Surgical intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis: towards lesser and later
M. Cheung
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2009.04846.x
IF: 1.7
2009-04-01
ANZ Journal of Surgery
Abstract:Acute pancreatitis and burn are surgical emergencies that elicit similar pathophysiology, characterized by an early phase of systemic inflammatory response syndrome and a later stage of superimposed infection.1 Acute pancreatitis is a chemical burn in the retroperitoneal space. The difficulty in the management of acute pancreatitis compared with that of acute burn is obvious in terms of its access and control. A surgical operation to tackle acute pancreatitis in the early stage when the retroperitoneal burn is in its initial phase, while the inflammation is spreading without any demarcation, carries a very high mortality and is doomed to fail. The reported mortality rate differs widely from centre to centre. The inclusion of cases for analysis varies a great deal and probably accounts for the wide range of mortality. With the multi-modality approach to the management of acute pancreatitis, data have shown a significant reduction in the mortality rate if the operation is delayed.2 The modalities include intensive therapies with maximal cardiac, respiratory and renal support; open surgical drainage and debridement; focus operative necrosectomy via a small incision; percutaneous, endoscopic or laparoscopic drainage and necrosectomy. The difficulty lies in deciding which is the most appropriate modality, when is the most appropriate time, and for how long. In regard to the pathophysiology of acute pancreatitis, the term ‘walled-off pancreatic necrosis’ has been introduced recently to denote a distinct phase when the inflammation has been walled off. The necrotic tissue, whether infected or not, becomes walled off by granulation tissue. Once the inflammation is walled off, the necrotic tissue can be safely removed by various means. The key in the management of severe acute pancreatitis is keeping the patient alive until this safe period, usually 4–6 weeks after onset. With advances in intensive therapy, involving the provision of cardiac, respiratory and renal support, most patients can survive this early critical phase. Some patients, however, may still deteriorate despite maximal intensive therapy. Extensive retroperitoneal inflammation, especially in those with superimposed infection, may result in a significant acute abdominal compartment syndrome that is not amendable to intensive management; resulting in clinical deterioration. A laparostomy with mesh cover will release the tension and possibly drain away the toxic mediators.3 Surgical intervention becomes helpful in this early phase irrespective of whether infection occurs or not. The vital physiology of the patient can improve and this critical period can be passed. Referral centres for patients with severe acute pancreatitis should expect that some patients in the intensive therapy unit will have their abdominal wall opened for a long period, thereby placing a significant demand on staff.4 During systemic inflammatory response it could be difficult to distinguish if an infection is present. Fine-needle aspiration for diagnosis of infection has been used as an indicator for surgery.5 The magnitude of surgery remains controversial. With a poorly demarcated infection and an unorganized necrosis in the early phase, aggressive surgical debridement may result in a spreading infection or an uncontrolled bleeding. The extent of surgery could be limited to simple drainage and laparostomy to relieve the abdominal tension instead of extensive debridement. The drainage track will facilitate later percutaneous debridement. It has also been shown that radiology-guided percutaneous drainage is one of the therapies that can be used as a temporary measure, with an overall mortality comparable to that of an open surgery.6 Rarely, the percutaneous catheter can also be used to guide the location of collection during an open surgery that was required later. The difficulty remains as to when percutaneous drainage therapy should be abandoned in favour of an open surgical debridement. Once the necrosis, whether infected or not, becomes organized and walled off, a number of approaches or combinations of approaches can be utilized. Use of a minimally invasive approach, which alleviates surgical trauma and causes the least physiological disturbance to the patient, who is recovering from the critical phase, has had comparable success and has enabled rapid recovery. These approaches include focus open debridement; percutaneous, endoscopic or laparoscopic drainage and necrosectomy. Selection of the approach depends on the location of collection and the availability of expertise. A combination of modalities will be necessary in the case of extensive collection. Small loin incision, toward where the collection points, enables easy opening to the pocket but cause 220 Perspectives