The Use of Prophylaxis Antibiotics to Prevent Acute Pancreatitis Complications: Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials

Background: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is an inflammation of the pancreas, a serious emergency with no definitive treatment. It may progress to infected necrosis, non-pancreatitis infection, also death that may occur within the first 1 to 2 weeks. The use of prophylactic antibiotics in AP to prevent complications remains a controversy. The objective of this meta-analysis is to assess the benefit of prophylaxis antibiotics administration to prevent the complication.Method: Trials were identified by searching the medical database. Literature range is within the year 1975 to 2021. Review Manager 5.4.1 was used to analyse data extraction and risk of bias of included studies were elaborated. Risk ratio (RR) was calculated with 95% confidence interval (CI). P 0.05 was considered significant.Results: Twenty trials with a total of 1.287 patients of AP were analysed; 646 patients treated with antibiotic prophylaxis and 641 patients treated with placebo. Prophylaxis antibiotics were found to have significant difference between the two groups. The administration of prophylaxis antibiotics lower the risk of non-pancreatic infections (RR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.62–0.95; p 0.05) and infected pancreatic necrosis (RR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.58-0.94; p 0.05). Meanwhile, prophylaxis antibiotics were found to be insignificant to lower the risk of mortality (RR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.54-1.03; p 0.05). Conclusion: Prophylaxis antibiotics lower the risk of non-pancreatic infections and infected pancreatic necrosis, but did not lower the risk of mortality.

A case report of severe acute pancreatitis with infected necrosis and concomitant Coronavirus Disease‑19 (COVID‑19): a nosocomial infection or delayed respiratory manifestation of viral disease?

The association between COVID‑19 and acute pancreatitis (AP) has been extensively analyzed in recent research and review papers worldwide. It should be noted that most studies have focused on AP as a COVID‑19 complication and/or an extra‑pulmonary manifestation of the disease, although the investigation reports on the cases of prior pancreatitis and subsequent COVID‑19 infection are limited. The aim of this case report is to describe the treatment protocol and clinical outcome of a patient with acute necrotizing pancreatitis who developed nosocomial COVID‑19.. Case presentation. The data were collected from patient S., a 42‑year‑old male admitted with AP to the intensive care unit of Kyiv City Clinical Emergency Hospital, in October 2020. This study was reviewed and approved by the local Ethics Committee (Protocol No 25‑15‑60). The patient signed written informed consent to participate in the study, after having been informed of all relevant aspects that could influence his decision. The patient, primarily diagnosed with AP, was admitted to the hospital without a PCR test for detecting SARS‑CoV‑2. 21 days after his admission to the hospital, the patient developed COVID‑19. AP progression to severe AP with infected necrosis, the development of systemic inflammatory response syndrome and multiple organ failure necessitated operative pancreatic debridement, which was postponed due to severe acute respiratory failure. Operative pancreatic debridement was performed on the 45th day of hospital stay after the resolution of COVID‑19‑associated pneumonia. The postoperative period was typical for the disease severity and the extent of the surgery, and was complicated by external pancreatic and colonic fistulas. The length of hospital stay for this patient was 115 days which included 20 days of treatment and monitoring in the intensive care unit due to pneumonia. He was discharged after clinical symptom improvement. Conclusions. It is imperative to screen patients presenting with AP for SARS‑CoV‑2 in order to avoid misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment strategy. Further detailed investigation of mechanisms of pancreatic injury in patients with SARS‑CoV‑2 is necessary.

P-EUS03 Risk prediction in patients undergoing Endoscopic Necrosectomy for infected pancreatic necrosis

Background Laparotomy for the treatment of patients with infected pancreatic necrosis is associated with high rates of morbidity (∼95%) and mortality (∼50%); this has driven the development of minimally invasive alternatives for the treatment of such cases. Endoscopic Transgastric Necrosectomy (ETN) is an accepted method for debriding infected necrosis in these challenging cases. The National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) and P-POSSUM scoring systems are well-validated risk stratification tools used nationally for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. This work aims to determine whether patients undergoing ETN for infected pancreatic necrosis can be risk stratified accurately using both the NELA and P-POSSUM scoring systems. Methods A prospective database of all patients in a single UK centre undergoing ETN from 2011 to 2021 for infected pancreatic necrosis has been maintained. All patients initially underwent an EUS guided stent placement to create a cystgastrostomy before subsequent transgastric necrosectomy. Patient demographics, timing of procedures and short-term post procedural outcomes were recorded. The NELA and P-POSSUM score was calculated at the time of the endoscopic cystgastrostomy. Demographic data were descriptively summarized and ROC analysis was performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of both the P-POSSUM and NELA score. Data are presented as median (range) Results Sixty-nine patients underwent ETN between 2011 and 2021 with a median age of 54 years-(15-86). Twenty-nine patients-(42%) required ITU admission during their admission. The actual mortality was 10.1%-(7), which was slightly higher than the median of the NELA predicted mortality-(6.7%) but half the median of the P-POSSUM predicted mortality-(21.1%). Median overall predicted mortality for ETN using P-POSSUM was 21.1%-(2.6-85.7%) and with NELA was 6.7%-(0.4-34.3%). The median P-POSSUM score of the patients who died was 33.2%-(6.9-52.4%) compared to the median NELA score which was 17.2%-(0.8-34.3%). The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve-(AUROC) was similar for both the NELA-(0.82, SE = 0.13) and P-POSSUM-(0.75,-SE=0.1). Conclusions Endoscopic Transgastric Necrosectomy is a safe alternative to emergency laparotomy for the debridement of infected pancreatic necrosis. Both the NELA and P-POSSUM scoring systems can effectively stratify those patients at highest risk, however where P-POSSUM scoring may overestimate mortality NELA scoring may underestimate the severity of illness and mortality associated with the disease.

A Case of Intratumoral and Hepatic Portal Venous Gas in Patient with Gastric Cancer Liver Metastases

Background: Hepatic portal venous gas [HPVG] is not a common finding in daily practice. It is usually associated with mesenteric ischemia and bowel necrosis in adults. Combination of intratumoral gas in metastatic liver lesions with HPVG is quite rare and thought to be associated with chemotherapy-induced necrosis and infection of the necrotized metastasis. Objective: Here we present a case of gastric adenocarcinoma with portal venous and intratumoral gas in metastatic liver lesions due to the infected necrosis. Case Presentation: The patient was presented to the emergency room with severe abdominal pain and septic condition after the second round of chemotherapy. Hepatic portal venous and intratumoral gas in metastatic liver lesions due to the infected necrosis of liver metastasis was detected in computed tomography images. There were no findings of mesenteric ischemia both clinically and radiologically. Massive intratumoral infected necrosis in metastatic liver lesions and fistulization to the right portal vein branches were detected on abdominopelvic CT. Secondary infection of the necrotic metastases and fistulization to portal vein branches was believed to cause the air in metastatic liver masses and portal venous gas. Conclusion: Infected necrosis of metastatic liver lesions and fistulizations to the portal venous structures is extremely rare. Clinicians and radiologists should be aware of such a rare complication because early detection is crucial for patient management.

Technical aspects of minimally invasive percutaneous approach for local complications of acute pancreatitis

Aim. To improve the results of treatment for patients with acute pancreatitis by optimizing the technique of performing percutaneous methods of drainage and sequestrectomy.Material and methods. We have considered experience of treating pancreatic necrosis in 257 patients, confirmed by computed tomography, intraoperatively, and postmortem examinations. Moderate severity pancreatitis was detected in 159 (61.9%) patients, severe – in 98 (38.1%) cases.Results. Small focal pancreatic necrosis was detected in 99 (62.3%) patients with moderate pancreatitis, large focal pancreatitis – in 60 (37.7%). Small-focal pancreatic necrosis was in 23 (23.5%) patients, large-focal – in 43 (43.9%), subtotal – in 29 (29.6%), total – in 3 (3.1%) among patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Percutaneous approach was used in combination with transluminal and open surgery in 59 (23%) patients. Infected necrosis was detected in 6 (3.8%) patients with acute moderate pancreatitis and in 44 (44.9%) patients with severe pancreatitis, sepsis – in 12 (12.2%) patients. 27 (10.5%) patient have died from septic shock in the first phase of pancreatitis, included 14 (5.4%) cases after surgery. Overall 41 (16%) patients with pancreatic necrosis have died.Conclusion. Compliance of stages in surgical treatment technology allows optimally combine it with transluminal sequestrectomy, reduces surgical trauma, eliminates additional risks of open approach associated with complications and deaths.

Optimal timing of cholecystectomy after necrotising biliary pancreatitis

ObjectiveFollowing an episode of acute biliary pancreatitis, cholecystectomy is advised to prevent recurrent biliary events. There is limited evidence regarding the optimal timing and safety of cholecystectomy in patients with necrotising biliary pancreatitis.DesignA post hoc analysis of a multicentre prospective cohort. Patients with biliary pancreatitis and a CT severity score of three or more were included in 27 Dutch hospitals between 2005 and 2014. Primary outcome was the optimal timing of cholecystectomy in patients with necrotising biliary pancreatitis, defined as: the optimal point in time with the lowest risk of recurrent biliary events and the lowest risk of complications of cholecystectomy. Secondary outcomes were the number of recurrent biliary events, periprocedural complications of cholecystectomy and the protective value of endoscopic sphincterotomy for the recurrence of biliary events.ResultsOverall, 248 patients were included in the analysis. Cholecystectomy was performed in 191 patients (77%) at a median of 103 days (P25–P75: 46–222) after discharge. Infected necrosis after cholecystectomy occurred in four (2%) patients with persistent peripancreatic collections. Before cholecystectomy, 66 patients (27%) developed biliary events. The risk of overall recurrent biliary events prior to cholecystectomy was significantly lower before 10 weeks after discharge (risk ratio 0.49 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.90); p=0.02). The risk of recurrent pancreatitis before cholecystectomy was significantly lower before 8 weeks after discharge (risk ratio 0.14 (95% CI 0.02 to 1.0); p=0.02). The complication rate of cholecystectomy did not decrease over time. Endoscopic sphincterotomy did not reduce the risk of recurrent biliary events (OR 1.40 (95% CI 0.74 to 2.83)).ConclusionThe optimal timing of cholecystectomy after necrotising biliary pancreatitis, in the absence of peripancreatic collections, is within 8 weeks after discharge.

Acute Complicated Necrotising Pancreatitis Treated with Video-Assisted Retroperitoneal Debridement

Acute necrotising pancreatitis is a complex disease with high morbidity and mortality rates. In cases of infected necrosis, treatment consists of a step-up approach involving endoscopic or mini-invasive surgical methods. In some cases, there are extremely rare complications. In addition, the underlying comorbidities worsen the course of the disease. We report a case of a 32-year-old male with acute necrotising pancreatitis complicated with recurrent retroperitoneal abscesses, sepsis, iatrogenic pylephlebitis, exacerbation of underlying Crohn’s disease, and the outcome of the treatment was successful. During the period of hospitalisation, one ultrasound-guided percutaneous drainage, two computed tomography-guided punctures of the retroperito-neal space (percutaneous and transhepatic) and five video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement procedures were carried out. The patient was discharged after 185 days of hospitalisation.