• Nenhum resultado encontrado

Clinics vol.61 número4

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2018

Share "Clinics vol.61 número4"

Copied!
1
0
0

Texto

(1)

287

CLINICS 2006;61(4):287-8

Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital das Clínicas, São Paulo University Medical School

Interventional Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

Email: faintuch@net.ipen.br

NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT OF INFECTED

PANCREATIC NECROSIS

Joel Faintuch, Salomão Faintuch

EDITORIAL

Many years ago, we published the first report in the lit-erature of a patient having infected pancreatic necrosis who survived following strictly medical therapy, namely

anti-biotics.1 That paper was harshly criticized, perhaps rightly

so, since conventional wisdom recommended—and to some extent still advises—open necrosectomy and drainage for

nearly 100% of such patients.2

It should however be noted that, in that case, adminis-tering only antibiotics was neither a simple option, nor an unauthorized experiment, for the very good reason that the patient himself irrevocably refused any surgical interven-tion on religious grounds.

Even at that time, experienced surgeons in international congresses would privately concede that every once in a while they had come across this situation: nonoperated pa-tients who had survived on antibiotics only, but publica-tion of such results was generally regarded as an anathema. Fifteen years and several articles later, infected pancreatic necrosis has not become a trivial disease – and probably never will – nor has conservative therapy become mainstream.

However, advances in interventional radiology and other forms of minimally invasive management have greatly ben-efited patients with deep-seated infected foci in general,

including those associated with severe pancreatitis.3,4

Of course, minimally invasive management is not the gold standard for infected pancreatic necrosis, and open surgical debridement of contaminated foci still produces the most reliable results, with present reported mortalities

of 20% to 25%.2,5 However, the use of minimally invasive

therapies is growing in certain institutions and could still become a generally accepted alternative.

Disseminated infected necrosis and poorly localized bac-terial foci do not lend themselves to easy and effective per-cutaneous management, so nonclassical treatment should be reserved for centers with interest and expertise in this area.

Mortality with laparoscopy or percutaneous drainage3,4 tends

to exceed that of the best surgical centers.2,5 Still, as

tech-niques improve and favorable outcomes become more fre-quent, it is conceivable that in the future these nonclassical techniques could become the therapies of choice.

Exclusive antibiotic therapy, as recently discussed by

Amico et al,6 has been advocated by some, but it is

un-likely to become a first-line option unless new drugs or pre-scription protocols that are particularly effective for such complex and dangerous intraperitoneal and retroperitoneal infected lesions are developed. Patients in good clinical condition tend to have the best results, according to

pre-liminary findings as well as to our own experience;1

how-ever, these are also the subjects with favorable outcomes in face of any therapeutic modality.

Interventional radiology is already advised for metabolically and hemodynamically unstable subjects or

others who are somehow unfit for surgery.4,5 As already

mentioned, this may soon become an uncontroversial area as more compelling evidence supports revision of therapeu-tic guidelines.

REFERENCES

1. Faintuch J, Meniconi MT, Speranzini MB, Pinotti HV, Smolentsov H. Clinical regression of infected pancreatic necrosis. Case report. Int J Pancreatol. 1991;8:379-86.

2. Rau B, Bothe A, Beger HG. Surgical treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis by necrosectomy and closed lavage: changing patient characteristics and outcome in a 19-year, single-center series. Surgery. 2005;138:28-39.

3 Adamson GD, Cuschieri A. Multimedia article. Laparoscopic infracolic necrosectomy for infected pancreatic necrosis. Surg Endosc. 2003;17:1675.

4. Leone A, Violino P, Ghirardo D, Fioranti L, Borrelli M, Scarrone A, et al. Role of computerized tomography in percutaneous drainage of acute infected necrotic-hemorrhagic pancreatitis. Radiol Med (Torino). 1996;92:241-6.

5. Werner J, Hartwig W, Hackert T, Buchler MW. Surgery in the treatment of acute pancreatitis—open pancreatic necrosectomy. Scand J Surg. 2005;94:130-4.

Referências

Documentos relacionados

6.1 Principais Contribuições As principais contribuições deste trabalho foram: • Análise da realização dos testes em processos de desenvolvimento de software na seção 2.4;

Foram vistos, dessa maneira: o sistema de avaliação de congelamento de preços de Edlin 70 , onde um incumbente não pode abaixar seus preços frente a uma entrada significativa,

glomerata , the major component, aromadendrene, exhibited the same degree of toxicity as p -cymene, independently of the method employed (fumigation or residual contact),

Objective: To evaluate the direct costs of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) or open technique (OPEN).. Methods: The present study

The outcome was, in her view, “serious consequences for the Social Security Budget that would ultimately compromise the inancing of social policies”, health care and social as-

Unlike the increase in leaf area, the number of in fl orescences produced by the plants declined during some months (Figure 1), but it would be necessary to analyze production

Nephroureterectomy remains the gold standard for the surgical management of upper tract tran- sitional cell carcinoma; However, recently, minimally invasive approaches

The probability of attending school four our group of interest in this region increased by 6.5 percentage points after the expansion of the Bolsa Família program in 2007 and