BACKGROUND: The optimal diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in @entity788 are subject to debate. A survey was performed on these topics amongst a group of international expert pancreatologists. METHODS: An online survey including case vignettes was sent to 118 international pancreatologists. The use and timing of fine-needle aspiration (FNA), antibiotics, catheter drainage and (minimally invasive) necrosectomy were evaluated. 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 @entity1 with infected @entity39 . Walled-off @entity39 (WON) is considered a prerequisite for endoscopic drainage and percutaneous drainage by 66% and 12%, respectively. After diagnosing infected @entity39 , 55% routinely postpone invasive interventions, whereas 45% proceed immediately to intervention. A lack of consensus about timing of intervention was apparent on day 14 with proven infected @entity39 (58% intervention versus 42% non-invasive) as well as on day 20 with only clinically suspected infected @entity39 (59% intervention versus 41% non-invasive). DISCUSSION: The step-up approach is the preferred treatment strategy in @entity788 amongst expert pancreatologists. There is no uniformity regarding the use of FNA and timing of intervention in the first 2-3 weeks of @entity788 .

Diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in XXXX : an international expert survey and case vignette study.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients'] @entity788 :: ('MESH:D010190', 'Disease') :: ['infected necrotizing pancreatitis'] @entity39 :: ('MESH:D009336', 'Disease') :: ['necrosis']
@entity788 :: (MESH:D010190,Disease) :: ['infected necrotizing pancreatitis']
