Randomized controlled trials of antibiotic prophylaxis in severe acute pancreatitis: relationship between methodological quality and outcome

AIM: To evaluate the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in severe acute pancreatitis in relation to outcome. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for RCTs that studied the effectiveness of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in severe acute pancreatitis. A meta-analysis was performed with a random effects model. Methodological quality was quantified by a previously published scoring system (range 0-17 points). RESULTS: Six studies, with a total of 397 participants, obtained a methodological score of at least 5 points and were included. Systemic antibiotic prophylaxis had no significant effect on infection of pancreatic necrosis (absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.055; 95% CI -0.084 to 0.194) and mortality (ARR 0.058, 95% CI -0.017 to 0.134). Spearman correlation showed an inverse association between methodological quality and ARR for mortality (correlation coefficient -0.841, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The inverse relationship between methodological quality and impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on mortality emphasizes the importance of high-quality RCTs. At present, adequate evidence for the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in severe acute pancreatitis is lacking

Timing of surgical intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of timing of surgical intervention for necrotizing pancreatitis. DESIGN: Retrospective study of 53 patients and a systematic review. SETTING: A tertiary referral center. Main Outcome Measure Mortality. RESULTS: Median timing of the intervention was 28 days. Eighty-three percent of patients had infected necrosis and 55% had preoperative organ failure. The mortality rate was 36%. Sixteen patients were operated on within 14 days of initial admission, 11 patients from day 15 to 29, and 26 patients on day 30 or later. This latter group received preoperative antibiotics for a longer period (P < .001), and Candida species and antibiotic-resistant organisms were more often cultured from the pancreatic or peripancreatic necrosis in these patients (P = .02). The 30-day group also had the lowest mortality (8% vs 75% in the 1 to 14-days group and 45% in the 15 to 29-days group, P < .001); this difference persisted when outcome was stratified for preoperative organ failure. During the second half of the study, necrosectomy was further postponed (43 vs 20 days, P = .06) and mortality decreased (22% vs 47%, P = .09). We also reviewed 11 studies with a total of 1136 patients. Median surgical patient volume was 8.3 patients per year (range, 5.3-15.6), median timing of surgical intervention was 26 days (range, 3-31), and median mortality was 25% (range, 6%-56%). We observed a significant correlation between timing of intervention and mortality (R = - 0.603; 95% confidence interval, - 2.10 to - 0.02; P = .05). CONCLUSION: Postponing necrosectomy until 30 days after initial hospital admission is associated with decreased mortality, prolonged use of antibiotics, and increased incidence of Candida species and antibiotic-resistant organisms

Timing of cholecystectomy after mild biliary pancreatitis

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to evaluate recurrent biliary events as a consequence of delay in cholecystectomy following mild biliary pancreatitis. METHODS: Between 2004 and 2007, patients with acute pancreatitis were registered prospectively in 15 Dutch hospitals. Patients with mild biliary pancreatitis were candidates for cholecystectomy. Recurrent biliary events requiring admission before and after cholecystectomy, and after endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES), were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 308 patients with mild biliary pancreatitis, 267 were candidates for cholecystectomy. Eighteen patients underwent cholecystectomy during the initial admission, leaving 249 potential candidates for cholecystectomy after discharge. Cholecystectomy was performed after a median of 6 weeks in 188 patients (75.5 per cent). Before cholecystectomy, 34 patients (13.7 per cent) were readmitted for biliary events, including 24 with recurrent biliary pancreatitis. ES was performed in 108 patients during the initial admission. Eight (7.4 per cent) of these patients suffered from biliary events after ES and before cholecystectomy, compared with 26 (18.4 per cent) of 141 patients who did not have ES (risk ratio 0.51, 95 per cent confidence interval 0.27 to 0.94; P = 0.015). Following cholecystectomy, eight (3.9 per cent) of 206 patients developed biliary events after a median of 31 weeks. Only 142 (53.2 per cent) of 267 patients were treated in accordance with the Dutch guideline, which recommends cholecystectomy or ES during the index admission or within 3 weeks thereafter. CONCLUSION: A delay in cholecystectomy after mild biliary pancreatitis carries a substantial risk of recurrent biliary events. ES reduces the risk of recurrent pancreatitis but not of other biliary events