van Grinsven Janneke, van Brunschot Sandra, Bakker Olaf J, Bollen Thomas L, Boermeester Marja A, Bruno Marco J, Dejong Cornelis H, Dijkgraaf Marcel G, van Eijck Casper H, Fockens Paul, van Goor Harry, Gooszen Hein G, Horvath Karen D, van Lienden Krijn P, van Santvoort Hjalmar C, Besselink Marc G
Dept. of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
Dept. of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
HPB (Oxford). 2016 Jan;18(1):49-56. doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2015.07.003. Epub 2015 Dec 20.
The optimal diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in infected necrotizing pancreatitis is subject to debate. We performed a survey on these topics amongst a group of international expert pancreatologists.
An online survey including case vignettes was sent to 118 international pancreatologists. We evaluated the use and timing of fine needle aspiration (FNA), antibiotics, catheter drainage and (minimally invasive) necrosectomy.
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. Lack of consensus about timing of intervention was apparent on day 14 with proven infected necrosis (58% intervention vs. 42% non-invasive) as well as on day 20 with only clinically suspected infected necrosis (59% intervention vs. 41% non-invasive).
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.
感染性坏死性胰腺炎的最佳诊断策略和干预时机仍存在争议。我们针对这些主题对一组国际胰腺病学专家进行了调查。
向118名国际胰腺病学专家发送了一份包含病例 vignettes 的在线调查问卷。我们评估了细针穿刺抽吸(FNA)、抗生素、导管引流和(微创)坏死组织清除术的使用情况和时机。
回复率为74%(N = 87)。没有受访者常规使用FNA,85% 选择性使用,15% 从不使用。大多数受访者(87%)对感染性坏死患者采用逐步升级的方法。分别有66% 和12% 的受访者认为包裹性坏死(WON)是内镜引流和经皮引流的先决条件。在诊断出感染性坏死后,55% 的受访者常规推迟侵入性干预,而45% 的受访者立即进行干预。在确诊感染性坏死的第14天以及仅临床怀疑感染性坏死的第20天,关于干预时机缺乏共识(58% 进行干预 vs. 42% 采用非侵入性治疗)。
逐步升级的方法是胰腺病学专家在感染性坏死性胰腺炎中首选的治疗策略。在感染性坏死性胰腺炎的前2 - 3周,FNA的使用和干预时机尚无统一标准。