TY - JOUR
T1 - Diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in infected necrotizing pancreatitis
T2 - An international expert survey and case vignette study
AU - van Grinsven, Janneke
AU - van Brunschot, Sandra
AU - Bakker, Olaf J.
AU - Bollen, Thomas L.
AU - Boermeester, Marja A.
AU - Bruno, Marco J.
AU - Dejong, Cornelis H.
AU - Dijkgraaf, Marcel G.
AU - van Eijck, Casper H.
AU - Fockens, Paul
AU - van Goor, Harry
AU - Gooszen, Hein G.
AU - Horvath, Karen D.
AU - van Lienden, Krijn P.
AU - van Santvoort, Hjalmar C.
AU - Besselink, Marc G.
PY - 2016/1
Y1 - 2016/1
N2 - Background: The optimal diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in infected necrotizing pancreatitis are subject to debate. A survey was performed on these topics amongst a group of international expert pancreatologists. Methods: An online survey including case vignettes was sent to 118 international pancreatologists. The use and timing of fine-needle aspiration (FNA), antibiotics, catheter drainage and (minimally invasive) necrosectomy were evaluated. Results: The response rate was 74% (N = 87). None of the respondents use FNA routinely, 85% selectively and 15% never. Most respondents (87%) use a step-up approach in patients with infected necrosis. Walled-off necrosis (WON) is considered a prerequisite for endoscopic drainage and percutaneous drainage by 66% and 12%, respectively. After diagnosing infected necrosis, 55% routinely postpone invasive interventions, whereas 45% proceed immediately to intervention. A lack of consensus about timing of intervention was apparent on day 14 with proven infected necrosis (58% intervention versus 42% non-invasive) as well as on day 20 with only clinically suspected infected necrosis (59% intervention versus 41% non-invasive). Discussion: The step-up approach is the preferred treatment strategy in infected necrotizing pancreatitis amongst expert pancreatologists. There is no uniformity regarding the use of FNA and timing of intervention in the first 2-3 weeks of infected necrotizing pancreatitis.
AB - Background: The optimal diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in infected necrotizing pancreatitis are subject to debate. A survey was performed on these topics amongst a group of international expert pancreatologists. Methods: An online survey including case vignettes was sent to 118 international pancreatologists. The use and timing of fine-needle aspiration (FNA), antibiotics, catheter drainage and (minimally invasive) necrosectomy were evaluated. Results: The response rate was 74% (N = 87). None of the respondents use FNA routinely, 85% selectively and 15% never. Most respondents (87%) use a step-up approach in patients with infected necrosis. Walled-off necrosis (WON) is considered a prerequisite for endoscopic drainage and percutaneous drainage by 66% and 12%, respectively. After diagnosing infected necrosis, 55% routinely postpone invasive interventions, whereas 45% proceed immediately to intervention. A lack of consensus about timing of intervention was apparent on day 14 with proven infected necrosis (58% intervention versus 42% non-invasive) as well as on day 20 with only clinically suspected infected necrosis (59% intervention versus 41% non-invasive). Discussion: The step-up approach is the preferred treatment strategy in infected necrotizing pancreatitis amongst expert pancreatologists. There is no uniformity regarding the use of FNA and timing of intervention in the first 2-3 weeks of infected necrotizing pancreatitis.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84951763087&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/hpb.12491
DO - 10.1111/hpb.12491
M3 - Article
C2 - 26475650
AN - SCOPUS:84951763087
SN - 1365-182X
VL - 18
SP - 49
EP - 56
JO - HPB
JF - HPB
IS - 1
ER -