Resection versus drainage in the management of patients with AAST-OIS grade IV blunt pancreatic injury: A single trauma centre experience.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare outcomes of pancreatic resection with that of peripancreatic drainage for American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-Organ Injury Scale (AAST-OIS) grade IV blunt pancreatic injury in order to determine the optimal treatment method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nineteen surgical patients with AAST-OIS grade IV blunt pancreatic injury between 1994 and 2016 were retrospectively studied. RESULTS: Among the 19 patients, 14 were men and 5 were women (median age: 33 years). Twelve patients underwent pancreatic resection (spleen-sacrificing distal pancreatectomy, n = 6; spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy, n = 3; and central pancreatectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis, n = 3), and seven underwent peripancreatic drainage. After comparing these two groups, no significant differences were found in terms of gender, shock at triage, laboratory data, injury severity score, associated injury, length of hospital stay, and complication. The only significant difference was that in the drainage group, the duration from injury to surgery was longer than that from injury to resection (median, 48 hours vs. 24 hours; P = 0.036). In the drainage group, three patients required reoperation, and another three required further pancreatic duct stent therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In the surgery of the grade IV blunt pancreatic injury, pancreatic resection is warranted in early, conclusive MPD injury; if surgery is delayed or MPD injury has not been clearly assessed, peripancreatic drainage is an alternative method. However, peripancreatic drainage alone is not adequate and further pancreatic duct stent or reoperation is required. Further studies should be conducted to confirm our conclusions.

Efficacy of early endoscopic intervention in pediatric pancreatic duct injury management.

BACKGROUND: The optimal management method for pediatric pancreatic trauma is controversial. Moreover, the efficacy of stent placement via endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) remains poorly documented. METHODS: The present, retrospective review of pediatric patients with pancreatic trauma was conducted from 2010 to 2020 at a single institution. RESULTS: Ten, male children with the median age of 9.5 years (range 4-14 years) with a grade I (n = 2), II (n = 4) or III (n = 4) pancreatic injury were identified. Of six of these patients in whom ERP was performed, four had a pancreatic duct injury (PDI). Pancreatic stent placement was performed in all the patients with ERP at a site proximal to the injury in four patients and across the injury in two patients. A pseudocyst or pancreatic fluid collection was detected in five patients, of these, two with a grade II injury were managed successfully with conservative therapy while three with PDI required surgery. In the four patients with PDI, only one in whom the stent was placed across the PDI was able to avoid surgery. CONCLUSION: Therapeutic ERP might be effective even if a patient has a PDI, therefore, early ERP should be considered as a treatment option.

[Management of obstructive jaundice in patients with neoplasms of the major duodenal papilla]. / Taktika lecheniya mekhanicheskoi zheltukhi u patsientov s novoobrazovaniyami bol'shogo sosochka dvenadtsatiperstnoi kishki.

OBJECTIVE: To develop the indications and assess an effectiveness of treatment of patients with ampullary tumors followed by mechanical jaundice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: There were 26 patients with major duodenal papilla neoplasms for the period 2015-2020 at the Sklifosovsky Research Institute for Emergency Care. RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent transpapillary interventions: papillosphincterotomy followed by lithoextraction and bilio-duodenal stenting in 4 (15.3%) patients, bilio-duodenal stenting in 12 (46.1%) patients, nasobiliary drainage in 2 (7.6%) patients, pancreaticoduodenal stenting in 2 (7.6%) patients. Percutaneous transhepatic microcholecystostomy was performed in 6 (23.4%) patients. In all cases, laboratory values decreased in 5-7 days after drainage. Eight (30.7%) patients refused further surgical treatment and were discharged in satisfactory condition. Another 8 (44.5%) patients underwent endoscopic submucosal papillectomy. There were no postoperative complications. Patients were discharged after 5-7 days. Four (22.2%) patients underwent tumor resection via laparotomy. One of these patients required redo laparotomy in postoperative period due to acute perforated duodenal ulcer. Six (33.3%) patients underwent palliative bilio-duodenal stenting. CONCLUSION: Invasion of muscle layer or distal parts of the common bile duct, as well as abnormal vascularization are indications for open surgery or palliative endoscopic treatment. Tumor location within mucous and muscle layers without invasion of distal third of the common bile duct and no abnormal vascularization of tumor justify endoscopic papillectomy. Endoscopic approach can be considered as a final minimally invasive method with minimal risk of postoperative complications in case of benign ampullary tumor.

[Diagnosis and treatment of benign neoplasms of the major duodenal papilla]. / Diagnostika i lechenie dobrokachestvennykh novoobrazovanii bol'shogo sosochka dvenadtsatiperstnoi kishki.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an efficacy of surgical treatment of patients with benign tumors of the major duodenal papilla. MATERIAL AND METHODS: For the period from January 2015 to January 2020, sixteenth patients with benign tumors of the major duodenal papilla were treated at the Sklifosovsky Research Institute for Emergency Care. There were 7 men (43.7%) and 9 women (56.3%). Tumor dimension ranged from 1.0 to 4.0 cm (mean 2.5 cm). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Tumor resection through laparotomy was performed in 4 (25%) patients. Six (37.5%) patients underwent endoscopic submucosal papillectomy. Other 6 (37.5%) patients refused surgical treatment due to regression of symptoms. Postoperative re-laparotomy was performed in 1 patient (10%) with acute perforated duodenal ulcer. There were no complications after endoscopic papillectomy. Control endoscopic examination identified no signs of tumor recurrence in all patients after 3 and 6 months. In our opinion, endoscopic papillectomy is preferable for adenoma of the major duodenal papilla due to reduced surgical trauma. We assume that stenting of the bile ducts and the major pancreatic duct prevented acute pancreatitis and obstructive jaundice. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic papillectomy is an effective minimally invasive treatment of tumors of the major duodenal papilla. Despite a considerable number of complications, most of them can be resolved by conservative treatment or endoscopic procedures. Thus, endoscopic papillectomy may be considered as preferable method in the treatment of patients with benign tumors of the major duodenal papilla.

Successful combination strategy of preoperative placement of an endoscopic nasopancreatic drainage catheter and pancreas preservation surgery for pancreatic injury with major pancreatic duct disruption: a case report.

BACKGROUND: The guidelines recommend pancreatic resection for grade III and IV pancreatic injuries. On the other hand, organ preservation is an important issue. Herein, we present the first case of pancreatic injury with major pancreatic duct (MPD) disruption that was treated with the combination of preoperative placement of endoscopic nasopancreatic drainage (ENPD) catheter and pancreas preservation surgery after endoscopic pancreatic stenting (EPS) failure. CASE PRESENTATION: A 70-year-old female diagnosed with pancreatic injury was admitted to our hospital. She was hemodynamically stable. ERP revealed MPD disruption, and EPS failed. An ENPD catheter was placed preoperatively at the site of injury. During laparotomy, we identified a partial-thickness laceration in the pancreatic body. At the site of injury, the tip of the ENPD catheter was found; therefore, the patient was diagnosed with grade III pancreatic body injury with MPD disruption. The extent of crush was not severe, and we had no difficulty in identifying the distal MPD segment. We inserted the ENPD catheter into the distal MPD segment. The ruptured MPD and the laceration was sutured, then pancreatic resection was prevented. She was discharged on POD 56. CONCLUSION: The treatment strategy incorporated ERP, placement of an ENPD catheter preoperatively, and a simple surgery in a hemodynamically stable patient with pancreatic injury allows the pancreas and spleen to be preserved.

Lessons learned from isolated blunt major pancreatic injury: Surgical experience in one trauma centre.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to present our surgical experience of isolated blunt major pancreatic injury (IBMPI), and to compare its characteristic outcomes with that of multi-organ injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1994-2015, 31 patients with IBMPI and 54 patients with multi-organ injury, who underwent surgery, were retrospectively studied. RESULTS: Of the 31 patients with IBMPI, 22 were male and 9 were female. The median age was 30 years (interquartile range, 20-38). Twenty-one patients were classified as the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-Organ Injury Scale Grade III, and 10 patients as Grade IV. Patients with IBMPI had significantly lower shock-at-triage rates, lower injury severity scores, longer injury-to-surgery time, and shorter length of hospital stay than those with multi-organ injury. There were no statistically significant differences in sex, age, trauma mechanism, laboratory data, surgical procedures, and complications between the two groups. Eight patients with IBMPI underwent endoscopic retrograde pancreatography, and 5 patients with complete major pancreatic duct (MPD) disruption underwent pancreatectomy eventually. The remaining 3 patients had partial MPD injury and two of them received a pancreatic duct stent for the treatment of existing postoperative pancreatic fistula. Spleen-sacrificing distal pancreatectomy (SSDP) was performed in 13 patient with IBMPI, followed by spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (n = 12), peripancreatic drainage (n = 4), and central pancreatectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (n = 2). The overall complication rates, related to the SSDP, SPDP, peripancreatic drainage, and central pancreatectomy, were 10/13 (77%), 4/12 (33%), 3/4 (75%), and 2/2 (100%), respectively. Three patients died resulting in a 10% mortality rate, and the other 16 patients developed intra-abdominal complications resulting in a 52% morbidity rate. In the subgroup analysis of the 25 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy, SPDP was associated with a shorter injury-to-surgery time than SSDP. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IBMPI have longer injury-to-surgery times, compared to those with multi-organ injury. Of the distal pancreatectomy patients, the time interval from injury to surgery was a significant associated factor in preserving or sacrificing the spleen.

Major pancreatic duct continuity is the crucial determinant in the management of blunt pancreatic injury: a pancreatographic classification.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the management and outcomes of blunt pancreatic injuries based on the integrity of the major pancreatic duct (MPD). METHODS: Between August 1996 and August 2015, 35 patients with blunt pancreatic injuries underwent endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP). Medical charts were retrospectively reviewed for demography, ERP timing, imaging findings, management, and outcome. RESULTS: Of the 35 patients, 21 were men and 14 were women, with ages ranging from 11 to 70 years. On the basis of the ERP findings, we propose a MPD injury classification as follows: class 1 indicates normal MPD; class 2, partial injury with intact MPD continuity; and class 3, complete injury with disrupted MPD continuity. Both classes 2 and 3 are subdivided into classes a, b, and c, which represent the pancreatic tail, body, and head, respectively. In this report, 14 cases belonged to class 1, 10 belonged to class 2, and 11 belonged to class 3. Of the 14 patients with class 1 injuries, 10 underwent nonsurgical treatment and 4 underwent pancreatic duct stenting. Of the 10 patients with class 2 injuries, 4 underwent nonsurgical treatment and 6 underwent pancreatic duct stenting. Two of the 11 patients with class 3 injuries underwent pancreatic duct stenting; one in the acute stage developed sepsis that led to death even after converting to distal pancreatectomy plus splenectomy. Of the 11 patients with class 3 injuries, spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy was performed in 6, distal pancreatectomy plus splenectomy in 2, and Roux-en-Y pancreaticojejunostomy after central pancreatectomy in 2. The overall pancreatic-related morbidity rate was 60% and the mortality rate was 2.8%. CONCLUSION: Based on our experience, class 1 and 2 injuries could be treated by nonsurgical means and pancreatic duct stenting could be an adjunctive therapy in class 2b and 2c injuries. Operation is warranted in class 3 injuries.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreaticobiliary intervention in patients with surgically altered anatomy and inaccessible papillae: A review of current literature.

The management of pancreaticobiliary disease in patients with surgically altered anatomy is a growing problem for gastroenterologists today. Over the years, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as an important diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the treatment of pancreaticobiliary disease. Patient anatomy has become increasingly complex due to advances in surgical resection of pancreaticobiliary disease and EUS has emerged as the therapy of choice when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography failed cannulation or when the papilla is inaccessible such as in gastric obstruction or duodenal obstruction. The current article gives a comprehensive review of the current literature for EUS-guided intervention of the pancreaticobiliary tract in patients with altered surgical anatomy.

Surgical treatment for pancreatic disrupture with major duct injury / 国际外科学杂志

Objective To investigate the selection and efficacy of operative medality for pancreatic transec-tion with major duct injury. Methods The clinical data were retrospectively analyzed in 21 patients with pancreatic disruption. They were treated in our hospital from Jan. 1995 to Feb. 2009. There were 14 males and 7 females in these cases with a mean age of 26 years (range 9-53 years). The trauma causes of them were blunt injuries in 13 and patent injuries in 8 cases. The injury grade (according to American Association for the Surgery of Trauma) distribution for these patients was grade Ⅲin 8 cases, grade Ⅳ in 8 cases, and grade V in 3. The early emergency operation was performed in eighteen within 12 hours, and delayed opera-tion was in three cases. Of these operative medalities, Roux-en-Y distal panereatojejunostomy was in 10 ca-ses, pancreatoduodenectomy was in 3, modified duodenal diverticulizatian was in 2, distal pancreatectomy was in 3, tube installing in major duct and external drainage, and suture of pancreatic section was in 2, su-ture of two broken sides in 1 (Roux-en-Y distal pancreatojejunostomy in second time). Results Twenty patients were cured, and one was died after a procedure of pancreatoduodenectomy. The postoperative pan-creatic fistula happened in 3 cases and recovered well with conservative line of management. Conclusions For improving the outcome of pancreatic transection, the earlier exploratory laparotomy and carrying out concept of "Damage Control Surgery" are critical. The individual operative modality based on the grade should be a-dopted in the surgical procedure.