Diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in infected necrotizing pancreatitis: an international expert survey and case vignette study

J van Grinsven, S van Brunschot, OJ Bakker, TL Bollen, MA Boermeester, Marco Bruno, CH DeJong, MG Dijkgraaf, Casper van Eijck, P Fockens, H van Goor, HG Gooszen, KD Horvath, KP van Lienden, HC van Santvoort, MG Besselink

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademic

45 Citations (Scopus)


Background: The optimal diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in infected necrotizing pancreatitis is subject to debate. We performed a survey on these topics amongst a group of international expert pancreatologists. Methods: An online survey including case vignettes was sent to 118 international pancreatologists. We evaluated the use and timing of fine needle aspiration (FNA), antibiotics, catheter drainage and (minimally invasive) necrosectomy. Results: The response rate was 74% (N = 87). None of the respondents use FNA routinely, 85% selectively and 15% never. Most respondents (87%) use a step-up approach in patients with infected necrosis. Walled-off necrosis (WON) is considered a prerequisite for endoscopic drainage and percutaneous drainage by 66% and 12%, respectively. After diagnosing infected necrosis, 55% routinely postpone invasive interventions, whereas 45% proceed immediately to intervention. Lack of consensus about timing of intervention was apparent on day 14 with proven infected necrosis (58% intervention vs. 42% non-invasive) as well as on day 20 with only clinically suspected infected necrosis (59% intervention vs. 41% non-invasive). Discussion: The step-up approach is the preferred treatment strategy in infected necrotizing pancreatitis amongst expert pancreatologists. There is no uniformity regarding the use of FNA and timing of intervention in the first 2-3 weeks of infected necrotizing pancreatitis.
Original languageUndefined/Unknown
Pages (from-to)49-56
Number of pages8
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Cite this