Association of extent and infection of pancreatic necrosis with organ failure and death in acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Organ failure is the usual cause of death in acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Our objective was to study whether the extent and infection of pancreatic necrosis correlate with organ failure and mortality. METHODS: All consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis were prospectively studied. They underwent a detailed clinical and investigative evaluation. Pancreatic necrosis, diagnosed on a computed tomography scan, was graded as <30%, 30%-50%, and >50% necrosis and characterized as either sterile or infected. Logistic regression analysis was done to find out the association of the extent and infection of pancreatic necrosis with organ failure and mortality. RESULTS: Of 276 patients (mean age, 41.25 years; 172 men), 104 had pancreatic necrosis: 30 had <30% necrosis, 37 had 30%-50% necrosis, and 37 had >50% necrosis; 74 had sterile necrosis, and 30 had infected necrosis. Of them, 37 (35%) patients developed organ failure. Two significant factors were associated with the development of organ failure, the extent of necrosis (<30% necrosis vs 30%-50% necrosis: P = .03; odds ratio [OR], 5.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-29.45; <30% necrosis vs >50% necrosis: P = .0004; OR, 18.86; 95% CI, 3.75-94.92) and infected pancreatic necrosis (P = .02; OR, 3.29; 95% CI, 1.17-9.24). The overall mortality was 22%. Infected pancreatic necrosis (P = .006; OR, 4.99; 95% CI, 1.56-16.02) and Acute Physiology, Age, and Chronic Healthy Evaluation II score (P = .004; OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.08-1.52) were 2 independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Extent of necrosis and infected pancreatic necrosis were associated with the development of organ failure in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Infected pancreatic necrosis was the most significant predictor of mortality.     

Isolated peripancreatic necrosis (PPN) is associated with better clinical outcomes compared with combined pancreatic and peripancreatic involvement (CPN)- a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and aimsPeripancreatic necrosis (PPN) is considered as a distinct entity with a better outcome when compared with combined pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis (CPN), but there is no systematic review to summarize the evidence. Our study aimed to perform a meta-analysis of existing observational studies comparing the outcomes of PPN with CPN.MethodsStudies in adult patients comparing the outcomes of PPN and CPN from PubMed, Medline, and Scopus databases from inception to November 2018 were systematically searched. The primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcomes included multi-organ failure, persistent organ failure, infected necrosis, need for interventions including open necrosectomy. Pooled adjusted odds ratios, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were obtained by the random-effects model. Forrest plots were constructed to show the summary pooled estimate. Heterogeneity was assessed by using I2 measure of inconsistency.ResultsA total of 6 studies involving 1851 patients (1295 (70%) with CPN and 556 (30%) with PPN) were included. Patients with CPN had a significantly higher mortality (OR 2.49, 95% CI: 1.61–3.87), risk for multi-organ failure (OR 3.24, 95% CI: 2.38–4.43), persistent organ failure (OR 2.79, 95% CI: 1.53–5.08), and infected necrosis (OR 6.21, 95% CI: 3.85–10.03). They underwent more interventions (OR 5.86, 95% CI: 3.69–9.32), including open necrosectomy (OR 5.04, 95% CI: 3.33–7.63). Heterogeneity was low (I2 = 18.1, p = 0.296), and there was no publication bias.ConclusionIsolated peripancreatic necrosis portends an overall better prognosis when compared to necrosis involves pancreatic parenchyma. Clinicians should recognize this distinction for management decisions.     

Effect of aggressive versus conservative hydration for early phase of acute pancreatitis in adult patients: A meta-analysis of 3,127 cases

BackgroundThe advantages of aggressive hydration compared to conservative hydration within 24 h for acute pancreatitis (AP) remain controversial in adult patients. A meta-analysis was undertaken to investigate whether aggressive strategies are more beneficial.MethodsWe searched (on February 1, 2021) PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for eligible trials that assessed the two therapies and performed a meta-analysis. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were adverse events (e.g., renal failure and pancreatic necrosis) within 24 h of treatment.ResultsFive randomized controlled trials and 8 observational trials involving 3127 patients were identified. Patients with severe pancreatitis showed significant difference of in-hospital mortality (OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.32–2.33) in aggressive hydration group, which were less susceptible to study type and age. Patients with severe pancreatitis were likely to develop respiratory failure (OR 5.08; 95% CI 2.31–11.15), persistent SIRS (OR 2.83; 95% CI 1.58–5.04), renal failure (OR 2.58; 95% CI 1.90–3.50) with significant difference. A longer hospital stay was observed in patients with severe pancreatitis (WMD 7.61; 95% CI 5.51–9.71; P < 0.05) in the aggressive hydration group. Higher incidence of pancreatic necrosis (OR 2.34; 95% CI 1.60–3.42; P < 0.05) was major susceptible to observational studies, old patients and mild pancreatitis.ConclusionsCompared to conservative hydration, aggressive hydration increases in-hospital mortality and the incidence of renal failure, pancreatic necrosis with relatively strong evidence. Further investigation should be designed with a definitive follow-up period and therapeutic goals to address reverse causation bias.     

Timing of enteral nutrition in acute pancreatitis: Meta-analysis of individuals using a single-arm of randomised trials

IntroductionIn acute pancreatitis, enteral nutrition (EN) reduces the rate of complications, such as infected pancreatic necrosis, organ failure, and mortality, as compared to parenteral nutrition (PN). Starting EN within 24 h of admission might further reduce complications.MethodsA literature search for trials of EN in acute pancreatitis was performed. Authors of eligible trials were requested to provide the data of all patients in the EN-arm of their trials. A meta-analysis of individual patient data was performed. The cohort of patients with EN was divided into patients receiving EN within 24 h or after 24 h of admission. Multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for predicted disease severity and trial, was used to study the effect of timing of EN on a composite endpoint of infected pancreatic necrosis, organ failure, or mortality.ResultsObservational data from 165 individuals from 8 randomised trials were obtained; 100 patients with EN within 24 h and 65 patients with EN after 24 h of admission. In the multivariable model, EN started within 24 h of admission compared to EN started after 24 h of admission, reduced the composite endpoint from 45% to 19% (adjusted odds ratio [OR] of 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20–0.96). Within the composite endpoint, organ failure was reduced from 42% to 16% (adjusted OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.19–0.94).ConclusionsIn this meta-analysis of observational data from individuals with acute pancreatitis, starting EN within 24 h after hospital admission, compared with after 24 h, was associated with a reduction in complications.     

Use of antibiotics in acute pancreatitis: ten major concerns

Abstract

Acute pancreatitis is one of the most common gastrointestinal causes for hospitalization. In 15–20% it evolves into severe necrotizing pancreatitis. Recent studies have shown no association between the initiation of antibiotic therapy in acute pancreatitis and severe outcomes such as organ failure, infection of pancreatic necrosis, extrapancreatic infections or mortality. Specific subgroups with predicted severe acute pancreatitis or both extensive sterile necrosis and persistent organ failure may benefit from prophylactic antibiotics. Local infection develops in 30% of patients with pancreatic necrosis and results in morbidity and mortality. Contrast enhanced computed tomography should be performed in all patients with acute pancreatitis who develop sepsis, organ failure or fail to improve. C-reactive protein is an independent predictor of severe acute pancreatitis. Procalcitonin is the most sensitive laboratory test for detection of pancreatic infection. Antibiotics do however play a large role in patients with suspected or confirmed infected pancreatic necrosis and extrapancreatic infections. In clinical practice most clinicians prescribe antibiotics in the first 3?days of acute pancreatitis which in turns lead to excessive, unjustified use of antibiotics. Deep knowledge of the recent guidelines combined with an individualized management based on right clinical judgment is a rationale approach of patients with acute pancreatitis.     

Severe acute pancreatitis： Clinical course and management

Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) develops in about 25% of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). Severity of AP is linked to the presence of systemic organ dysfunctions and/or necrotizing pancreatitis pathomorphologically. Risk factors determining independently the outcome of SAP are early multi-organ failure, infection of necrosis and extended necrosis (> 50%). Up to one third of patients with necrotizing pancreatitis develop in the late course infection of necroses. Morbidity of SAP is biphasic, in the first week strongly related to early and persistence of organ or multi-organ dysfunction. Clinical sepsis caused by infected necrosis leading to multi-organ failure syndrome (MOFS) occurs in the later course after the first week. To predict sepsis, MOFS or deaths in the first 48-72 h, the highest predictive accuracy has been objectified for procalcitonin and IL-8; the Sepsis- Related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA)-score predicts the outcome in the first 48 h, and provides a daily assessment of treatment response with a high positive predictive value. Contrast-enhanced CT provides the highest diagnostic accuracy for necrotizing pancreatitis when performed after the first week of disease. Patients who suffer early organ dysfunctions or at risk of developing a severe disease require early intensive care treatment. Early vigorous intravenous fluid replacement is of foremost importance. The goal is to decrease the hematocrit or restore normal cardiocirculatory functions. Antibiotic prophylaxis has not been shown as an effective preventive treatment. Early enteral feeding is based on a high level of evidence, resulting in a reduction of local and systemic infection. Patients suffering infected necrosis causing clinical sepsis, pancreatic abscess or surgical acute abdomen are candidates for early intervention. Hospital mortality of SAP after interventional or surgical debridement has decreased in high volume centers to below 20%.     

内镜与手术治疗坏死性胰腺炎疗效和安全性的Meta分析

背景消化内镜和外科手术是治疗坏死性胰腺炎的两种主要有创方式,但比较二者疗效和安全性的研究尚缺乏.目的系统评价消化内镜和外科手术治疗坏死性胰腺炎的疗效和安全性.方法检索PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane Library、中国知网、万方和中国生物医学文献数据库2000-01/2019-06发表的比较内镜和手术治疗坏死性胰腺炎的随机对照研究(randomized control trials,RCT)和队列研究,使用Revman5.3软件进行数据分析.结果共纳入8篇文献,其中3篇为RCT,5篇为队列研究.患者总数366例,其中内镜组167例,手术组199例.Meta分析结果显示:内镜组和手术组在临床缓解率(OR=1.3,95%CI:0.58-2.92,P=0.52)、复合结局变量——主要并发症或死亡(RR=0.46,95%CI:0.17-1.27,P=0.14)和死亡率(OR=0.78,95%CI:0.37-1.56,P=0.52)上无统计学差异.术后并发症中,内镜组相比于手术组,新发器官衰竭(OR=0.40,95%CI:0.18-0.90,P=0.03)、肠皮瘘或消化道穿孔(OR=0.46,95%CI:0.23-0.91,P=0.02)、胰瘘(OR=0.09,95%CI:0.03-0.24,P<0.00001)的发生率显著降低;而两组间术后腹腔出血、胰腺内分泌和胰腺外分泌功能不全的发生率无统计学差异.结论内镜和手术治疗坏死性胰腺炎的疗效无显著差异,但内镜可显著降低术后并发症的发生率.     

Does mortality occur early or late in acute pancreatitis?

ABSTRACT: Several prior studies have suggested that 80% of deaths in acute pancreatitis occur late as a result of pan-creatic infection. Others have suggested that approx half of deaths occur early as a result of multisystem organ failure. The aim of the present study was to determine the timing of mortality of acute pancreatitis at a large tertiary-care hospital in the United States. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis (ICD-9 code 577.0) admitted to Brigham and Women's Hospital from October 1, 1982 to June 30, 1995 were retrospectively studied to determine total mortality, frequency of early vs late deaths, and clinical features of patients with early (< or = 14 d after admission) or late deaths (> 14 d after admission). RESULTS: The overall mortality of acute pancreatitis was 2.1% (17 deaths among 805 patients). Eight deaths (47%) occurred within the first 14 d of hospitalization (median d 8, range 1-11 d), whereas 9 occurred after 14 d (median d 56, range 19-81). Early deaths resulted primarily from organ failure. Late deaths occurred postoperatively in 8 patients with infected or sterile necrosis and 1 patient with infected necrosis treated medically. CONCLUSION: Approximately half of deaths in acute pancreatitis occur within the first 14 d owing to organ failure and the remainder of deaths occur later because of complications associated with necrotizing pancreatitis. Improvement in mortality in the future will require innovative approaches to counteract early organ failure and late complications of necrotizing pancreatitis.     

Prognostic factors of critical acute pancreatitis: A prospective cohort study

BackgroundPatients with critical acute pancreatitis (CAP) have the highest risk of mortality. However, there have been no studies specifically designed to evaluate the prognostic factors of CAP.Aims & methodsThis was a prospective observational cohort study involving patients with CAP. Three aspects including organ failure, (peri)pancreatic necrotic fluid cultures and surgical interventions were analyzed specifically to identify prognostic factors.ResultsOf the 102 consecutive patients with CAP, 83 patients (81.4%) received step-up surgical treatment, the mortality of the step-up group was 25.3% (21/83). 19 patients (18.6%) underwent step-down surgical treatment, the mortality of the step-down group was 57.9% (11/19). Overall mortality in the whole cohort was 31.4% (32/102). Multivariate analysis of death predictors indicated that multiple organ failure (MOF) (OR = 5.3; 95% CI, 1.5–18.2; p = 0.008), long duration (≥5 days) of organ failure (OR = 6.4; 95% CI, 1.2–54.3; p = 0.029), multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) infection (OR = 4.6; 95% CI, 1.3–15.8; p = 0.013), OPN (OR = 3.7; 95% CI, 1.5–8.8; p = 0.004) and step-down surgical treatment (OR = 3.5; 95% CI, 1.2–10.1; p = 0.019) were significant factors.ConclusionAmong patients with CAP, MOF, long duration (≥5 days) of organ failure, MDROs infection, OPN and step-down surgical treatment were identified as the predictors of mortality.     

Acute pancreatitis: when and how to operate.

Patients with proved necrotizing pancreatitis should be treated in an intensive care unit. Surgical management of necrotizing pancreatitis is indicated if an acute abdomen or persistent or increasing signs of organ complications develop, such as pulmonary or renal insufficiency, cardiocirculatory dysfunction or metabolic disorders, and these do not respond to maximum intensive care treatment over at least 72 h. Besides these so-called non-responders to ICU treatment, operative management is clearly indicated in patients who develop signs of sepsis on the basis of a bacteriologically positive fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic necroses. In patients with minor necroses without any bacterial contamination and without extensive retroperitoneal fatty tissue necroses intensive care therapy can be successful without the necessity of a surgical intervention. The gold standard of surgical management of necrotizing pancreatitis is careful removal of necrotic tissue, drainage of bacterially infected area, elimination of the pancreatogenic ascites in order to prevent systemic spread of vasoactive and toxic substances and interruption of the inflammatory process. For the treatment of pancreatic necrosis we strongly support surgical debridement (necrosectomy), supplemented by postoperative closed continuous lavage of the lesser sac and the adjacent necrotic cavities. In 152 patients suffering from severe necrotizing pancreatitis the hospital mortality was 12.5% (19/152) by this surgical approach.     

Early nasojejunal tube feeding versus nil-by-mouth in acute pancreatitis: A randomized clinical trial

Background/objectivesThere is substantial evidence of superiority of enteral nutrition (EN) to parenteral nutrition in acute pancreatitis (AP) treatment, but few studies evaluated its effectiveness compared to no intervention. The objective of our trial was to compare the effects of EN to a nil-by-mouth (NBM) regimen in patients with AP.MethodsPatients with AP were randomized to receive either EN via a nasojejunal tube initiated within 24 h of admission or no nutritional support. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) was assessed as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included mortality, organ failure, local complications, infected pancreatic necrosis, surgical interventions, length of hospital stay, adverse events and inflammatory response intensity. Outcomes were compared using Student's t-test and Mann–Whitney U test as appropriate.Results214 patients were randomized in total, 107 to each group. SIRS occurrence was similar between groups, with 48 (45%) versus 51 (48%), respectively (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.71–1.26). No significant reduction of persistent organ failure (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.52–1.27) and mortality (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.28–1.23) was present in the EN group. There were no significant differences in other outcomes between the groups. When analyzing the occurrence of SIRS and mortality in subgroup of patients with severe disease no significant differences were noted.ConclusionOur results showed no significant reduction of persistent organ failure and mortality in patients with AP receiving early EN compared to patients treated with no nutritional support (NCT01965873).     

The Penetration of Ciprofloxacin into Human Pancreatic and Peripancreatic Necroses in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis

Background: Antibiotic prophylaxis in necrotizing pancreatitis has recently gained acceptance. Published studies, however, used different antibiotic regimes and some antibiotics penetrated pancreatic tissue or pancreatic necroses only poorly. The aim of this study was to assess the penetration of ciprofloxacin (CIP) into necrotic pancreatic and peripancreatic tissue. Patients and Methods: Serum, pancreatic necroses, peripancreatic fat tissue necroses and infected omental fluid levels of CIP were measured after 51 operations in 14 patients. Results: The median penetration ratio of CIP was 137.5% (range 11–196%) in infected omental bursa fluid, 59.6% (3–214%) in pancreatic necroses and 67.1% (1–250%) in peripancreatic necroses. Chemotherapeutical ratios of CIP as a marker for antimicrobial potency were high against most relevant pathogens in necrotizing pancreatitis. Conclusion: Due to its antimicrobial spectrum and the good penetration into the relevant compartments, CIP may be useful in preventing local infection in necrotizing pancreatitis. Received: August 28, 2000 · Revision accepted: August 28, 2001     

A systematic review of the extra-pancreatic infectious complications in acute pancreatitis

Background and aimExtra-pancreatic infectious complications in acute pancreatitis increase morbidity, but their incidence and association with infected pancreatic necrosis is unknown. Half of bacterial cultures of pancreatic necrosis are of non-enteric origin, raising the possibility of other sources of infection. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the incidence of extra-pancreatic infectious complications in acute pancreatitis, their timing, and relation to severity of pancreatitis and mortality.MethodsA systematic review was performed using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Libraries, following PRISMA guidelines. Search terms were “Pancreatitis” AND “Infection” AND (“Complication” OR “Outcome”).Results19 studies with 1741 patients were included. Extra-pancreatic infectious complication incidence was 32% (95% CI 23–41%), with the commonest being respiratory infection (9.2%) and bacteraemia (8.4%). Extra-pancreatic infectious complications were not associated with the predicted severity or the mortality of acute pancreatitis. Only 3 studies reported a relation of timing between extra-pancreatic and pancreatic infectious complications.ConclusionsThis is the first systematic review to evaluate the incidence of extra-pancreatic infectious complications in acute pancreatitis, which a third of patients with acute pancreatitis will develop. Implications are vigilance and prompt treatment of extra-pancreatic infection, to reduce possibility of progression to infected pancreatic necrosis.     

Changing concepts in the surgical management of acute pancreatitis.

Most episodes of acute pancreatitis are mild and self-limiting, but severe disease complicated by multiple system organ failure develops in up to 20% of cases. Early detection of those patients who subsequently develop necrotizing pancreatitis allows the start of supportive treatment in the intensive care unit before organ failure occurs. Conservative treatment in the intensive care unit, including the administration of intravenous antibiotics, is the gold standard. Surgery is indicated in patients with infected pancreatic necrosis but not in patients with sterile necrosis in the absence of deteriorating multi-organ failure despite maximal intensive care unit treatment, or other specific surgical complications. At our institution, out of 44 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis 29 (66%) had sterile necrosis and were managed conservatively while 15 (34%) had infected pancreatic necrosis and were treated by necrosectomy and continuous closed retroperitoneal lavage. There were two deaths resulting in an overall mortality of 5% in patients with severe acute pancreatitis.     

Risk factors for concomitant infectious pancreatic necrosis in patients with severe acute pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveAcute pancreatitis (AP) is a self-limiting disease. However, 20–30% of patients will develop into severe AP (SAP), and infectious pancreatic necrosis in the late course of SAP is the leading cause of death for such patients. This review aims to provide a comprehensive and systematic report of the currently published risk factors for complicated infectious pancreatic necrosis in patients with severe acute pancreatitis by meta-analysis of published retrospective case-control studies.MethodsFive electronic database systems were selected to search for articles on risk factors of infectious pancreatic necrosis in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. According to the heterogeneity among studies, the standardized mean difference (SMD), odds ratio and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated by applying a random-effects model or fixed-effects model, respectively.ResultsAs of 2nd Jun, 2021, a total of 1408 articles were searched, but only 21 articles were finally included in this meta-analysis. The results found that patients with severe acute pancreatitis complicated by infected pancreatic necrosis had higher APACHE II scores and higher levels of lipase (LPS), C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) compared to patients with severe acute pancreatitis alone. The differences were statistically significant (APACHE II: SMD = 0.86, 95%CI: 0.55, 1.18; LPS: SMD = 1.52, 95%CI: 1.13, 1.92; CRP: SMD = 1.42, 95%CI: 1.05, 1.79; PCT: SMD = 1.82, 95%CI: 1.36, 2.28).ConclusionsCompared with patients with severe acute pancreatitis alone, high levels of LPS, CRP, PCT and high APACHE II score were risk factors for infectious pancreatic necrosis in patients with severe acute pancreatitis.     

The role of extra-pancreatic infections in the prediction of severity and local complications in acute pancreatitis

Background

The aim of our study was to determine the risk factors for extrapancreatic infection (EPI) occurrence and its predictive power for assessing severity and local complications in acute pancreatitis including infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN).

Hemoconcentration is an early marker for organ failure and necrotizing pancreatitis

In a previous retrospective case-control study, hemoconcentration was associated with the development of pancreatic necrosis. The aim of the present study was to determine in a cohort study whether hemoconcentration is a marker for both organ failure and necrotizing pancreatitis. A cohort study was performed on patients admitted with acute pancreatitis from February 1996 to April 1997. Pancreatic necrosis was defined by findings on dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan or magnetic resonance imaging. Of 128 total patients with acute pancreatitis, 53 underwent computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Eighteen of 53 had necrotizing pancreatitis. Logistic regression identified an admission hematocrit > or = 44% and a failure of admission hematocrit to decrease at 24 hours as the best binary predictors of necrotizing pancreatitis and organ failure. By 24 hours, 17 of 18 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis versus 11 of 35 with interstitial pancreatitis met one or the other criterion for necrosis (p < 0.001). By 24 hours, 13 of 15 with organ failure versus 36 of 104 without organ failure met one or the other criterion (p < 0.001). The negative predictive value by 24 hours was 96% for necrotizing pancreatitis and 97% for organ failure. Hemoconcentration with an admission hematocrit > or = 44% and/or failure of admission hematocrit to decrease at approximately 24 hours was associated with the development of necrotizing pancreatitis and organ failure. Patients who did not experience hemoconcentration were very unlikely to develop pancreatic necrosis or organ failure.     

CXC receptor 1 is overexpressed in endoscopy-negative gastroesophageal reflux disease

Abstract

Objective. Transmural endoscopic drainage and necrosectomy have become favored treatment modes for infected pancreatic pseudocysts and necroses. In this analysis, we summarize the outcome of 40 patients with complicated course of acute pancreatitis after endoscopic treatment. Material and methods. From January 2006 through May 2011, 40 patients of our department with complicated pancreatitis were included in this retrospective analysis. All patients underwent endosonographic transgastric puncture followed by wire-guided insertion of one or more double pigtail stents. Patients with extensive necroses were treated repeatedly with transgastric necrosectomy. Treatment success was determined by clinical, laboratory, and radiological parameters. Results. Nine patients had interstitial pancreatitis (IP) with pancreatic pseudocysts. Thirty-one patients had necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) with acute pancreatic necroses (n = 4) or walled-off pancreatic necrosis (n = 27). All patients with IP and nine patients with NP had pseudocysts without solid material and underwent transgastric drainage only. In this group major complications occurred in 11.1% and no mortality was observed. Twenty-two NP patients were treated with additional repeated necrosectomy. In patients with localized peripancreatic necroses (n = 10) no need of surgery or mortality was observed, major complications occurred in 10%. In patients with extensive necroses reaching the lower abdomen (n = 12), three needed subsequent surgery and three died. Conclusions. Transgastric endoscopy is an effective minimally invasive procedure even in patients with advanced pancreatic necroses. Complication rate is low particularly in patients with sole pseudocysts or localized necroses. The extent of the fluid collections and necroses is a new predictive parameter for the outcome of the patients.     

In-Hospital Outcomes with Transfemoral Versus Transapical Access for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease

BackgroundThere is a paucity of data regarding outcomes with transfemoral (TF) versus transapical (TA) access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD).MethodsWe queried the national inpatient sample database (NIS) (2012−2013) to identify patients with PAD who underwent TAVR. We conducted a propensity matching analysis using 25 clinical variables to compare TF-TAVR versus TA-TAVR. The main outcome was in-hospital mortality.ResultsThe analysis included 22,349 patients who underwent TAVR, among those 6692 (29.9%) had PAD. In the matched cohort, in-hospital mortality was similar between TF-TAVR and TA-TAVR groups (4.8% vs. 5.1%, OR 0.95; 95%CI 0.74–1.21). TF-TAVR was associated with lower rates of cardiogenic shock (OR 0.64; 95%CI 0.50–0.82), use of mechanical circulatory support (OR 0.56; 95%CI 0.42–0.75), acute kidney injury (OR 0.76; 95%CI 0.67–0.86), hemodialysis (OR 0.51; 95%CI 0.36–0.71), major bleeding (OR 0.72; 95%CI 0.64–0.80), blood transfusion (OR 0.65; 95%CI 0.58–0.73), discharge to a skilled nursing facility (OR 0.61; 95%CI 0.54–0.68) as well as shorter length of hospital stay (8.13 ± 6.76 vs. 10.11 ± 7.80 days) compared with TA-TAVR. However, TF-TAVR was associated with higher rate of vascular complications (11.7% vs. 3.7%, OR 3.40; 95%CI 2.63–4.38), complete heart block (OR 1.52; 95%CI 1.23–1.87), and pacemaker insertion (OR = 1.58; 95%CI: 1.28–1.94). There was no difference between both groups in the rate of cerebrovascular accidents (OR 1.26; 95%CI 0.93–1.72).ConclusionIn this observational analysis from a large national database, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality between TF-TAVR and TA-TAVR among patients with PAD. Further studies are encouraged to identify the optimal access for TAVR in patients with PAD.