Interventional Ultrasound-Guided Procedures in Pancreatic Pseudocysts, Abscesses and Infected Necroses – Treatment Algorithm in a Large Single-Center Study

Zusammenfassung

Über einen Zeitraum von 5 Jahren wurden alle konsekutiven Patienten in dieser prospektiven „Single-center”-Observationsstudie dokumentiert, um Machbarkeit und „Outcome” der Ultraschall(US)- und EUS-geführten Drainage von symptomatischen nicht infizierten Pankreaspseudozysten und -abszessen als auch des endoskopischen Debridements infizierter Pankreasnekrosen zu untersuchen. Ergebnisse: Vom 23.3.2002 – 31.12.2008 wurden 147 Patienten (Frauen/Männer = 49 / 98 [1:2,0]) mit Pseudozysten (n = 32), Abszessen (n = 81) und Nekrosen (n = 34) registriert. Die technische Erfolgsrate bei der US-gestützten externen und der EUS-geführten transmuralen Drainage war 100 bzw. 97 % (transpapilläre [ERP-gestützte] Drainage: 92,1 %). Während die Komplikationsrate bei der externen Drainage 3,7 % ausmachte, lag diese Rate bei der transmuralen/transpapillären Drainage bei 9,6 %/ 0. Späte Komplikationen (> 24 h) wurden bei 6,4 % der Patienten nach transpapillärer Drainage beobachtet (externe/transmurale Drainage: 5,6 / 19,1 %). Komplikationen in 5 Fällen (Blutung: n = 3; Perforation: n = 1; Prothesendislolation mit Perforation des terminalen Ileums: n = 1) waren offen-chirurgisch zu versorgen. Nach einem mittleren Follow-up-Zeitraum von 20,7, 20,9 bzw. 19,4 Monaten wurde die definitive therapeutische Erfolgsrate mit durchschnittlich 96,2 % für die Pseudozyste (96,9 %), Abszess (97,5 %) und Nekrose (94,1 %) ermittelt (mittlere Rezidivrate: 15,4 %; Gesamtmortalität: 0,7 %, jedoch ohne interventionsbezogenen Todesfall). Schlussfolgerung: Das US- und Endoskopie-gestützte Management der aufgeführten Pankreasläsionen ist machbar und geeignet (auch in der täglichen Routine), da es als sicher und effektiv in erfahrener Hand anzusehen ist.

Abstract

Through a time period of 5 years, all consecutive patients were documented in this prospective single centre observational clinical study to investigate feasibility and outcome of ultrasound(US)- and EUS-guided drainage of symptomatic non-infected pancreatic pseudocysts and abscesses as well as the endoscopic debridement of infected necroses. Results: From 03 / 23 / 2002 to 12 / 31 / 2008, 147 patients (females:males = 49:98 [1:2.0]) with pseudocysts (n = 32), abscesses (n = 81) and necroses (n = 34) were enrolled in the study. Technical success rate in US-guided external and in EUS-guided transmural drainage was 100 % and 97.0 %, respectively, whereas that of transpapillary (ERP-guided) drainage was 92.1 %. While the complication rate in external drainage was 3.7 %, this rate in transmural and transpapillary drainage was 9.6 % and 0, respectively. Late complications (> 24 h) were observed in 6.4 % of patients after transpapillary drainage (external drainage, 5.6 %; transmural drainage, 19.1 %). Complications in 5 cases (bleeding, n = 3; perforation, n = 1; dislocation of the prosthesis with perforation of the terminal ileum, n = 1) needed to be approached surgically. After a mean follow-up period of 20.7 months, 20.9 months, and 19.4 months, the definitive therapeutic success rate was 96.2 % in average for the three diagnoses such as pseudocyst (96.9 %), abscess (97.5 %), and necrosis (94.1 %), respectively (recurrency rate, 15.4 % in average; overall mortality, 0.7 % but no intervention-related death). Conclusion: US- and endoscopy-based management of pancreatic lesions as reported is suitable and favorable also in daily clinical routine since it is a safe and efficacious approach in experienced hands.

Key words

pancreas - ultrasound - endoscopy - pancreatitis - abscess

References

• 1 Antillon M R, Shah R J, Stiegmann G et al. Single-step EUS-guided transmural drainage of simple and complicated pancreatic pseudocysts.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;  63 797-803
• 2 Baillie J. Pancreatic pseudocysts (Part I).  Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;  59 873-879
• 3 Baillie J. Pancreatic pseudocysts (Part II).  Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;  60 105-113
• 4 Bhattacharya D, Ammori B J. Minimally invasive approaches to the management of pancreatic pseudocysts: review of the literature.  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2003;  13 141-148
• 5 De Palma G D, Galloro G, Puzziello A et al. Endoscopic drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts: a long-term follow-up study of 49 patients.  Hepatogastroenterology. 2002;  49 1113-1115
• 6 Dohmoto M, Akiyama K, Lioka Y. Endoscopic and endosonographic management of pancreatic pseudocyst: a long-term follow-up.  Rev Gastroenterol Peru. 2003;  23 269-275
• 7 Giovannini M, Binmoeller K, Seifert H. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided cystogastrostomy.  Endoscopy. 2003;  35 239-245
• 8 Lopes C V, Pesenti C, Bories E et al. Endoscopic-ultrasound-guided endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts and abscesses.  Scand J Gastroenterol. 2007;  42 524-529
• 9 Norton I D, Clain J E, Wiersema M J et al. Utility of endoscopic ultrasonography in endoscopic drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts in selected patients.  Mayo Clin Proc. 2001;  76 794-798
• 10 Seewald S, Thonke F, Ang T L et al. One-step, simultaneous double-wire technique facilitates pancreatic pseudocyst and abscess drainage (with videos).  Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;  64 805-808
• 11 Sharma S S, Bhargawa N, Govil A. Endoscopic Management of Pancreatic Pseudocyst: A Long Term Follow Up.  Endoscopy. 2002;  34 203-207
• 12 Vosoghi M, Sial S, Garrett B et al. EUS-guided pancreatic pseudocyst drainage: review and experience at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center.  MedGenMed. 2002;  4 2
• 13 Will U, Wegener C, Graf K I et al. Differential treatment and early outcome in the interventional endoscopic management of pancreatic pseudocysts in 27 patients.  World J Gastroenterol. 2006;  12 4175-4178
• 14 Baron T H, Thaggard W G, Morgan D et al. Endoscopic therapy of organized pancreatic necrosis.  Gastroenterology. 1996;  111 755-764
• 15 Seewald S, Groth S, Omar S et al. Aggressive endoscopic therapy for pancreatic necrosis and pancreatic abcess.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;  62 92-100
• 16 Seifert H, Wehrmann T, Schmitt T et al. Retroperitoneal endoscopic debridement for infected peripancreatic necrosis.  Lancet. 2000;  356 653-655
• 17 Connor S, Raraty M G, Howes N et al. Surgery in the treatment of acute pancreatitis--minimal access pancreatic necrosectomy.  Scand J Surg. 2005;  94 135-142
• 18 Gotzinger P, Sautner T, Kriwanek S et al. Surgical treatment for severe acute pancreatitis.  World J Surg. 2002;  26 474-478
• 19 Mier J, Leon E L, Castillo A et al. Early versus late necrosectomy in severe necrotizing pancreatitis.  Am J Surg. 1997;  173 71-75
• 20 Seifert H, Biermer M, Schmitt W et al. Transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy after acute pancreatitis: a multicentre study with long-term follow-up (the GEPARD Study).  Gut. 2009;  58 1260-1266
• 21 Horvath K D, Kao L S, Ali A et al. Laparoscopic assisted percutaneous drainage of infected pancreatic necrosis.  Surg Endosc. 2001;  15 677-682
• 22 Uhl W, Warshaw A, Imrie C et al. IAP Guidelines for the surgical management of acute pancreatitis.  Pancreatology. 2002;  2 565-573
• 23 Seifert H, Faust D, Schmitt T et al. Transmural drainage of cystic peripancreatic lesions with a new large-channel echo endoscope.  Endoscopy. 2001;  33 1022-1026