Transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy in the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis

Read metadata

OBJECTIVE

To develop an effective minimally invasive method for the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

There were 168 patients with infected pancreatic necrosis who were treated at the Regional Clinical Hospital No. 2 between 2011 and 2018. Eighty-seven (51.8%) patients underwent primary drainage with large-diameter double-lumen drains 28—32 Fr, and original technique of transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy was used. Puncture-drainage interventions with transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy were used in 23 (26.4%) patients with local and 64 (73.6%) patients with widespread purulent-necrotic parapancreatitis.

RESULTS

Percutaneous channels are accesses to purulent-necrotic cavity and used for transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy. This procedure was performed 98 times. Time of primary sanitation in patients with 3 accesses in omental bursa was significantly less compared to 2 accesses (62±4.3 vs. 89±8.2 min, p<0.05). In case of repeated sanitation, time of intervention did not depend on the number of accesses. Incidence of local complications was 9.1%, extra-abdominal complications — 19.4%. Mortality rate was 12.6%.

CONCLUSION

Original technique of transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy increases efficiency of sanitation of infected parapancreatitis, improves treatment outcomes and reduces mortality to 12.3%.

Keywords:

pancreas

infected pancreatic necrosis

minimally invasive interventions

transfistulous sequestrectomy

Authors:

S.I. Remizov

Regional Clinical Hospital No. 2;
Kuban State Medical University

ORCID: 0000-0001-9410-9493

А.V. Andreev

Regional Clinical Hospital No. 2;
Kuban State Medical University

Scopus AuthorID: 57215609812
ORCID: 0000-0003-0945-9400

V.M. Durleshter

Regional Clinical Hospital No. 2;
Kuban State Medical University

ORCID: 0000-0002-7420-0553

S.A. Gabriel

Regional Clinical Hospital No. 2;
Kuban State Medical University

ORCID: 0000-0002-0755-903X

G.A. Levchenko

Kuban State Medical University

ORCID: 0000-0001-8695-3205

Received:

04.04.2022

Accepted:

24.05.2022

List of references:

Van Dijk SM, Hallensleben NDL, Van Santvoort HC, Fockens P, Van Goor H, Bruno MJ, Besselink MG. Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. Acute pancreatitis: recent advances through randomised trial. Gut. 2017;66(11):2024-2032. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2016-313595
Raraty MG, Halloran CM, Dodd S, Ghaneh P, Connor S, Evans J, Sutton R, Neoptolemos JP. Minimal access retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy: improvement in morbidity and mortality with a less invasive approach. Ann Surg. 2010;251(5):787-793. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181d96c53
Gomatos IP, Halloran CM, Ghaneh P, Raraty MG, Polydoros F, Evans JC, Smart HL, Yagati-Satchidanand R, Garry JM, Whelan PA, Hughes FE, Sutton R, Neoptolemos JP. Outcomes From Minimal Access Retroperitoneal and Open Pancreatic Necrosectomy in 394 Patients With Necrotizing Pancreatitis. Ann Surg. 2016;263(5):992-1001. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001407
Rische S, Riecken B, Degenkolb J, Kayser T, Caca K. Transmural endoscopic necrosectomy of infected pancreatic necroses and drainage of infected pseudocysts: a tailored approach. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2013;48(2):231-240. https://doi.org/10.3109/00365521.2012.752029
Kumar N, Conwell DL, Thompson CC. Direct endoscopic necrosectomy versus step-up approach for walled-off pancreatic necrosis: comparison of clinical outcome and health care utilization. Pancreas. 2014;43(8):1334-1339. https://doi.org/10.1097/MPA.0000000000000213
van Brunschot S, van Grinsven J, van Santvoort HC, Bakker OJ, Besselink MG, Boermeester MA, Bollen TL, Bosscha K, Bouwense SA, Bruno MJ, Cappendijk VC, Consten EC, Dejong CH, van Eijck CH, Erkelens WG, van Goor H, van Grevenstein WMU, Haveman JW, Hofker SH, Jansen JM, Laméris JS, van Lienden KP, Meijssen MA, Mulder CJ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Poley JW, Quispel R, de Ridder RJ, Römkens TE, Scheepers JJ, Schepers NJ, Schwartz MP, Seerden T, Spanier BWM, Straathof JWA, Strijker M, Timmer R, Venneman NG, Vleggaar FP, Voermans RP, Witteman BJ, Gooszen HG, Dijkgraaf MG, Fockens P. Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. Endoscopic or surgical step-up approach for infected necrotising pancreatitis: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 2018;391(10115):51-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32404-2
van Brunschot S, Hollemans RA, Bakker OJ, Besselink MG, Baron TH, Beger HG, Boermeester MA, Bollen TL, Bruno MJ, Carter R, French JJ, Coelho D, Dahl B, Dijkgraaf MG, Doctor N, Fagenholz PJ, Farkas G, Castillo CFD, Fockens P, Freeman ML, Gardner TB, Goor HV, Gooszen HG, Hannink G, Lochan R, McKay CJ, Neoptolemos JP, Oláh A, Parks RW, Peev MP, Raraty M, Rau B, Rösch T, Rovers M, Seifert H, Siriwardena AK, Horvath KD, van Santvoort HC. Minimally invasive and endoscopic versus open necrosectomy for necrotising pancreatitis: a pooled analysis of individual data for 1980 patients. Gut. 2018;67(4):697-706. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2016-313341
Hollemans RA, Bakker OJ, Boermeester MA, Bollen TL, Bosscha K, Bruno MJ, Buskens E, Dejong CH, van Duijvendijk P, van Eijck CH, Fockens P, van Goor H, van Grevenstein WM, van der Harst E, Heisterkamp J, Hesselink EJ, Hofker S, Houdijk AP, Karsten T, Kruyt PM, van Laarhoven CJ, Laméris JS, van Leeuwen MS, Manusama ER, Molenaar IQ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, van Ramshorst B, Roos D, Rosman C, Schaapherder AF, van der Schelling GP, Timmer R, Verdonk RC, de Wit RJ, Gooszen HG, Besselink MG, van Santvoort HC. Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. Superiority of Step-up Approach vs Open Necrosectomy in Long-term Follow-up of Patients With Necrotizing Pancreatitis. Gastroenterology. 2019;156(4):1016-1026. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2018.10.045
Driedger M, Zyromski NJ, Visser BC, Jester A, Sutherland FR, Nakeeb A, Dixon E, Dua MM, House MG, Worhunsky DJ, Munene G, Ball CG. Surgical Transgastric Necrosectomy for Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Single-stage Procedure for Walled-off Pancreatic Necrosis. Ann Surg. 2020;271(1):163-168. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000003048
Saunders R, Ramesh J, Cicconi S, Evans J, Yip VS, Raraty M, Ghaneh P, Sutton R, Neoptolemos JP, Halloran C. A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous. Surg Endosc. 2019;33(5):1412-1425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6416-5
Working Group IAP/APA Acute Pancreatitis Guidelines. IAP/APA evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis. Pancreatology. 2013;13(4):1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pan.2013.07. 063
Connor S, Alexakis N, Neal T, Raraty M, Ghaneh P, Evans J, Hughes M, Rowlands P, Garvey CJ, Sutton R, Neoptolemos JP. Fungal infection but not type of bacterial infection is associated with a high mortality in primary and secondary infected pancreatic necrosis. Dig Surg. 2004;21(4):297-304. https://doi.org/10.1159/000080884
Prudkov MI. Osnovy minimal’no invazivnoj hirurgii. Ekaterinburg. 2007. (In Russ.).
Beger HG, Rau B, Isenmann R. Natural history of necrotizing pancreatitis. Pancreatology. 2003;3(2):93-101. https://doi.org/10.1159/000070076
Sileikis A, Beiša V, Beiša A, Samuilis A, Serpytis M, Strupas K. Minimally invasive retroperitoneal necrosectomy in management of acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2013;8(1):29-35. https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2011.30943
Sileikis A, Beisa V, Simutis G, Tamosiūnas A, Strupas K. Three-port retroperitoneoscopic necrosectomy in management of acute necrotic pancreatitis. Medicina (Kaunas). 2010;46(3):176-179.
Miller SV, Vinnik YuS, Tepliakova OV. The results of the practical use of the destructive peritonitis’ standartized treatment. Pirogov Russian Journal of Surgery. Khirurgiya. Zurnal im. N.I. Pirogova. 2012;5:24-30. (In Russ.).
Bang JY, Arnoletti JP, Holt BA, Sutton B, Hasan MK, Navaneethan U, Feranec N, Wilcox CM, Tharian B, Hawes RH, Varadarajulu S. An endoscopic transluminal approach, compared with minimally invasive surgery, reduces complications and costs for patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. Gastroenterology. 2019;156(4):1027-1040. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2018.11.031
Connor S, Ghaneh P, Raraty M, Sutton R, Rosso E, Garvey CJ, Hughes ML, Evans JC, Rowlands P, Neoptolemos JP. Minimally invasive retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy. Dig Surg. 2003;20(4):270-277. https://doi.org/10.1159/000071184
Heckler M, Hackert T, Hu K, Halloran CM, Büchler MW, Neoptolemos JP. Severe acute pancreatitis: surgical indications and treatment. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2021;406(3):521-535. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s00423-020-01944-6
Fan ST, Lai EC, Mok FP, Lo CM, Zheng SS, Wong J. Early treatment of acute biliary pancreatitis by endoscopic papillotomy. N Engl J Med. 1993;328(4):228-232. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199301283280402
Lyzikov AN, Majorov VM, Dundarov ZA, Svistunov SV. The comparative assessment of effectiveness of the application of low-invasive interventions in patients with acute destructive pancreatitis in its different phases. Health and Ecology Issues. 2014;2(40):61-66. (In Russ.).
Patent N 2741465/26.01.2021 Russian Federation. Andreev AV, Durleshter VM, Remizov SI, Gabriel SA, Kuznetsov YuS. Sposob chresfistul’noj videoskopicheskoj nekrsekvestrektomii pri gnojno-nekroticheskom parapankreatite. (In Russ.). https://patenton.ru/patent/RU2741465C1
Carter CR, McKay CJ, Imrie CW. Percutaneous necrosectomy and sinus tract endoscopy in the management of infected pancreatic necrosis: an initial experience. Ann Surg. 2000;232(2):175-180. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200008000-00004
Connor S, Alexakis N, Raraty MG, Ghaneh P, Evans J, Hughes M, Garvey CJ, Sutton R, Neoptolemos JP. Early and late complications after pancreatic necrosectomy. Surgery. 2005;137(5):499-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2005.01.003

Close metadata

Introduction

Various methods of surgical treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis lead to the need for choosing the most effective surgical approach [1–10]. Currently, there are trends towards active implementation of minimally invasive technologies because traditional open surgical debridement of purulent-necrotic parapancreatitis do not significantly improve the outcomes and survival [2, 3, 6, 11, 12]. Various minimally invasive techniques have been developed: interventions with “Mini-assistant” equipment for small-access surgery [13, 14], laparoscopic debridement of omental bursa and retroperitoneal space [15–17], transluminal [18] and puncture-drainage procedures [2, 3, 19]. The last ones are perspective due to minimal surgical trauma, short-term anesthesia and low number of perioperative complications [3, 20, 21]. However, many surgeons use ultrasound-guided minimally invasive interventions only at the first stage of treatment of pancreatic necrosis for evacuation of purulent exudate. Puncture-drainage technologies for necrectomy at subsequent stages cause great difficulties that prevents widespread application of this method and causes a critical attitude to its effectiveness [22].

The purpose of the study was to develop an effective minimally invasive method for the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis.

Material and methods

There were 168 patients with infected pancreatic necrosis who underwent minimally invasive treatment at the Regional Clinical Hospital No. 2 between 2011 and 2018. Age of patients ranged from 43 to 84 years. There were 107 (63.7%) men and 61 (36.3%) women. Elderly (62.9%) and middle-aged (26.1%) patients prevailed; 147 (87.5%) patients were delivered from regional hospitals in 12.3±2.6 days after onset of disease.

Primary drainage with large double-lumen drains 28-32 Fr was performed in 87 (51.8%) patients. The developed technique of transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy was applied to remove necrotic tissue [23].

Percutaneous interventions followed by transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy were performed in 23 (26.4%) patients with local and 64 (73.6%) patients with widespread purulent-necrotic parapancreatitis. Severity of disease and multiple organ failure was assessed using the integral scales Apache II, Ranson, SOFA. Fifty-nine (67.8%) patients had concomitant diseases.

Transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy was performed as follows. After preliminary visualization of exudative and necrotic lesion of omental bursa and retroperitoneal space using ultrasound and pre-performed contrast-enhanced computed tomography of abdominal cavity and retroperitoneal space, we planned surgical access. The main requirements for accesses were as follows: no great arteries and veins along the intended trajectory, as well as no hollow and parenchymal internal organs. Omental bursa was punctured through the gastrocolic ligament and retroperitoneal space (paracolon) on the right and/or on the left along the middle or posterior axillary line using a needle for primary access under ultrasound control. Then, we inserted 2-3 rigid guidewires into omental bursa and 1-2 ones into retroperitoneal space through this needle. After that, the canal was dilated under ultrasound control, and hollow pipes were installed. Then, drainage tubes 28–32 Fr were inserted through the pipes.

After 7–10 days, drainage tubes were removed in operating theatre. After that, flexible endoscope, laparoscopic clamp or dissector and silicone drainage tube connected to electric aspirator (if there was a third access) were inserted through the channels.

Saline solution was supplied to surgical field through the endoscope to facilitate visualization of sequesters and washing the omental bursa. A clamp was used to dissect and remove necrotic tissue (Fig. 1). Intervention was continued until all sequesters were removed as much as possible (Fig. 2, 3).

Fig. 1. Intraoperative endoscopic image. Stage of sequestrectomy. Capture and removal of sequester.

Fig. 2. Intraoperative endoscopic image after removal of sequesters.

Fig. 3. Postoperative image. Macroscopic specimen. Removed sequesters after transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy.

Surgical intervention was finished by drainage of omental bursa and retroperitoneal space with double-lumen tubes under endoscopic control. In postoperative period, we performed fractional washing of cavities with aqueous solutions of antiseptics (chlorhexidine, sodium hypochlorite, etc.).

Progression of endogenous intoxication required repeated endoscopic sequestrectomy. In case of positive dynamics, we replaced drainage tubes every 7 days under X-ray control with contrast enhancement (to prevent their occlusion with large sequesters) and continued fractional washing every 6 hours.

All patients received standard therapy.

Statistical analysis was performed using Statistica 10 software. Differences of means were assessed using parametric Student's t-test. Differences were significant at p<0.05.

Results

Approaches to omental bursa and retroperitoneal space is the first stage of minimally invasive treatment implying subsequent removal of necrotic tissue via transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy. A total of 352 minimally invasive interventions were performed: drainage of omental bursa — 23, drainage of omental bursa and retroperitoneal space — 64, replacement and correction of drainage tubes — 265. There were 3 accesses to omental bursa in 69 (79.3%) patients and 2 accesses in 18 (20.7%) patients. There were 2 accesses to retroperitoneal space in 54 (62.1%) patients and 1 access in 33 (37.9%) patients.

Active removal of sequesters using transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy was performed 98 times (once in 78 (86.2%) patients, twice in 7 (8.6%) patients, 3 times in 2 (5.2%) patients). Surgery time in patients with 3 approaches to omental bursa was 62±4.3 min, 2 accesses — 96±8.2 min (p<0.05). Time of redo sequestrectomy in patients with 3 accesses was 47±5.6 min, 2 accesses — 52±4.7 min (p>0.05). Duration of transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy was similar regardless the number of accesses to retroperitoneal space.

The following local complications occurred: external intestinal fistula in 1 (1.1%) patient, internal intestinal fistula in 2 (2.3%) patients, multiple organ failure in 5 (5.7%) patients.

No bleeding was recorded. Three (3.4%) patients developed venous bleeding during sequestrectomy that was stopped by temporary occlusion of drains after surgery.

There were the following extra-abdominal complications: pulmonary embolism in 3 (3.4%) patients, acute coronary syndrome in 1 (1.1%), lower lobe left-sided pneumonia in 4 (4.6%) patients, exudative pleuritic in 9 (10.3%) patients.

Laparotomy was required in 2 (3.4%) patients due to progression of sepsis despite minimally invasive interventions combined with endoscopic sequestrectomy. Mortality rate was 12.6%.

Discussion

There were previous multiple attempts of sequestrectomy via percutaneous approaches. MIPN (minimally invasive pancreatic necrosectomy) and MARPN (minimal access retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy) techniques were developed and proposed. They suggested a staged approach to the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis with primary drainage through the tubes 8 Fr followed by dilation of channel up to 30 Fr before sequestrectomy. Active debridement of necrotic tissue was carried out using a nephroscope inserted through the channel [2, 24, 25].

Importantly, one access to pathological zone and small channel of nephroscope (4 mm) complicate effective sanitation and increase surgery time that can adversely affect severe patients with concomitant diseases.

The main feature of percutaneous interventions in omental bursa and retroperitoneal space is surgical manipulations within a small space (small space surgery). Transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy was proposed to increase efficiency and reduce duration of necrectomy. The main directions of this procedure were aimed at improving intraoperative visualization, creating the optimal number of accesses and combining the methods of sequestrectomy.

Improving visualization during sequestrectomy

One of the most important techniques determining the effectiveness of transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy is visualization of surgical field and equipment. Various optical instruments were used for visualization during development and testing of technique: laparoscope, nephroscope, broncho- and choledochoscope, gastroscope. Obvious advantages of flexible optical systems were confirmed. Indeed, these systems allow passing through different channels and examine the cavities with irregular configuration. Among flexible optical systems, standard gastroscope with a distal end diameter of 9.4 mm proved to be the most effective device. Gastroscope has a high optical resolution and ensures high-quality imaging.

Optimal number of accesses

In our practice of transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy, we made 2–3 accesses to omental bursa sac and 1–2 accesses to retroperitoneal space. Significant relationship between the number of approaches to omental bursa and surgery time was found. Three available accesses can reduce surgery time by 34 minutes. Prolonged sequestrectomy in patients with two accesses is explained by insertion of gastroscope and simultaneous injection of solutions for sanitation through one access and alternate insertion of electric aspirator tip and instruments through the second access. This significantly increases surgery time. No significant difference in time of repeated sequestrectomy was found that seems to be related to creation of necessary workspace during the first procedure. The number of accesses to retroperitoneal space did not significantly affect duration of intervention.

Combination of types of sequestrectomy

One of the features increasing effectiveness of active necrectomy was combination of instrumental and aspiration sequestrectomy. In case of instrumental sequestrectomy, we dissected tissues and adhesions using a laparoscopic clamp or dissector. When manipulating in omental bursa, we created working space after separation of posterior stomach wall from anterior surface of the pancreas. After creating the working space, we washed the cavity with antiseptic solutions. Then, we performed instrumental palpation and removal of free-lying sequesters using a laparoscopic clamp. All stages were accompanied by permanent supply and aspiration of solutions (0.05% aqueous solution of chlorhexidine and 3% solution of hydrogen peroxide). Aspiration-assisted sequestrectomy was another element that increased the efficiency of necrectomy. Alternative use of different plastic tips with a diameter of 8–9 mm and silicone drains with end and side working holes allowed the vacuum aspirator to capture and remove sequesters.

Conclusion

Transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy provides adequate minimally invasive removal of parapancreatic necrotic tissue. Several accesses make it possible to carry out a staged sequestrectomy under visual control within a sufficient surgical space. Effective debridement of necrotic focus, especially in severe and debilitated patients, allows us to characterize this procedure as an important component in improving the results of treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis.

Original technique of transfistulous endoscopic sequestrectomy increases efficiency of sanitation of infected parapancreatitis, improves treatment outcomes and reduces mortality to 12.3%. This is due to better visualization during sequestrectomy through the gastroscope, optimal number of accesses to omental bursa and combination of instrumental and aspiration-assisted sequestrectomy.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.