Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Aggressive Percutaneous Catheter Drainage Protocol for Necrotic Pancreatic Collections

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) performed pro-actively for collections in acute pancreatitis (AP) is associated with better outcomes. However, there are only a few studies describing this protocol.

Aim

We aimed to evaluate an aggressive PCD protocol.

Methods

Consecutive patients with AP who underwent PCD with an aggressive protocol between January 2018 and January 2019 were included. This protocol involved catheter upsizing at a pre-specified interval (every 4–6 days) as well as drainage of all the new collections. The indications and technical details of PCD and clinical outcomes were compared with patients who underwent standard PCD.

Results

Out of the 185 patients with AP evaluated during the study period, 110 (59.4%) underwent PCD, all with the aggressive protocol. The historical cohort of standard PCD comprised of 113 patients. There was no significant difference in the indication of PCD and interval from pain onset to PCD between the two groups. The mean number of catheters was significantly higher in the aggressive PCD group (1.86 ± 0.962 vs. 1.44 ± 0.667, p = 0.002). Additional catheters were inserted in 54.2% of patients in aggressive group vs. 36.2% in the standard group (p = 0.006). Length of hospital stay and intensive care unit (ICU) stay were significantly longer in the standard PCD group (34.3 ± 20.14 vs. 27.45 ± 14.2 days, p < 0.001 and 10.46 ± 12.29 vs. 4.12 ± 8.5, p = 0.009, respectively). There was no significant difference in mortality and surgery between the two groups.

Conclusion

Aggressive PCD protocol results in reduced length of hospital stay and ICU stay and can reduce hospitalization costs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Peery AF, Dellon ES, Lund J, et al. Burden of gastrointestinal disease in the United States: 2012 update. Gastroenterology. 2012;143:1179–1187.e3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Banks PA, Bollen TL, Dervenis C, et al. Classification of acute pancreatitis—2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus. Gut. 2013;62:102–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Manrai M, Kochhar R, Gupta V, et al. Outcome of acute pancreatic and peripancreatic collections occurring in patients with acute pancreatitis. Ann Surg. 2018;267:357–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bellam BL, Samanta J, Gupta P, et al. Predictors of outcome of percutaneous catheter drainage in patients with acute pancreatitis having acute fluid collection and development of a predictive model. Pancreatology. 2019;19:658–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mortele K-J, Girshman J, Szejnfeld D, et al. CT-guided percutaneous catheter drainage of acute necrotizing pancreatitis: clinical experience and observations in patients with sterile and infected necrosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192:110–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. van Santvoort H-C, Besselink M-G, Bakker O-J, et al. A step-up approach or open necrosectomy for necrotizing pancreatitis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1491–1502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Besselink M-G, van Santvoort H-C, Nieuwenhuijs V-B, et al. Minimally invasive ‘step-up approach’ versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (PANTER trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN13975868]. BMC Surg. 2006;6:6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ke L, Li J, Hu P, Wang L, Chen H, Zhu Y. Percutaneous catheter drainage in infected pancreatitis necrosis: a systematic review. Indian J Surg. 2016;78:221–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. van Baal M-C, van Santvoort H-C, Bollen T-L, et al. Systematic review of percutaneous catheter drainage as primary treatment for necrotizing pancreatitis. Br J Surg. 2011;98:18–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mallick B, Dhaka N, Gupta P, et al. An audit of percutaneous drainage for acute necrotic collections and walled off necrosis in patients with acute pancreatitis. Pancreatology. 2018;18:727–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. van Grinsven J, Timmerman P, van Lienden K-P, et al. Proactive versus standard percutaneous catheter drainage for infected necrotizing pancreatitis. Pancreas. 2017;46:518–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sugimoto M, Sonntag D-P, Flint G-S, et al. Better outcomes if percutaneous drainage is used early and proactively in the course of necrotizing pancreatitis. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27:418–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sugimoto M, Sonntag D-P, Flint G-S, et al. A percutaneous drainage protocol for severe and moderately severe acute pancreatitis. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:3282–3291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hollemans R-A, Bollen T-L, van Brunschot S, et al. Predicting success of catheter drainage in infected necrotizing pancreatitis. Ann Surg. 2016;263:787–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gupta P, Rana P, Bellam BL, et al. Site and size of extrapancreatic necrosis are associated with clinical outcomes in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis. Pancreatology. 2020;20:9-15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kohli P, Gupta V, Kochhar R, Yadav TD, Sinha SK, Lal A. Lavage through percutaneous catheter drains in severe acute pancreatitis: Does it help? A randomized control trial. Pancreatology. 2019;19:929–934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Werge M, Novovic S, Roug S, et al. Evaluation of local instillation of antibiotics in infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis. Pancreatology. 2018;18:642–646.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, 160012, India

    Pankaj Gupta, Jayanta Samanta, Harshal Mandavdhare, Vishal Sharma, Saroj K. Sinha, Usha Dutta & Rakesh Kochhar

  2. Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, 160012, India

    Jyoti Gupta & Chandan Kumar

  3. Department of Surgery, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, 160012, India

    Vikas Gupta & Thakur Deen Yadav

Authors
  1. Pankaj Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jyoti Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chandan Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jayanta Samanta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Harshal Mandavdhare
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Vishal Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Saroj K. Sinha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Vikas Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Thakur Deen Yadav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Usha Dutta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Rakesh Kochhar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rakesh Kochhar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Procedural informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gupta, P., Gupta, J., Kumar, C. et al. Aggressive Percutaneous Catheter Drainage Protocol for Necrotic Pancreatic Collections. Dig Dis Sci 65, 3696–3701 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-020-06116-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-020-06116-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation