The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Minimally Invasive Retroperitoneal Pancreatic Necrosectomy
Abstract
Introduction: Open surgery for pancreatic necrosis is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. We report the results of a recently developed minimally invasive technique that we adopted in 1998. Methods: A descriptive explanation of the approach is given together with the results of a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent a minimally invasive retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy (MIRP) between August 1998 and April 2002. Patients: There were 24 patients with a median (range) age of 61 (29–75) years. The initial median (range) APACHE II score was 8 (2–21). All patients had infected pancreatic necrosis with at least 50% pancreatic necrosis. In three patients it was not possible to complete the first MIRP because of technical reasons. Results: A total of 88 procedures were performed with a median (range) of 4 (0–8) per patient. Twenty-one (88%) patients developed 36 complications during the course of their illness. Five patients required an additional open procedure: 2 for subsequent distant collections, 2 for bleeding and 1 for persisting sepsis and a distant abscess. Six (25%) patients who had MIRP died. The median (range) post-operative hospital stay was 51 (5–200) days. Conclusions: MIRP is a new technique that has shown promising results, and could be preferable to open pancreatic necrosectomy in selected patients. However, unresolved issues remain to be overcome and the exact role of MIRP in the management of pancreatic necrosis has yet to be defined.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Practice guidelines in acute pancreatitis
Banks, P. A., Freeman, M. L., & the Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology (2006) · The American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00856.x · Cited by 2,050
Acute Pancreatitis: Bench to the Bedside
Pandol, S. J., Saluja, A. K., Imrie, C. W., & Banks, P. A. (2007) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2007.01.055 · Cited by 677
Clinical practice guideline: management of acute pancreatitis
Greenberg, J. A., Hsu, J., Bawazeer, M., Marshall, J., Friedrich, J. O., Nathens, A., Coburn, N., May, G. R., Pearsall, E., & McLeod, R. S. (2016) · Canadian Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1503/cjs.015015 · Cited by 429
Rodriguez, J. R., Razo, A. O., Targarona, J., Thayer, S. P., Rattner, D. W., Warshaw, A. L., & Fernández-del Castillo, C. (2008) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e31815b6976 · Cited by 332
Metadata
- Authors
- Connor, S., Ghaneh, P., Raraty, M., Sutton, R., Rosso, E., Garvey, C. J., Hughes, M. L., Evans, J. C., Rowlands, P., & Neoptolemos, J. P.
- Venue
- Digestive Surgery
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2003
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 270-277
- ISSN
- 0253-4886 (ISSN-L)
- 1421-9883
- OpenAlex
- W2134436503
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Minimally Invasive Retroperitoneal Pancreatic Necrosectomy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000071184
- The paper
- Connor, S., Ghaneh, P., Raraty, M., Sutton, R., Rosso, E., Garvey, C. J., Hughes, M. L., Evans, J. C., Rowlands, P., & Neoptolemos, J. P. (2003). Minimally Invasive Retroperitoneal Pancreatic Necrosectomy. Digestive Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1159/000071184
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.