Carlos Manterola; Sebastián Urrutia & Franz Apodaca

Summary

Despite diagnostic and therapeutic advances, the treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) continues to be a complex problem to solve. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of different surgical alternatives for the treatment of IPN. Articles published between 2000 to 2013, and related to effectiveness of open surgery (OS) and minimally invasive treatmente (MIT) in patients with IPN were evaluated. PubMed, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register RCT, DARE, IBECS, SciELO, LILACS, PAHO, WHOLIS, ASERNIP-S, NIHR, HTA, Clinical Excellence, York Health Economic Consortium and Tripdatabase were reviewed, searching systematic reviews (SR), randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies (OST), in which the effectiveness of OS and MIT was evaluated in relation to the variables mortality, intra-abdominal bleeding, development of enterocutaneous fistula or hollow viscera perforation, development of pancreatic fistula, reoperations for complications, reoperations for new necrosectomy, development of diabetes mellitus and pancreatic enzyme requirements. Three hundred eighty-nine articles were retrieved, 10 of which met the selection criteria (2 SR, 1 RCT and 7 OST). The studies have a level of evidence of 2a, 2b, 3a and 4. MIT are associated with better results than OS in all variables analyzed, but significantly only in the development of diabetes mellitus and pancreatic enzyme requirement. Articles found are few and heterogeneous, making meaningful conclusions difficult. Studies with a better level of evidence, methodological quality and population size are needed to make conclusions and recommendations.

KEY WORDS: "Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing/complications"; "Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing/therapy"; Infected pancreatic necrosis; Necrosectomy; Evidence-based medicine; Overview.

How to cite this article