications, although there are no randomised trials to evaluate these techniques. The aims of this study were to review the scope and quality of recommendations in current clinical practice guidelines on the role of percutaneous catheter drainage and endoscopic techniques for pancreatic abscess, pseudocyst, and infected pancreatic necrosis and identify the degree of consensus between guidelines. A MEDLINE search was performed to identify current guidelines from any professional body published in the English language. Guidelines were analysed to determine their specific recommendations for using percutaneous catheter drainage and endoscopic techniques to manage pancreatic abscess, infected pseudocyst, and infected pancreatic necrosis. Sixteen guidelines were reviewed. Percutaneous catheter drainage for pancreatic abscess was recommended by eight guidelines; for infected pseudocysts, one guideline did not recommend its use and six recommended its use; for infected necrosis, two guidelines did not recommend its use and four recommended its use. Endoscopic management of both pancreatic abscess and infected pseudocyst was recommended by seven guidelines; for infected necrosis, endoscopic management was recommended by ten guidelines. Ten guidelines did not include levels of evidence to support their recommendations. Guidelines lacked consensus in their recommendations for minimally invasive management of pancreatic abscess, infected pseudocyst, and infected necrosis, and few recommendations were graded according to the strength of the evidence. More prospective trials are needed to provide evidence where it is lacking, which should be incorporated into clinical practice guidelines.

Acute necrotizing pancreatitis: role of CT-guided percutaneous catheter drainage

Necrotizing pancreatitis is the most severe form of acute pancreatitis associated with high morbidity and mortality. Percutaneous CT-guided catheter drainage is an important treatment option that can be effective whether used alone, or as an adjunct to operation. Existing literature describing the role of percutaneous catheter drainage of necrotizing pancreatitis is limited. This update reviews techniques, indications, outcomes, and complications of CT-guided percutaneous treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

Complex ruptured amebic liver abscesses: the role of percutaneous catheter drainage

The failure of medical therapy for amebic liver abscess may be followed by its perforation, a complication associated with high mortality. We assessed the role of percutaneous catheter drainage in management of the sequelae of ruptured amebic abscesses in 13 critically ill patients; 22 intrahepatic lesions, three of which were multiloculated, were drained. Catheters were also placed in 17 extrahepatic collections: pleural space (n = 5), subphrenic (n = 7), perihepatic/subhepatic (n = 3), greater sac of peritoneum (n = 2). No attempt at percutaneous drainage failed. Prompt resolution of clinical features following drainage was a uniform feature. Successful resolution of the abscesses occurred within 20 days in 11 patients. In the remaining two, catheters needed to be retained in situ for 35 and 50 days. The mean hospital stay was 15 days (range 10–20 days). 100% patient survival was achieved, without a single morbid episode. Our results suggest that patients with ruptured amebic abscesses can be effectively and safely managed by percutaneous catheter drainage irrespective of the extent of extrahepatic contamination.

Treatment of traumatic pancreatic pseudocysts in children: The role of percutaneous catheter drainage : M. Hendrickson, M.E. Matlak, R.B. Jaffe, et al. Pediatr Surg Int 5:347–349, (August), 1990

Treatment of traumatic pancreatic pseudocysts in children: The role of percutaneous catheter drainage : M. Hendrickson, M.E. Matlak, R.B. Jaffe, et al. Pediatr Surg Int 5:347–349, (August), 1990

Treatment of traumatic pancreatic pseudocysts in children: the role of percutaneous catheter drainage

Six cases of successful percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) of pancreatic pseudocysts in children ages 3–13 years are presented. All cases involved blunt abdominal trauma and presented with abdominal pain, vomiting, epigastric tenderness without a palpable mass, and elevated serum amylase. Indications for PCD were an enlarging pseudocysts and marked abdominal pain. Catheter placement was accomplished using CT guidance 15.3±1.8 days (mean ± SEM) following injury. Two patients had transgastric PCD. None of the pseudocysts were infected. Catheters were left in place until the drainage ceased, the serum amylase approached normal, the pseudocyst resolved on ultrasound, and the asymptomatic patient tolerated enteral feedings with the catheter clamped. The mean duration of catheter drainage was 18.3±3.7 days. At the time of catheter insertion, the range of serum amylase values was 242–2810 IU/l, while discharge values were 50–147 IU/l (normal: 16–108 IU/l). The mean hospital stay was 36.2±3.8 days and the mean length of total parenteral nutrition was 27.5±4.5 days. All pseudocysts were treated successfully without complication. PCD of traumatic pancreatic pseudocysts in children was performed safely and effectively in our study. Use of this therapeutic modality allowed earlier treatment, decreased the duration of symptoms, and avoided abdominal operation. PCD may prove to be the treatment of choice for pancreatic pseudocysts in children.

Preoperative percutaneous drainage of diverticular abscesses

To define the role of percutaneous catheter drainage in the initial management of diverticular abscess, we reviewed 19 patients who were followed for an average of 17.4 months after drainage. All patients had large paracolic or pelvic abscesses with a mean size of 8.9 cm. There were no complications related to catheter placement, and 15 patients (79 percent) required drainage for less than 3 weeks. Sepsis resolved rapidly, and only two patients (11 percent) had persistent fever or leukocytosis beyond the third day of drainage. Routine sinography revealed fistulous communications to the colon in nine patients (47 percent), but only three (16 percent) had grossly feculent drainage. Fourteen patients (74 percent) completed the treatment plan of preoperative catheter drainage followed by single-stage sigmoid colectomy and primary anastomosis without complications. Two patients refused operation, one of whom died 16 days postoperatively from recurrent sepsis and end-stage pulmonary disease. The three patients with fecal fistulas all had inadequate control of infection, suggesting the need for early operation and fecal diversion in such cases. We conclude that preoperative percutaneous catheter drainage obviates the need for colostomy and multiple-stage surgery in approximately three-fourths of patients with large diverticular abscesses.