ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2014
Is necrosectomy obsolete for infected necrotizing pancreatitis? Is a paradigm shift needed?
Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The optimal timing and intervention to reduce mortality for necrotizing pancreatitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2023Pooled it
- Early versus delayed necrosectomy in pancreatic necrosis: A population-based cohort study on readmission, healthcare utilization, and in-hospital mortality.World journal of methodology · 2024Article
- Article
- Gastrovesical fistula as a rare complication following endoscopic transluminal drainage of walled-off necrosis-a case report.AME case reports · 2024Article
- Time to think prime times for treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis: Pendulum conundrum.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2023Review
- Does early intervention for infected pancreatic necrosis lead to better clinical outcomes compared to delayed intervention?Journal of gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Early versus delayed interventions for necrotizing pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.DEN open · 2023Review
- Management of severe acute pancreatitis: all hands to the pump.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2022Article
- RWON Study: The Real-World Walled-off Necrosis Study.Clinical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Pancreatic necrosis: Complications and changing trend of treatment.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2019Review
- Comparing efficacy of lumen-apposing stents to plastic stents in the endoscopic management of mature peripancreatic fluid collections: a single-center experience.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2018Article
- Laparoscopic approach in gastrointestinal emergencies.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
- Comparison of endoscopicEndoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 1886, Senn stated that removing necrotic pancreatic and peripancreatic tissue would benefit patients with severe acute pancreatitis. Since then, necrosectomy has been a mainstay of surgical procedures for infected necrotizing pancreatitis (NP). No published report has successfully questioned the role of necrosectomy. Recently, however, increasing evidence shows good outcomes when treating walled-off necrotizing pancreatitis without a necrosectomy. The literature concerning NP published primarily after 2000 was reviewed; it demonstrates the feasibility of a paradigm shift. The majority (75%) of minimally invasive necrosectomies show higher completion rates: between 80% and 100%. Transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy has shown remarkable results when combined with percutaneous drainage or a metallic stent. Related morbidities range from 40% to 92%. Single-digit mortality rates have been achieved with transluminal endoscopic necrosectomy, but not with video-assisted retroperitoneal necrosectomy series. Drainage procedures without necrosectomy have evolved from percutaneous drainage to transluminal endoscopic drainage with or without percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy access for laparoscopic instruments. Most series have reached higher success rates of 79%-93%, and even 100%, using transcystic multiple drainage methods. It is becoming evident that transluminal endoscopic drainage treatment of walled-off NP without a necrosectomy is feasible. With further refinement of the drainage procedures, a paradigm shift from necrosectomy to drainage is inevitable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.