Reconstruction of Fingers Using Skin-Bone Grafts with Microvascular Anastomoses.

The aim of the study was to present a clinical and anatomical rationale for transplantation of skin-bone grafts with microvascular anastomoses for treating terminal and segmental defects of the hand and fingers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Finger and metacarpal bones were reconstructed in 25 hands of 25 patients by transplanting skin-bone tubular fragments with microvascular anastomoses. Transplants from the second metatarsal bone (n=22) and fibula (n=3) were used. Clinical, radiological, morphological, biomechanical, biophysical, and statistical research methods were used. The developed technology is adjustable to individual vascular anatomy of the foot. The proposed use of non-free skin-fat flaps and skin-bone fragments with microvascular anastomoses has been implemented for reconstructing lost segments. RESULTS: The engraftment of skin-bone fragments was observed in 25 cases. In two cases, partial necrosis of the transplants was detected. Sufficient resistance of the transplanted bone graft to resorption was noted. According to the X-ray evidence, the length of the finger with the metacarpal bone after surgery was 8.44±0.32 cm, in the short term after surgery - 8.10±0.36 cm, and in the long term - 7.87±0.45 cm, indicating mild resorption. We used an individual approach to the transplant selection, which made it possible to obtain generally good long-term results in 3 patients, and satisfactory results - in 22 patients. CONCLUSION: The study showed the feasibility of transplanting skin-bone fragments with microvascular anastomoses for replacing various anatomical defects of the hand and fingers. The proposed modification takes into account the variability of vascular anatomy of the donor region.

Quantitative determination of pancreas size using anatomical landmarks and its clinical relevance: A systematic literature review.

There have been many reports of altered pancreas size in diseases of the endocrine and exocrine pancreas, but few attempts to quantify such changes. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review, documenting the methodology, and quantitative data in studies reporting on pancreas size. Three electronic databases (Embase, Scopus, and MEDLINE) were searched by two reviewers independently. Studies of humans were included if they compared pancreas size (reported as pancreas diameters, areas, and/or lengths) between diseased populations and controls. A total of 28 studies with 3,810 individuals were included. Among these, 22 measured pancreas diameters, seven measured pancreas areas, and one measured pancreas lengths. The most common landmark for the head of the pancreas was the confluence of the superior mesenteric and splenic veins (three out of nine studies, 33.3%); for the body it was the superior mesenteric artery (seven out of nine, 77.8%); for the tail it was the internal border of the left kidney (two out of six, 33.3%). Pancreas diameters and areas tended to be smaller in diabetes mellitus, the extent of reduction being greater in individuals with type 1 than type 2 diabetes. Pancreas diameters tended to be greater in acute pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer but not in chronic pancreatitis. Pancreas diameters are a clinically relevant measure for diseases of the endocrine and exocrine pancreas. Consensus guidelines need to be developed to standardize their measurements. Clin. Anat. 31:913-926, 2018. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Classifying the severity of acute pancreatitis: towards a way forward.

BACKGROUND: The recent development of two different severity classifications for acute pancreatitis has appropriately raised questions about which should be used. The aim of this paper is to review the two new severity classifications, outline their differences, review validation studies, and identify gaps in knowledge to suggest a way forward. METHODS: A literature review was performed to identify the purposes and differences between the classifications. Validation studies and those comparing the two different classifications were also reviewed. RESULTS: The Revised Atlanta Classification (RAC) and the Determinants Based Classification (DBC) both rely on assessment of local and systemic factors. The differences between the classifications provides opportunities for further research to improve the accuracy and utility of severity classification. This includes understanding how best to tailor severity classification to setting (e.g. secondary or tertiary hospital) and purpose (e.g. clinical management or research). A key difference is that the RAC does not consider infected pancreatic necrosis an indicator of severe disease. There is also the need to develop methods for the accurate non-invasive diagnosis of infected necrosis and evaluation of the characteristics of organ dysfunction in relation to severity and outcome. CONCLUSION: Further improvement in severity classification is possible and research priorities have been identified. For now, the decision as to which classification to use should be on the basis of setting, validity, accuracy, and ease of use.

Meta-analysis of gut barrier dysfunction in patients with acute pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: The gut is implicated in the pathogenesis of acute pancreatitis but there is discrepancy between individual studies regarding the prevalence of gut barrier dysfunction in patients with acute pancreatitis. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of gut barrier dysfunction in acute pancreatitis, the effect of different co-variables, and changes in gut barrier function associated with the use of various therapeutic modalities. METHODS: A literature search was performed using PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Summary estimates were presented as pooled prevalence of gut barrier dysfunction and the associated 95 per cent c.i. RESULTS: A total of 44 prospective clinical studies were included in the systematic review, of which 18 studies were subjected to meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of gut barrier dysfunction was 59 (95 per cent c.i. 48 to 70) per cent; the prevalence was not significantly affected by disease severity, timing of assessment after hospital admission or type of test used, but showed a statistically significant association with age. Overall, nine of 13 randomized clinical trials reported a significant improvement in gut barrier function following intervention compared with the control group, but only three of six studies that used standard enteral nutrition reported a statistically significant improvement in gut barrier function after intervention. CONCLUSION: Gut barrier dysfunction is present in three of five patients with acute pancreatitis, and the prevalence is affected by patient age but not by disease severity. Clinical studies are needed to evaluate the effect of enteral nutrition on gut function in acute pancreatitis.

[International multidisciplinary classification of acute pancreatitis severity: the 2013 Spanish edition]. / Clasificación Internacional y Multidisciplinaria de la Pancreatitis Aguda: Edición Española 2013.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a new classification of acute pancreatitis severity on the basis of a sound conceptual framework, comprehensive review of the published evidence, and worldwide consultation. BACKGROUNDS: The Atlanta definitions of acute pancreatitis severity are ingrained in the lexicon of specialist in pancreatic diseases, but are suboptimal because these definitions are based on the empiric description of events not associated with severity. METHODS: A personal invitation to contribute to the development of a new classification of acute pancreatitis severity was sent to all surgeons, gastroenterologists, internists, intensivists and radiologists currently active in the field of clinical acute pancreatitis. The invitation was not limited to members of certain associations or residents of certain countries. A global web-based survey was conducted, and a dedicated international symposium was organized to bring contributors from different disciplines together and discuss the concept and definitions. RESULTS: The new classification of severity is based on the actual local and systemic determinants of severity, rather than on the description of events that are non-causally associated with severity. The local determinant relates to whether there is (peri) pancreatic necrosis or not, and if present, whether it is sterile or infected. The systemic determinant relates to whether there is organ failure or not, and if present, whether it is transient or persistent. The presence of one determinant can modify the effect of another, whereby the presence of both infected (peri) pancreatic necrosis and persistent organ failure has a greater impact upon severity than either determinant alone. The derivation of a classification based on the above principles results in four categories of severity: mild, moderate, severe, and critical. CONCLUSIONS: This classification is the result of a consultative process among specialists in pancreatic diseases from 49 countries spanning North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Oceania and Africa. It provides a set of concise up to date definitions of all the main entities pertinent to classifying the severity of acute pancreatitis in clinical practice and research. This ensures that the determinant-based classification can be used in a uniform manner throughout the world.

[Multidisciplinar international classification of the severity of acute pancreatitis: Italian version 2013]. / Classificazione Internazionale Multidisciplinare della Gravità della Pancreatite Acuta Versione Italiana 2013.

AIM: The aim of this paper was to present the 2013 Italian edition of a new international classification of acute pancreatitis severity. The Atlanta definitions of acute pancreatitis severity are ingrained in the lexicon of pancreatologists but suboptimal because these definitions are based on empiric description of occurrences that are merely associated with severity. METHODS: A personal invitation to contribute to the development of a new international classification of acute pancreatitis severity was sent to all surgeons, gastroenterologists, internists, intensivists, and radiologists who are currently active in clinical research on acute pancreatitis. A global web-based survey was conducted and a dedicated international symposium was organized to bring contributors from different disciplines together and discuss the concept and definitions. RESULTS: The new international classification is based on the actual local and systemic determinants of severity, rather than description of events that are correlated with severity. The local determinant relates to whether there is (peri)pancreatic necrosis or not, and if present, whether it is sterile or infected. The systemic determinant relates to whether there is organ failure or not, and if present, whether it is transient or persistent. The presence of one determinant can modify the effect of another such that the presence of both infected (peri)pancreatic necrosis and persistent organ failure have a greater effect on severity than either determinant alone. The derivation of a classification based on the above principles results in 4 categories of severity-mild, moderate, severe, and critical. CONCLUSION: This classification provides a set of concise up-to-date definitions of all the main entities pertinent to classifying the severity of acute pancreatitis in clinical practice and research.

[Determinant-based classification of acute pancreatitis severity. International multidisciplinary classification of acute pancreatitis severity: the 2013 German edition]. / Einteilung des Schweregrads der akuten Pankreatitis. Internationale, multidisziplinäre klinische Klassifikation auf Basis pathogenetischer Determinanten: Deutsche Version 2013.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a new international classification of acute pancreatitis severity on the basis of a sound conceptual framework, comprehensive review of published evidence, and worldwide consultation. BACKGROUND: The Atlanta definitions of acute pancreatitis severity are ingrained in the lexicon of pancreatologists but suboptimal because these definitions are based on empiric descriptions of occurrences that are merely associated with severity. METHODS: A personal invitation to contribute to the development of a new international classification of acute pancreatitis severity was sent to all surgeons, gastroenterologists, internists, intensive medicine specialists, and radiologists who are currently active in clinical research on acute pancreatitis. The invitation was not limited to members of certain associations or residents of certain countries. A global Web-based survey was conducted and a dedicated international symposium was organised to bring contributors from different disciplines together and discuss the concept and definitions. RESULT: The new international classification is based on the actual local and systemic determinants of severity, rather than descriptions of events that are correlated with severity. The local determinant relates to whether there is (peri)pancreatic necrosis or not, and if present, whether it is sterile or infected. The systemic determinant relates to whether there is organ failure or not, and if present, whether it is transient or persistent. The presence of one determinant can modify the effect of another such that the presence of both infected (peri)pancreatic necrosis and persistent organ failure have a greater effect on severity than either determinant alone. The derivation of a classification based on the above principles results in 4 categories of severity - mild, moderate, severe, and critical. CONCLUSIONS: This classification is the result of a consultative process amongst pancreatologists from 49 countries spanning North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Oceania, and Africa. It provides a set of concise up-to-date definitions of all the main entities pertinent to classifying the severity of acute pancreatitis in clinical practice and research. This ensures that the determinant-based classification can be used in a uniform manner throughout the world.

SEMICYUC 2012. Recommendations for intensive care management of acute pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: Significant changes in the management of acute pancreatitis have taken place since the 2004 Pamplona Consensus Conference. The objective of this conference has been the revision and updating of the Conference recommendations, in order to unify the integral management of potentially severe acute pancreatitis in an ICU. PARTICIPANTS: Spanish and international intensive medicine physicians, radiologists, surgeons, gastroenterologists, emergency care physicians and other physicians involved in the treatment of acute pancreatitis. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE AND GRADES OF RECOMMENDATION: The GRADE method has been used for drawing them up. DRAWING UP THE RECOMMENDATIONS: The selection of the committee members was performed by means of a public announcement. The bibliography has been revised from 2004 to the present day and 16 blocks of questions on acute pancreatitis in a ICU have been drawn up. Firstly, all the questions according to groups have been drawn up in order to prepare one document. This document has been debated and agreed upon by computer at the SEMICYUC Congress and lastly at the Consensus Conference which was held with the sole objective of drawing up these recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Eighty two recommendations for acute pancreatitis management in an ICU have been presented. Of these 84 recommendations, we would emphasize the new determinants-based classification of acute pancreatitis severity, new surgical techniques and nutritional recommendations. Note. This summary only lists the 84 recommendations of the 16 questions blocks except blocks greater relevance and impact of its novelty or because they modify the current management.

[Clinical pathways in acute pancreatitis: recommendations for early multidisciplinary management. Scientific Committee of the SEMICYUC. Working Group on Infectious Diseases (GTEI-SEMICYUC)]. / Hoja de ruta de los cuidados clínicos para la pancreatitis aguda: recomendaciones para el manejo anticipado multidisciplinar (clinical pathways).

There is a growing body of evidence that early management of patients with acute pancreatitis may alter the natural course of disease and improve outcomes of patients. The aim of this paper is to optimize the management of patients with acute pancreatitis during the first 72 h after hospital admission by proposing several clinical care pathways. The proposed pathways are based on the SEMICYUC 2005 Recommendations with incorporation of the latest developments in the field, particularly the determinants-based classification of acute pancreatitis severity. The pathways also incorporate the "alarm signs", the use of therapeutic modalities known as PANCREAS, and the "call to ICU" criteria. Further studies will need to assess whether the adoption of these pathway reduces mortality and morbidity in patients with acute pancreatitis. The previous SEMICYUC guidelines on management of patients with acute pancreatitis in Intensive Care will need to be revised to reflect the recent developments in the field.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of enteral nutrition formulations in acute pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Although the benefits of enteral nutrition in acute pancreatitis are well established, the optimal composition of enteral feeding is largely unknown. The aim of the study was to compare the tolerance and safety of enteral nutrition formulations in patients with acute pancreatitis. METHODS: Electronic databases (Scopus, MEDLINE, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register) and the proceedings of major pancreatology conferences were searched. RESULTS: Twenty randomized controlled trials, including 1070 patients, met the inclusion criteria. None of the following was associated with a significant difference in feeding intolerance: the use of (semi)elemental versus polymeric formulation (relative risk (RR) 0.62 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.10 to 3.97); P = 0.611); supplementation of enteral nutrition with probiotics (RR 0.69 (95 per cent c.i. 0.43 to 1.09); P = 0.110); or immunonutrition (RR 1.60 (95 per cent c.i. 0.31 to 8.29); P = 0.583). The risk of infectious complications and death did not differ significantly in any of the comparisons. CONCLUSION: The use of polymeric, compared with (semi)elemental, formulation does not lead to a significantly higher risk of feeding intolerance, infectious complications or death in patients with acute pancreatitis. Neither the supplementation of enteral nutrition with probiotics nor the use of immunonutrition significantly improves the clinical outcomes.

Systematic review of endoscopic ultrasonography versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for suspected choledocholithiasis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has emerged as an accurate diagnostic alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials of EUS-guided ERCP versus ERCP alone in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. METHODS: The search for eligible studies was carried out using the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Science Citation Index electronic databases. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Four trials containing 213 patients randomized to EUS-guided ERCP and 210 to ERCP alone were selected. In the EUS-guided ERCP group, ERCP was avoided in 143 patients (67.1 per cent) when EUS did not detect choledocholithiasis. The use of EUS significantly reduced the risk of overall complications (relative risk 0.35 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.20 to 0.62); P < 0.001) and post-ERCP acute pancreatitis (relative risk 0.21 (95 per cent c.i. 0.06 to 0.83); P = 0.030). CONCLUSION: By performing EUS first, ERCP may be safely avoided in two-thirds of patients with common bile duct stones. Application of EUS in the selection of patients for therapeutic ERCP significantly reduces the complication rate.

Systematic review: nutritional support in acute pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: There has been controversy concerning the merits of enteral and parenteral nutrition compared with no supplementary nutrition in the management of patients with acute pancreatitis. AIM: To perform a systematic review of the data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in acute pancreatitis that compares enteral nutrition with no supplementary nutrition, parenteral nutrition with no supplementary nutrition and enteral nutrition with parenteral nutrition. METHODS: A search was undertaken in the MEDLINIE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. RESULTS: Fifteen RCTs were included. Enteral nutrition, when compared with no supplementary nutrition, was associated with no significant change in infectious complications: ratio of relative risks (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07-4.32, P = 0.58, but a significant reduction in mortality: ratio of RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.07-0.70, P = 0.01. Parenteral nutrition, when compared with no supplementary nutrition, was associated with no significant change in infectious complications: RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.18-10.40; P = 0.77, but a significant reduction in mortality: RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.13-0.97, P = 0.04. Enteral nutrition, when compared with parenteral nutrition, was associated with a significant reduction in infectious complications: RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.30-0.57, P < 0.001, but no significant change in mortality: RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.32-1.14, P = 0.12. CONCLUSIONS: The use of either enteral or parenteral nutrition, in comparison with no supplementary nutrition, is associated with a lower risk of death in acute pancreatitis. Enteral nutrition is associated with a lower risk of infectious complications compared with parenteral nutrition.