Dataset Information

Trans-gastric and trans-abdominal percutaneous drainage of acute peripancreatic fluid infected collections: A retrospective analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Acute pancreatitis is one of the most common gastrointestinal diseases. Approximately 20% of the patients develop peripancreatic collections. Step-up management it's now the best approach with less rate of morbidity and mortality compared with open or minimally invasive surgery. Percutaneous management could reach a success rate between 50 and 76%. Our study shows the outcomes of trans-gastric versus transabdominal percutaneous drainage in cases of acute peripancreatic fluid infected collections in the absence of interventionist endoscopy.

Methods

A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database was conducted. All the patients older than 18 years old that underwent percutaneous drainage between January 2010-December 2021 were included. Analysis and description of outcomes such as mortality, complications, and avoidance of surgical procedures was performed.

Results

18 patients underwent percutaneous drainage. 66.67% of patients were male. Mean age was 52.55 ± 22.06 years. Mean weight was 74.43 ± 15.25 kg. Mean size of peripancreatic collections 118.4 ± 49.12 mm. Wall-off necrosis was present in 33.33%. Trans-gastric approach was performed in 50% of the cases, the rest was trans-abdominal. No mortality was evidenced after 30 days of follow up. After trans-gastric percutaneous drainage, all patients avoided surgical open or laparoscopic procedure.

Conclusion

Standardized step-up approach shows increased rates of success in percutaneous drainage of peripancreatic collections. Our case series shows a high rate of success in terms of avoidance any surgical procedure with no mortality after trans-abdominal and trans-gastric percutaneous drainage. Nevertheless, further prospective studies with higher sample size are needed.

SUBMITTER: Rey C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9289435 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and aimsPelvic fluid collections (PFCs) are frequent adverse events of abdominal surgery or inflammatory conditions. A percutaneous approach to deep PFCs could be challenging and result in a longer, painful recovery. The transvaginal approach has been considered easy but is limited by the difficulty of leaving a stent in place. The transrectal approach has been described, but issues related to fecal contamination were hypothesized. Data on EUS-guided transrectal drainage (EUS-TRD) with lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are few and suggest unsatisfactory outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EUS-TRD with LAMSs in patients with PFCs.MethodsA retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database on therapeutic EUS was conducted. All EUS-TRD procedures were included.ResultsFive patients (2 male, age 44-89 years) were included. Four patients had postoperative PFCs, and 1 presented with a pelvic abscess complicating acute diverticulitis. Two of 5 had fecal diversion; the remaining 3 had unaltered large-bowel anatomy. One case had a concomitant abdominal collection, treated with percutaneous drainage in the same session. An electrocautery-enhanced LAMS delivery system (15 × 10 mm) was used in all cases. EUS-TRD was performed with the direct-puncture technique and lasted less than 10 minutes in 4 cases; in the remaining case, needle puncture and LAMS placement over a guidewire was required, and the procedure length was 14 minutes. The clinical success rate was 100%. LAMSs were removed after a median of 14 (range, 12-24) days. One patient reported partial proximal LAMS migration after 24 days (mild adverse event). No PFC recurrence was observed.ConclusionEUS-TRD with LAMSs is a safe and effective technique for treatment of PFCs. The use of 15- × 10-mm LAMSs allows rapid PFC resolution. EUS-TRD could be performed not only in patients with fecal diversion but also in cases of unaltered anatomy.

Project description:BackgroundThe outcomes of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage (EUSD) in treatment of pancreas fluid collection (PFC) after pancreas surgeries have not been evaluated systematically. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the outcomes of EUSD in patients with PFC after pancreas surgery and compare it with percutaneous drainage (PCD).MethodsPubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for studies reporting outcomes EUSD in treatment of PFC after pancreas surgeries, from their inception until January 2022. Two meta-analyses were performed: (A) a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis of EUSD (meta-analysis A) and (B) two-arm meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of EUSD and PCD (meta-analysis B). Pooled proportion of the outcomes in meta-analysis A as well as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) in meta-analysis B was calculated to determine the technical and clinical success rates, complications rate, hospital stay, and recurrence rate. ROBINS-I tool was used to assess the risk of bias.ResultsThe literature search retrieved 610 articles, 25 of which were eligible for inclusion. Included clinical studies comprised reports on 695 patients. Twenty-five studies (477 patients) were included in meta-analysis A and eight studies (356 patients) were included in meta-analysis B. In meta-analysis A, the technical and clinical success rates of EUSD were 94% and 87%, respectively, with post-procedural complications of 14% and recurrence rates of 9%. Meta-analysis B showed comparable technical and clinical success rates as well as complications rates between EUSD and PCD. EUSD showed significantly shorter duration of hospital stay compared to that of patients treated with PCD.ConclusionEUSD seems to be associated with high technical and clinical success rates, with low rates of procedure-related complications. Although EUSD leads to shorter hospital stay compared to PCD, the certainty of evidence was low in this regard.