Pancreatic Pseudocysts Treatment & Management

  • Author: Louis R Lambiase, MD, MHA; Chief Editor: Julian Katz, MD   more...
 
Updated: Nov 17, 2011
 

Medical Care

The goal of therapy is avoidance of complications.

  • About 10% of pseudocysts become infected.
  • Pseudocysts can also rupture. A controlled rupture into an enteric organ can sometimes cause GI bleeding. A free rupture into the peritoneal cavity produces abdominal pain and, rarely, peritonitis or even death.
  • Most pseudocysts resolve without interference and only require supportive care.
  • Several studies have indicated that the size of the cyst and the length of time the cyst has been present are poor predictors of complications. In general, larger cysts are more likely to become symptomatic or cause complications. However, some patients with larger collections do well; therefore, the size of the pseudocyst alone is not an indication for drainage.
  • Indications for drainage include the following:
    • Complications
    • Symptoms
    • Concern about possible malignancy
Next

Surgical Care

Drainage options are outlined below.

  • Catheter drainage
    • Percutaneous aspiration is useful only to establish a diagnosis or as a temporizing measure. It has a 54% failure rate and a 63% recurrence rate. This technique has a relatively high risk of infecting the pseudocyst. Percutaneous drainage may have a higher complication rate and inpatient mortality rate than surgical drainage.
    • Percutaneous catheter drainage is the procedure of choice for treating infected pseudocysts, allowing for rapid drainage of the cyst and identification of any microbial organism. A high recurrence and failure rate exist, but catheter drainage may be a good temporizing measure.
    • Percutaneous catheter drainage is contraindicated in patients who are poorly compliant and cannot manage a catheter at home. It is also contraindicated in patients with strictures of the main pancreatic duct and in patients with cysts containing bloody or solid material.
  • Endoscopic drainage may be either transpapillary (via ERCP) or transmural. Both modalities require careful patient selection to ensure success and safety.
    • Transpapillary drainage, while safer and more effective than transmural drainage, requires cyst communication with the pancreatic duct. This technique may be technically challenging because it requires wire passage and stenting through the pancreatic duct to the pseudocyst. The success rate is about 80%. The recurrence rate is 10-14%, and, in most series, the complication rate (mainly pancreatitis) is approximately 13%. These photographs show the endoscopic view of tranThese photographs show the endoscopic view of transpapillary pseudocyst drainage in a patient with pancreas divisum and a pseudocyst that communicates with the pancreatic duct. The image on the right shows the ampullary area. The middle image shows a wire placed in the minor papilla into the dorsal pancreatic duct. The left image shows a stent in place in the minor papilla.
    • Endoscopic transmural drainage is also possible.[3] This involves performing an endoscopy and finding a bulge within the wall of the stomach or duodenum caused by compression of the pseudocyst. The cyst is generally entered using a needle knife to cut through the gastric or duodenum wall, and a series of pigtail stents are placed through the resulting communication. Some have adapted the technique to avoid diathermy, thus decreasing possible complications. The method has an 82-89% success rate in very experienced hands. The recurrent rate is 6-18%. The complication rate is 20%, with the most feared complication being bleeding.
    • One report suggests that the complication rate decreases and efficacy increases with experience. Weckman reported an approximately 86% success rate with endoscopic drainage with a 10% complication rate and a 14% failure rate.[4] There appeared to be about a 15% recurrence rate. There was no real difference in outcome in patients treated with a transpapillary or transmural approach.
  • Surgical drainage is the criterion standard against which all therapies are measured.
    • Internal drainage is the procedure of choice. A laparoscopic approach has been used in some cases with good results.
    • In most series, the mortality rate is 3%, and the complication rate is approximately 24%.
    • The success rate is 85-90%.
    • Recent work suggests that a laparoscopic approach to drainage has a high success rate and a low morbidity rate.[5, 6]
Previous
Next

Consultations

Management of pseudocysts requires a team approach. Gastroenterologists, surgeons, and invasive radiologists must work together to determine the necessity, timing, and method of intervention. If nonsurgical drainage is contemplated, it is important to elucidate the anatomy of the pancreatic duct beforehand. This may be done via ERCP or MRI. A large number of patients who fail or have complications with nonsurgical drainage have disruption or stenosis of the pancreatic duct.

Previous
Next

Diet

Patients may eat a low-fat diet as tolerated. Patients in whom eating causes abdominal pain need parenteral or enteral nutrition through a percutaneously or endoscopically placed jejunal tube.

Previous
Next

Activity

Patients may engage in activities as tolerated.

Previous
Proceed to Medication
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Louis R Lambiase, MD, MHA  Professor of Medicine, University of Tennessee College of Medicine Chattanooga; Chief, Division of Gastroenterology, University of Tennessee Chattanooga Unit; Assistant Dean for Clinical Affairs, University of Tennessee College of Medicine Chattanooga

Louis R Lambiase, MD, MHA is a member of the following medical societies: American Gastroenterological Association, American Pancreatic Association, and American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

David Greenwald, MD  Associate Professor of Clinical Medicine, Fellowship Program Director, Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine

David Greenwald, MD is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American College of Gastroenterology, American College of Physicians, American Gastroenterological Association, American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, and New York Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD  Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Medscape Salary Employment

Simmy Bank, MD  Chair, Professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Long Island Jewish Hospital, Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Alex J Mechaber, MD, FACP  Senior Associate Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education, Associate Professor of Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine

Alex J Mechaber, MD, FACP is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine, and Society of General Internal Medicine

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Julian Katz, MD  Clinical Professor of Medicine, Drexel University College of Medicine

Julian Katz, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Gastroenterology, American College of Physicians, American Gastroenterological Association, American Geriatrics Society, American Medical Association, American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, American Trauma Society, Association of American Medical Colleges, and Physicians for Social Responsibility

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References
  1. Jani N, Bani Hani M, Schulick RD, Hruban RH, Cunningham SC. Diagnosis and management of cystic lesions of the pancreas. Diagn Ther Endosc. 2011;2011:478913. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  2. Brun A, Agarwal N, Pitchumoni CS. Fluid collections in and around the pancreas in acute pancreatitis. J Clin Gastroenterol. Aug 2011;45(7):614-25. [Medline].

  3. Zheng M, Qin M. Endoscopic ultrasound guided transgastric stenting for the treatment of traumatic pancreatic pseudocyst. Hepatogastroenterology. Jul-Aug 2011;58(109):1106-9. [Medline].

  4. Weckman L, Kylanpaa ML, Puolakkainen P, Halttunen J. Endoscopic treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts. Surg Endosc. Apr 2006;20(4):603-7. Epub 2006 Jan 19. [Medline].

  5. Aljarabah M, Ammori BJ. Laparoscopic and endoscopic approaches for drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts: a systematic review of published series. Surg Endosc. Nov 2007;21(11):1936-44. [Medline].

  6. Oida T, Mimatsu K, Kano H, Kawasaki A, Kuboi Y, Fukino N, et al. Laparoscopic Cystogastrostomy via the Posterior Approach for Pancreatic Pseudocyst Drainage. Hepatogastroenterology. Nov 14 2011;58(110-111):1771-1775. [Medline].

  7. Beckingham IJ, Krige JE, Bornman PC, Terblanche J. Long term outcome of endoscopic drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts. Am J Gastroenterol. Jan 1999;94(1):71-4. [Medline].

  8. Binmoeller KF, Seifert H, Walter A, Soehendra N. Transpapillary and transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts. Gastrointest Endosc. Sep 1995;42(3):219-24. [Medline].

  9. Criado E, De Stefano AA, Weiner TM, Jaques PF. Long term results of percutaneous catheter drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts. Surg Gynecol Obstet. Oct 1992;175(4):293-8. [Medline].

  10. D'Agostino HB, vanSonnenberg E, Sanchez RB, Goodacre BW, Villaveiran RG, Lyche K. Treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts with percutaneous drainage and octreotide. Work in progress. Radiology. Jun 1993;187(3):685-8. [Medline].

  11. El Hamel A, Parc R, Adda G, Bouteloup PY, Huguet C, Malafosse M. Bleeding pseudocysts and pseudoaneurysms in chronic pancreatitis. Br J Surg. Sep 1991;78(9):1059-63. [Medline].

  12. Gershoni-Baruch R, Mandel H, Bar El H, Bar-Nizan N, Borochowitz Z, Dar H. Interstitial deletion (6)q13q15. Am J Med Genet. Apr 24 1996;62(4):345-7. [Medline].

  13. Heider R, Meyer AA, Galanko JA, Behrns KE. Percutaneous drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts is associated with a higher failure rate than surgical treatment in unselected patients. Ann Surg. Jun 1999;229(6):781-7; discussion 787-9. [Medline].

  14. Howell DA, Elton E, Parsons WG. Endoscopic management of pseudocysts of the pancreas. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. Jan 1998;8(1):143-62. [Medline].

  15. Lewandrowski KB, Southern JF, Pins MR, Compton CC, Warshaw AL. Cyst fluid analysis in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic cysts. A comparison of pseudocysts, serous cystadenomas, mucinous cystic neoplasms, and mucinous cystadenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. Jan 1993;217(1):41-7. [Medline].

  16. Morton JM, Brown A, Galanko JA, Norton JA, Grimm IS, Behrns KE. A national comparison of surgical versus percutaneous drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts: 1997-2001. J Gastrointest Surg. Jan 2005;9(1):15-20; discussion 20-1. [Medline].

  17. Nealon WH, Walser E. Surgical management of complications associated with percutaneous and/or endoscopic management of pseudocyst of the pancreas. Ann Surg. Jun 2005;241(6):948-57; discussion 957-60. [Medline].

  18. Nguyen BL, Thompson JS, Edney JA, Bragg LE, Rikkers LF. Influence of the etiology of pancreatitis on the natural history of pancreatic pseudocysts. Am J Surg. Dec 1991;162(6):527-30; discussion 531. [Medline].

  19. Pitchumoni CS, Agarwal N. Pancreatic pseudocysts. When and how should drainage be performed?. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. Sep 1999;28(3):615-39. [Medline].

  20. Sahani DV, Kadavigere R, Saokar A, Fernandez-del Castillo C, Brugge WR, Hahn PF. Cystic pancreatic lesions: a simple imaging-based classification system for guiding management. Radiographics. Nov-Dec 2005;25(6):1471-84. [Medline].

  21. Soliani P, Franzini C, Ziegler S, Del Rio P, Dell'Abate P, Piccolo D, et al. Pancreatic pseudocysts following acute pancreatitis: risk factors influencing therapeutic outcomes. JOP. Sep 2004;5(5):338-47. [Medline].

  22. Vitas GJ, Sarr MG. Selected management of pancreatic pseudocysts: operative versus expectant management. Surgery. Feb 1992;111(2):123-30. [Medline].

  23. Warshaw AL, Compton CC, Lewandrowski K, Cardenosa G, Mueller PR. Cystic tumors of the pancreas. New clinical, radiologic, and pathologic observations in 67 patients. Ann Surg. Oct 1990;212(4):432-43; discussion 444-5. [Medline].

  24. Warshaw AL, Rutledge PL. Cystic tumors mistaken for pancreatic pseudocysts. Ann Surg. Apr 1987;205(4):393-8. [Medline].

  25. Yeo CJ, Bastidas JA, Lynch-Nyhan A, Fishman EK, Zinner MJ, Cameron JL. The natural history of pancreatic pseudocysts documented by computed tomography. Surg Gynecol Obstet. May 1990;170(5):411-7. [Medline].

Previous
Next
 
Three views of a pancreatic pseudocyst noted during endoscopic ultrasound. The concentric rings in the center of the images are the ultrasound transducer in the stomach. The cyst is observed as the large hypoechoic structure adjacent to the transducer.
These photographs show the endoscopic view of transpapillary pseudocyst drainage in a patient with pancreas divisum and a pseudocyst that communicates with the pancreatic duct. The image on the right shows the ampullary area. The middle image shows a wire placed in the minor papilla into the dorsal pancreatic duct. The left image shows a stent in place in the minor papilla.
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2012 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.