Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_734_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Disclaimer
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •Embryology
- •Lymphatics
- •Nerves
- •Clinically Relevant Anatomic Variations
- •Duodenum Inversum
- •Pancreas Divisum
- •Annular Pancreas
- •Ectopic Pancreas
- •Ansa Pancreatica
- •Pancreaticobiliary Maljunction
- •Duplication Anomalies
- •Physiology
- •Duodenal Physiology
- •Mechanical Function
- •Endocrine Function
- •Pancreatic Physiology
- •Exocrine Physiology
- •Normal Anatomy
- •Duodenal Anatomy
- •Pancreatic Anatomy
- •Ductal Anatomy
- •Vasculature
- •Endocrine Physiology
- •References
- •Etiology
- •Pathophysiology
- •Diagnosis
- •Clinical Presentation
- •Laboratory Tests
- •Imaging
- •Medical Management
- •Fluid Resuscitation
- •Analgesics
- •Prophylactic Antibiotics
- •Nutrition
- •Complications
- •Long-Term Sequelae of Acute Pancreatitis
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Initial Treatment
- •Reducing Severity of Acute Pancreatitis
- •Fluid Resuscitation
- •Pain Management
- •Nutrition
- •Preventing Infectious Complications
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Sterile Pancreatic Necrosis
- •Antibiotic Therapy
- •Catheter Drainage
- •Video-Assisted Retroperitoneal Drainage (VARD) Procedure
- •Sinus Tract Necrosectomy
- •Open Necrosectomy
- •Open Trans-Gastric Cystogastrostomy
- •Disconnected Distal Pancreatic Duct Syndrome
- •Introduction
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Venous Thrombosis
- •Intra-Abdominal Hypertension
- •Thoracic Complications
- •Gastrointestinal Complications
- •References
- •Pain
- •Endocrine Dysfunction
- •Exocrine Dysfunction
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Background
- •Postoperative Care
- •References
- •Background
- •Head-Dominant Disease
- •Tail-Dominant Disease
- •Perioperative Management
- •Procedure Steps
- •Open Whipple
- •MIS Whipple
- •Open Distal Pancreatectomy
- •MIS Distal Pancreatectomy
- •Pearls
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Procedures
- •Indications
- •Contraindications
- •Preoperative Workup
- •Pediatrics
- •Patient Selection
- •Contraindications
- •Key Steps
- •Common Steps
- •Pitfalls/Tricks
- •Local Complications
- •Systemic Complications
- •References
- •History/Introduction
- •Indications
- •Adults
- •Procedural Aspects
- •Preoperative Care
- •Total Pancreatectomy
- •Islet Infusion
- •Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS)
- •Postoperative Care
- •Outcomes
- •Perioperative Data
- •Perioperative Complications
- •Endocrine Function
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Duodenal Adenomas
- •Duodenal Adenocarcinomas
- •Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumors (D-NETs)
- •Other Non-neoplastic Epithelial Lesions
- •Duodenal Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (DGISTs)
- •Leiomyoma
- •Lipoma
- •Choledochal Cysts
- •Duodenal Lymphoma
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Pre-procedural Considerations
- •Indications
- •Resection Techniques
- •Sporadic Non-ampullary Adenomas: Cold Snare Polypectomy
- •Sporadic Non-ampullary Adenomas: EMR
- •Sporadic Non-ampullary Adenomas: ESD
- •Sporadic Non-ampullary Adenomas: Full-Thickness Resection Device
- •Ampullary Adenomas: Endoscopic Papillectomy
- •Sporadic Non-ampullary Adenomas: Cold Snare Polypectomy
- •Sporadic Non-ampullary Adenomas: EMR
- •Endoscopic Papillectomy
- •Surveillance
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Benign Tumors
- •Genetic Syndromes
- •Pre-Malignant Tumors
- •Low-Grade Malignancies
- •Alternatives
- •Inclusion Criteria
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Open Transduodenal Ampullectomy
- •Minimally Invasive (Robotic-Assisted) Transduodenal Ampullectomy
- •Outcomes
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Laparoscopic Segmental Duodenectomy
- •Robotic Segmental Duodenectomy
- •Technique
- •Open Segmental Duodenectomy
- •Patient Positioning
- •Technique
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Overview
- •Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm (IPMN)
- •General Concepts
- •Novel Biomarkers
- •DNA-Based Biomarkers
- •MiRNA
- •Protein-Based Biomarkers
- •IPMNs
- •MCNs
- •SCNs
- •SPTs
- •Guidelines
- •Surveillance Discontinuation
- •Follow-Up Strategy
- •The Verona Policy
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Pathophysiology
- •Work-Up
- •Tissue Diagnosis
- •Serum Tumor Markers
- •Multidisciplinary Decision-Making
- •Adjuvant Trials
- •Systemic Chemotherapy
- •Chemoradiation
- •Neoadjuvant Trials
- •Chemotherapy
- •Chemoradiation
- •Pancreatectomy
- •Summary
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Diagnosis
- •Imaging
- •Functionality
- •Insulinoma
- •Gastrinoma
- •VIPoma
- •Glucagonoma
- •Staging/Surgical Decision-Making
- •Nonmetastatic Disease
- •Metastatic Disease
- •Multidisciplinary Decision-Making
- •Surgical Resection
- •Systemic Treatments
- •Open Trials
- •Surveillance
- •References
- •Renal Cell Carcinoma
- •Introduction/Epidemiology
- •Diagnosis/Radiology/Pathology
- •Treatment/Outcome
- •Colorectal Carcinoma
- •Introduction/Epidemiology
- •Diagnosis/Radiology/Pathology
- •Treatment/Prognosis
- •Melanoma
- •Introduction/Epidemiology
- •Diagnosis/Radiology/Pathology
- •Treatment/Prognosis
- •Sarcoma
- •Introduction/Epidemiology
- •Diagnosis/Radiology/Pathology
- •Treatment/Prognosis
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Preoperative Considerations
- •Key Steps
- •Staging Laparoscopy
- •Specimen Removal
- •Vascular Resection
- •Reconstruction
- •Pancreaticojejunostomy
- •Hepaticojejunostomy
- •Gastro- or Duodeno-Jejunostomy
- •Final Steps
- •References
- •Randomized Controlled Trials
- •Surgical Technique
- •Resection Phase
- •Reconstruction Phase
- •Postoperative Course
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Preoperative Workup
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Surgical Management
- •Patient Preparation
- •Surgical Steps
- •Step 1: Kocher Maneuver
- •Step 4: Pancreatic Transection
- •Reconstruction
- •Hepaticojejunostomy
- •Pancreaticojejunostomy
- •Duodenojejunostomy
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Diagnostic Laparoscopy
- •Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS)
- •Splenic Vein Stump Length
- •Ligamentum Teres/Falciform Pedicle Flap
- •References
- •History
- •Early Exploration
- •Trends Over Time
- •Morbidity
- •Safety
- •Oncologic Safety
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Clinical Considerations
- •Anatomical Considerations
- •Surgical Technique
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Indications
- •Preoperative Testing
- •Operative Approach
- •Peritoneal Access
- •Specimen Extraction
- •Closure
- •Clinical Outcomes
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Preoperative Preparation
- •Key Shared Operative Steps
- •Trocar Placement
- •Splenic Flexure Mobilization
- •Pancreas Mobilization
- •Identify Pancreatic Pathology
- •Pancreatic Transection
- •Splenic Vein Dissection
- •Splenic Artery Dissection
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Historical Evolution
- •Perioperative Outcomes
- •Oncologic Outcomes
- •Neoadjuvant Therapy
- •Preoperative Adjuncts
- •Preoperative Coiling
- •Aortic Stenting
- •Robotic DP-CAR Surgical Technique
- •Positioning
- •Port Placement
- •Surgical Steps
- •Perioperative Care
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Preoperative Considerations
- •Laparoscopic Enucleation
- •Patient Positioning
- •Procedure
- •Robotic Enucleation
- •Patient Positioning
- •Procedure
- •Open Enucleation
- •Postoperative Management
- •Postoperative Outcomes
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Indications
- •Preoperative Assessment
- •Serologic Testing
- •Surgical Management
- •Patient Preparation
- •Diagnostic Laparoscopy
- •Surgical Steps
- •Step 1: Gastric Mobilization
- •Step 2: Pancreatic Resection
- •Step 3: Reconstruction
- •Jejunojejunostomy
- •Pancreaticojejunostomy
- •Discussion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Biliary Obstruction
- •Endoscopic Interventions
- •Plastic Versus Metal Stents
- •Covered Versus Uncovered Metal Stents
- •Stent Obstruction
- •Surgical Options
- •Endoscopic Versus Surgical Intervention
- •Duodenal Obstruction
- •Duodenal Stents
- •Venting Percutaneous Gastrostomy Tubes (PEG)
- •Surgical Gastrojejunostomy (Duodenal Bypass)
- •Endoscopic Versus Surgical Intervention
- •Abdominal Pain
- •Celiac Plexus Neurolysis
- •Surgical Celiac Plexus Block
- •Summary
- •References

2 Diagnosis andMedical Management ofAcute Pancreatitis
42. de Madaria E, Banks PA, Moya-Hoyo N, Wu BU, Rey-Riveiro M, Acevedo-Piedra NG, etal.
Early factors associated with uid sequestration and outcomes of patients with acute pancreatitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;12(6):997–1002.
43. Jang JW, Kim MH, Oh D, Cho DH, Song TJ, Park DH, etal. Factors and outcomes associated
with pancreatic duct disruption in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Pancreatology.
2016;16(6):958–65.
44. Crockett SD, Wani S, Gardner TB, Falck-Ytter Y, Barkun AN, American Gastroenterological
Association Institute Clinical Guidelines Committee. American Gastroenterological
Association Institute Guideline on Initial Management of Acute Pancreatitis. Gastroenterology.
2018;154(4):1096–101.
45. Singh VK, Bollen TL, Wu BU, Repas K, Maurer R, Yu S, etal. An assessment of the severity
of interstitial pancreatitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9(12):1098–103.
46. Sinha A, Quesada-Vázquez N, Faghih M, Afghani E, Zaheer A, Khashab MA, et al.
Early predictors of uid sequestration in acute pancreatitis: a validation study. Pancreas.
2016;45(2):306–10.
47. Kiriyama S, Gabata T, Takada T, Hirata K, Yoshida M, Mayumi T, etal. New diagnostic criteria of acute pancreatitis. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2010;17(1):24–36.
48. Ismail OZ, Bhayana V.Lipase or amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis? Clin Biochem.
2017;50(18):1275–80.
49. Weiss FU, Hesselbarth N, Párniczky A, Mosztbacher D, Lämmerhirt F, Ruffert C, et al.
Common variants in the CLDN2-MORC4 and PRSS1-PRSS2 loci confer susceptibility to
acute pancreatitis. Pancreatology. 2018;18(5):477–81.
50. Garg R, Rustagi T.Management of Hypertriglyceridemia Induced Acute Pancreatitis. Biomed
Res Int. 2018;2018:4721357.
51. Vipperla K, Somerville C, Furlan A, Koutroumpakis E, Saul M, Chennat J, etal. Clinical prole and natural course in a large cohort of patients with hypertriglyceridemia and pancreatitis.
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2017;51(1):77–85.
52. Türkvatan A, Erden A, Türkoğlu MA, Seçil M, Yener Ö. Imaging of acute pancreatitis and its
complications. Part 1: acute pancreatitis. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2015;96(2):151–60.
53. Kondo S, Isayama H, Akahane M, Toda N, Sasahira N, Nakai Y, etal. Detection of common bile duct stones: comparison between endoscopic ultrasonography, magnetic resonance cholangiography, and helical-computed-tomographic cholangiography. Eur J Radiol.
2005;54(2):271–5.
54. Wan J, Ouyang Y, Yu C, Yang X, Xia L, Lu N. Comparison of EUS with MRCP in idiopathic acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc.
2018;87(5):1180–1188.e9.
55. De Lisi S, Leandro G, Buscarini E. Endoscopic ultrasonography versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in acute biliary pancreatitis: a systematic review. Eur J
Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;23(5):367–74.
56. Makary MA, Duncan MD, Harmon JW, Freeswick PD, Bender JS, Bohlman M, etal. The role
of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the management of patients with gallstone pancreatitis. Ann Surg. 2005;241(1):119–24.
57. Ardengh JC, Malheiros CA, Rahal F, Pereira V, Ganc AJ.Microlithiasis of the gallbladder: role
of endoscopic ultrasonography in patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis. Rev Assoc Med
Bras (1992). 2010;56(1):27–31.
58. Papachristou GI, Muddana V, Yadav D, O’Connell M, Sanders MK, Slivka A, etal. Comparison
of BISAP, Ranson’s, APACHE-II, and CTSI scores in predicting organ failure, complications,
and mortality in acute pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105(2):435–41. quiz 442
59. Ranson JH, Pasternack BS.Statistical methods for quantifying the severity of clinical acute
pancreatitis. J Surg Res. 1977;22(2):79–91.
60. Di MY, Liu H, Yang ZY, Bonis PAL, Tang JL, Lau J.Prediction models of mortality in acute
pancreatitis in adults: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(7):482–90.
35

36
61. Singh VK, Wu BU, Bollen TL, Repas K, Maurer R, Johannes RS, etal. A prospective evaluation of the bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis score in assessing mortality and intermediate markers of severity in acute pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104(4):966–71.
62. Forsmark CE, Yadav D. Predicting the prognosis of acute pancreatitis. Ann Intern Med.
2016;165(7):523–4.
63. Koutroumpakis E, Wu BU, Bakker OJ, Dudekula A, Singh VK, Besselink MG, etal. Admission
hematocrit and rise in blood urea nitrogen at 24 h outperform other laboratory markers in predicting persistent organ failure and pancreatic necrosis in acute pancreatitis: a post hoc analysis of three large prospective databases. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110(12):1707–16.
64. Umapathy C, Raina A, Saligram S, Tang G, Papachristou GI, Rabinovitz M, et al. Natural
history after acute necrotizing pancreatitis: a large US tertiary care experience. J Gastrointest
Surg. 2016;20(11):1844–53.
65. Zavyalov T, Khotsyna Y, Tenner S.The role of antibiotics in the management of patients with
acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2010;12(1):13–8.
66. Banks PA, Bollen TL, Dervenis C, Gooszen HG, Johnson CD, Sarr MG, etal. Classication of
acute pancreatitis—2012: revision of the Atlanta classication and denitions by international
consensus. Gut. 2013;62(1):102–11.
67. Buxbaum JL, Quezada M, Da B, Jani N, Lane C, Mwengela D, et al. Early aggressive
hydration hastens clinical improvement in mild acute pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol.
2017;112(5):797–803.
68. Gardner TB, Vege SS, Pearson RK, Chari ST.Fluid resuscitation in acute pancreatitis. Clin
Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6(10):1070–6.
69. Gardner TB, Vege SS, Chari ST, Petersen BT, Topazian MD, Clain JE, etal. Faster rate of initial
uid resuscitation in severe acute pancreatitis diminishes in-hospital mortality. Pancreatology.
2009;9(6):770–6.
70. Singh VK, Gardner TB, Papachristou GI, Rey-Riveiro M, Faghih M, Koutroumpakis E, etal.
An international multicenter study of early intravenous uid administration and outcome in
acute pancreatitis. United European Gastroenterol J. 2017;5(4):491–8.
71. Villatoro E, Mulla M, Larvin M.Antibiotic therapy for prophylaxis against infection of pancreatic necrosis in acute pancreatitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;2010(5):CD002941.
72. Adler DG, Chari ST, Dahl TJ, Farnell MB, Pearson RK.Conservative management of infected
necrosis complicating severe acute pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98(1):98–103.
73. Runzi M, Niebel W, Goebell H, Gerken G, Layer P.Severe acute pancreatitis: nonsurgical
treatment of infected necroses. Pancreas. 2005;30(3):195–9.
74. Bakker OJ, van Brunschot S, van Santvoort HC, Besselink MG, Bollen TL, Boermeester MA,
etal. Early versus on-demand nasoenteric tube feeding in acute pancreatitis. N Engl J Med.
2014;371(21):1983–93.
75. Coté GA.Early enteral feeding does not improve outcomes in patients with predicted severe
acute pancreatitis. Gastroenterology. 2015;148(7):1476–8.
76. Vaughn VM, Shuster D, Rogers MAM, Mann J, Conte ML, Saint S, et al. Early versus
delayed feeding in patients with acute pancreatitis: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med.
2017;166(12):883–92.
77. Bevan MG, Asrani VM, Bharmal S, Wu LM, Windsor JA, Petrov MS.Incidence and predictors
of oral feeding intolerance in acute pancreatitis: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and metaregression. Clin Nutr. 2017;36(3):722–9.
78. Bakker OJ, van Brunschot S, Farre A, Johnson CD, Kalfarentzos F, Louie BE, etal. Timing
of enteral nutrition in acute pancreatitis: meta-analysis of individuals using a single-arm of
randomised trials. Pancreatology. 2014;14(5):340–6.
79. Jin M, Zhang H, Lu B, Li Y, Wu D, Qian J, etal. The optimal timing of enteral nutrition
and its effect on the prognosis of acute pancreatitis: a propensity score matched cohort study.
Pancreatology. 2017;17(5):651–7.
80. Petrov MS, van Santvoort HC, Besselink MGH, van der Heijden GJMG, Windsor JA,
Gooszen HG. Enteral nutrition and the risk of mortality and infectious complications in
C. T. Huerta et al.

2 Diagnosis andMedical Management ofAcute Pancreatitis
patients with severe acute pancreatitis: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Arch Surg.
2008;143(11):1111–7.
81. Afghani E, Pandol SJ, Shimosegawa T, Sutton R, Wu BU, Vege SS, et al. Acute
pancreatitis- progress and challenges: a report on an international symposium. Pancreas.
2015;44(8):1195–210.
82. Vege SS, DiMagno MJ, Forsmark CE, Martel M, Barkun AN.Initial medical treatment of
acute pancreatitis: American Gastroenterological Association Institute Technical Review.
Gastroenterology. 2018;154(4):1103–39.
37

Chapter 3
Acute Pancreatitis: Non-surgical Therapies
Including Gallstone Management
AnneNagelhout, MartijnW.J.Stommel, StefanA.W.Bouwense,
MarcG.Besselink, andfor the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group
Introduction
Acute pancreatitis has an increasing incidence worldwide and is one of the most
common gastrointestinal disorders requiring acute hospitalization [1, 2]. The current incidence in the Western World is 34 per 100.000 person-years [3]. The clinical
course and severity of acute pancreatitis varies a lot, ranging from a mild course
with transient abdominal discomfort till a severe course with multiorgan failure and
high mortality.
Approximately 80% of the patients present with mild acute pancreatitis, which is
self-limiting, usually within 1week [4, 5]. The other 20% of patients develop moderate to severe acute pancreatitis, with (multiple) organ failure and often (infected)
A. Nagelhout (*)
Department of Surgery, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Department of Research and Development, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein,
The Netherlands
e-mail: a.nagelhout@antoniusziekenhuis.nl
M. W. J. Stommel
Department of Surgery, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
e-mail: martijn.stommel@radboudumc.nl
S. A. W. Bouwense
Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
e-mail: stefan.bouwense@mumc.nl
M. G. Besselink
Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
e-mail: m.g.besselink@amsterdamumc.nl
Switzerland AG 2025
E. P. Ceppa et al. (eds.), The SAGES Manual of Evolving Techniques in
Pancreatic Surgery, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-78409-5_3
39© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature

40
necrosis of the pancreatic or peripancreatic tissue [4–6]. In these patients, the mortality rate is high (10–30%) in contrast to low mortality in mild pancreatitis (less
than 1%) [5, 7, 8]. The treatment of pancreatitis patients is predominantly aimed at
supporting the vital organ systems and providing comfort and nutrition when needed.
This chapter provides an overview of the non-surgical therapy of acute pancreatitis. First, initial therapies (i.e., uid resuscitation, pain management, nutrition,
and the role of antibiotics) will be discussed, followed by the specic treatment for
biliary pancreatitis, including the role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), and
endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), the timing of cholecystectomy. The prevention of
disease recurrence and recommendations for future research will also be discussed.
A. Nagelhout et al.
Early andLate Phase ofAcute Pancreatitis
In case of mild pancreatitis, the disease is limited to the early phase. A mild systemic inammatory reaction may take place and patients usually improve spontaneously after a few days. However, in case of a more severe inammatory response,
two overlapping phases of acute pancreatitis can be recognized: the early and the
late phase. Due to excessive local pancreatic cell injury, the early phase is characterized by activation of large cytokine cascades which can cause the systemic inammatory response syndrome (SIRS) [4]. As a result of persistent SIRS, the risk of
infections and development of organ failure arises [4, 9]. (Multi)organ failure,
including cardiovascular, respiratory, or renal failure, can develop early in acute
pancreatitis and is the main reason for early mortality in patients with severe acute
pancreatitis [4, 9, 10]. The late phase of acute pancreatitis is characterized by persistence of systemic signs of inammation, generally caused by compensatory antiinammatory response syndrome (CARS) [5]. During this phase, patients are again
susceptible to infections like pneumonia, sepsis, or secondary infection of (peri)
pancreatic necrosis [5, 7].
Initial Treatment
The initial treatment of acute pancreatitis in the early phase consists of supportive
measures and preventing/treating (multi)organ failure which comprises uid resuscitation, pain management, and proper nutrition. For management of the disease, a
multidisciplinary team (including a surgeon, gastroenterologist, radiologist, and
dietitian) in hospitals is recommended.

3 Acute Pancreatitis: Non-surgical Therapies Including Gallstone Management
41
Reducing Severity of Acute Pancreatitis
Until this date, the cornerstone of treatment in patients with severe acute pancreatitis is supportive care. Several studies have been conducted in the early phase of
acute pancreatitis in order to prevent severe disease progression and reduce complications [11–14]. Unfortunately, these studies showed no improvement in clinical
outcomes and the right treatment in the early phase of acute pancreatitis for reduction of organ failure and mortality is still lacking. An option for treatment may be
modication of the immune response in the early phase of predicted severe acute
pancreatitis through the administration of early intravenous omega-3 fatty acids in
patients. Omega-3 fatty acids replace arachidonic acids (omega-6) in the inammatory mediator production cascade [15]. In addition, omega-3 fatty acids provide
increased production of resolvins which improve normalization of inammatory
tissue [16]. These actions of omega-3 fatty acids could potentially lead to an effective response of the immune system. A meta-analysis [17] was performed to investigate the safety and efcacy of omega-3in patients with acute pancreatitis and
sepsis. The meta-analysis demonstrated a lower incidence of mortality after omega-3
fatty acids infusion. Furthermore, a recent single-center randomized controlled trial
[18] demonstrated decreased CRP levels and decreased onset of new organ failure
in patients with predicted severe pancreatitis after administration of omega-3 fatty
acids. To provide solid evidence on the true potential of omega-3 fatty acids, the
PLANCTON multicenter randomized trial is currently in progress in the Netherlands
in patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis.
Fluid Resuscitation
Adequate uid resuscitation is required during the rst few days of acute pancreatitis to correct for possible intravascular hypovolemia, which is caused by local and
systemic immune responses. Infusion with Ringer’s lactate is recommended as it
reduces the risk of developing SIRS when compared to normal saline infusion [1,
19–22]. In fact, such immune responses induce cell apoptosis and increase vascular
permeability, resulting in extravasation of uid in the third space, and could lead to
hypoperfusion, (multiple) organ failure, and ultimately death [2, 23, 24]. On the
other hand, aggressive and undirected uid infusion contributes to higher morbidity
and even higher mortality as was shown by two randomized trials [25, 26]. Therefore,
careful monitoring of the vital signs during uid resuscitation is necessary [1, 25,
26]. The preferred approach according to the current IAP/APA treatment guideline
for acute pancreatitis focuses on resuscitation until certain goals are reached (heart
rate less than 120 per minute, mean arterial pressure between 65 and 85mmHg, and
urinary output more than 0.5 till 1.0mL/kg/h) [1].
The recent Waterfall trial [27] compared aggressive versus moderate uid resuscitation in patients with acute pancreatitis. Aggressive uid resuscitation consisted

42
of 20 mL/kg Ringer’s lactate over 2 h, followed by 3 mL/kg/h. Patients in the
moderate- resuscitation group received 1.5 mL/kg/h and only a bolus of 10 mL/
kg/2 h in patients with hypovolemia. This trial demonstrated that patients with
aggressive uid resuscitation had a higher risk of uid overload compared to moderate resuscitation (20.5 vs. 6.3%). These ndings underline the importance of carefully monitoring vital signs and achieving the resuscitation goals to prevent both
hypovolemia and hypervolemia.
A. Nagelhout et al.
Pain Management
Severe, persistent upper abdominal pain is the predominant symptom in patients
with acute pancreatitis, which remains dominant during the rst few days of hospital admission. Therefore, adequate pain treatment according to the World Health
Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder is required [28]. The use of opioids could
reduce the number of patients that need supplementary analgesia [29]. One study
suggested that epidural anesthesia prevents early tissue damage and improves the
perfusion of the pancreas [30]. More recent, a multicenter retrospective study suggested that the use of epidural anesthesia was associated with reduced 30-day mortality in patients with severe acute pancreatitis compared to patients without epidural
anesthesia (2 vs. 17%) [31]. Nevertheless, more prospective studies are needed on
the use of epidural anesthesia before it can be recommended in the standard supportive care for acute pancreatitis.
Nutrition
Gut barrier dysfunction is present in most patients with acute pancreatitis [32].
Therefore, optimal enteral nutritional support is important to maintain the intestinal
barrier integrity, but it also prevents bacterial overgrowth and decreases SIRS. [32,
33] According to the multicenter randomized PYTHON trial [11], early enteral tube
feeding within 24h after admission does not decrease rates of infection (25 vs.
26%) or mortality (11 vs. 7%) in comparison to on-demand feeding in patients with
predicted severe acute pancreatitis. Oral feeding on-demand is recommended and
can be started as early as a patient request. Enteral tube feeding should only be considered if an oral diet is not tolerated after 72 h form the time of presentation.
Enteral feeding is strongly preferred over parenteral feeding because of the lower
risks of complications such as (multi)organ failure, central venous catheter infections, and mortality [34, 35].

3 Acute Pancreatitis: Non-surgical Therapies Including Gallstone Management
43
Preventing Infectious Complications
In acute pancreatitis, both early infections, especially bacteremia, and secondary
infection of (peri)pancreatic necrosis in a later phase, may increase mortality [9].
Disruption of the normal gut barrier, which results in translocation of microorganisms, is believed to be the major cause of secondary infection of (peri)pancreatic
necrosis [32, 36, 37]. Multiple studies have shown that prophylactic administration
of antibiotics does not reduce the risk of infected (peri)pancreatic necrosis [38–41].
Moreover, the use of prophylactic antibiotics is associated with an increased incidence of fungal and multidrug-resistant bacterial infections [42, 43]. Administration
of antibiotics in acute pancreatitis are therefore only advised as treatment for proven
or clinically suspected infected necrosis [1, 44]. Another believed potential prophylactic strategy for the prevention of (secondary) infections by protecting the gut
barrier was the use of probiotics. The multicenter randomized PROPATRIA trial
[12] found a higher rate of mortality in patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis who received probiotics compared to a placebo group. Therefore, the administration of probiotics for the treatment of acute pancreatitis is not recommended.
Nevertheless, the perfect strategy for protecting the gut barrier and eventually
preventing infectious complications remains challenging. A possible strategy may
be the use of the short-chain fatty acid “butyrate” which is produced by different
types of bacteria in the gut. Butyrate has an anti-inammatory and antimicrobial
effect in the gut that improves the gut integrity and the mucosal immune system
[45]. A recent study showed the positive effect of oral supplementation of butyrate
in a mouse model of biliary necrotizing pancreatitis on the gut barrier [46]. Another
possible benecial effect on preventing bacterial translocation may be modulating
the gut’s microora. The gut microbiome is believed to play a role in the development of sepsis and (multi)organ failure [47]. Future research should be conducted to
investigate both possible strategies.
Management ofBiliary Pancreatitis
Currently, the most frequent cause of acute pancreatitis in the Western world is
gallstones (45%) [48]. Gallstones can induce acute biliary pancreatitis as a result of
(transient) obstruction of the bile and pancreatic duct. Cholangitis, organ failure,
and further potentially fatal consequences can occur in patients with biliary pancreatitis [4, 49, 50].

44
A. Nagelhout et al.
Role ofERCP
According to current guidelines, ERCP is not recommended for mild biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis or predicted severe biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis
and no presence of common bile duct obstruction [1, 51]. Urgent ERCP (within 24h
of admission) might be favorable in patients with persistent cholestasis and is currently only indicated in patients with biliary pancreatitis and concurrent acute cholangitis [1, 52, 53]. It was hypothesized that ERCP combined with papillotomy
might also reduce the severity of biliary pancreatitis by reducing pressure in the
common bile duct [54]. The multicenter randomized APEC trial [55] demonstrated
that routine urgent ERCP with biliary papillotomy did not lower rates of mortality
or major complications in patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis
when compared to conservative treatment (38 vs. 44%). It therefore appears that
only patients with acute biliary pancreatitis and concurrent cholangitis benet from
ERCP, especially in the rst 24h of admission.
Role ofEUS andMRCP
Similar to ERCP, EUS and MRCP are not advised in patients with mild biliary pancreatitis without signs of common bile duct obstruction [1]. In case of uncertainty
regarding common bile duct obstruction in the absence of cholangitis, an EUS (or
MRCP) could detect gallstones in the common bile duct. A negative MRCP, however, does not reliably (sensitivity of 88%) rule out the presence of small stones (less
than 5mm) in the common bile duct, which are known to cause acute biliary pancreatitis [56, 57]. If stones are visualized on EUS, an elective ERCP with papillotomy and stone extraction may be indicated to prevent new episodes of biliary
pancreatitis [58]. However, an ERCP with papillotomy does not prevent gallbladder
stones-related conditions such as cholecystitis and biliary colic [1, 59]. For that
reason, cholecystectomy after ERCP and papillotomy is recommended [1].
Timing ofCholecystectomy
In case of mild biliary pancreatitis, same-admission cholecystectomy is advised [1].
This advice emerged out of the multicenter randomized PONCHO trial [60], which
demonstrated that same-admission cholecystectomy safely reduces the risk of
recurrent gallstone-related complications and mortality when compared with a
delayed elective cholecystectomy (5 vs. 17%). In patients with necrotizing biliary
pancreatitis, cholecystectomy is advised if necrotic peripancreatic collections have
resolved or persist after 6weeks [1, 61]. Before cholecystectomy, assessment of the
presence and location of peripancreatic collections should be performed [62].

3 Acute Pancreatitis: Non-surgical Therapies Including Gallstone Management
45
Whether or not cholecystectomy can be performed safely obviously depends on the
clinical condition of the patient, but also on the location of the persistent peripancreatic collections, which should be avoided in the surgical eld of the
cholecystectomy.
Prevention ofRecurrence
Besides gallstones, alcohol and smoking are common risk factors for recurrence of
acute pancreatitis [63]. Recurrence could be reduced by alcohol abstinence after the
rst episode of the acute alcoholic pancreatitis [64–66]. However, quitting excessive use of alcohol is widely known to be difcult. A single-center randomized trial
from Finland reported that standardized follow-up with repeated intervention
against alcohol consumption lowers the recurrence rate of acute alcoholic pancreatitis after 2years compared to single standardized intervention alone during the initial
hospitalization (8 vs. 21%) [66]. Currently, the multicenter randomized PANDA
trial in the Netherlands is assessing the effect of an optimally timed personalized
multidisciplinary alcohol cessation program on the recurrence rate in patients with
acute alcoholic pancreatitis.
Approximately 20% of the etiology of acute pancreatitis in patients remains idiopathic [67, 68]. In these patients, it is advised to repeat the transabdominal ultrasound after discharge, as the accuracy of a second transabdominal ultrasound is
higher than the rst one [1, 69]. In 2015, a multicenter randomized trial from Finland
reported that patients with idiopathic pancreatitis should undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy [70]. However, in this study EUS was not used. The current advice is,
in case of a negative repeat transabdominal ultrasound, to perform EUS to detect
occult microlithiasis, as well as neoplasms and chronic pancreatitis [1, 71, 72]. If
both transabdominal and EUS are negative, some experts advise (secretin-enhanced)
MRCP to search for rare anatomical anomalies [1]. In case of recurrent attacks of
idiopathic pancreatitis, genetic counseling should be considered [1]. The role of
laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with “EUS-negative” idiopathic pancreatitis is currently unclear and being studied in the multicenter randomized
PICUS-2 trial.
References
1. IAP/APA evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis. Pancreatology.
2013;13(4):e1–15.
2. Boxhoorn L, Voermans RP, Bouwense SA, Bruno MJ, Verdonk RC, Boermeester MA, etal.
Acute pancreatitis. Lancet. 2020;396(10252):726–34.
3. Xiao AY, Tan MLY, Wu LM, Asrani VM, Windsor JA, Yadav D, etal. Global incidence and
mortality of pancreatic diseases: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of
population-based cohort studies. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;1(1):45–55.
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
