Timing of Necrosectomy After Endoscopic Drainage of Walled-off Pancreatic Necrosis (WON)

NCT ID: NCT05252897

Last Updated: 2022-03-09

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

108 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2022-02-01

Study Completion Date

2026-06-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON) is associated with a mortality of 20-30%. The current evidence supports a minimally invasive drainage approach to infected WON. The current suggested approach in international guidelines is the endoscopic step-up approach. However, recent evidence from large national cohorts support the use of direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) at the time of stent placement, resulting in earlier resolution of WON and less number of necrosectomies. This study aims to investigate the clinical outcomes of the DEN versus the step-up approach for necrosectomy after endoscopic drainage of WON.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

INTRODUCTION Acute pancreatitis is one of the most common gastrointestinal diseases requiring emergency admissions to the hospital. 10-20% of these patients develop pancreatic necrosis and subsequent walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON) and is associated with a mortality of 20-30%. Grade 1A evidence exists to support an initial minimally invasive drainage approach to infected WON. However, the optimal approach and timing of necrosectomy remains unaddressed. The current suggested approach in international guidelines is the endoscopic step-up approach. However, recent evidence from large national cohorts support the use of direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) at the time of stent placement, resulting in earlier resolution of WON and less number of necrosectomies.

OBJECTIVE This study aims to investigate the clinical outcomes of the DEN versus the step-up approach for necrosectomy after endoscopic drainage of WON.

HYPOTHESIS The hypothesis is that DEN at the time of LAMS placement improves clinical outcomes after endoscopic drainage of WON as compared to the endoscopic step-up approach.

DESIGN AND SUBJECTS This is a multicentre international randomized controlled trial. Patients with suspected or confirmed infected or symptomatic WON on computed tomography (CT) and who are deemed feasible for endoscopic drainage will be included in the study. Endoscopic drainage with lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) will be performed. Patients will be randomised to either the endoscopic step-up approach or direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) approach.

The primary endpoint is a composite of major complications or death within 6 months after randomisation. Secondary endpoints include time to resolution of WON, pancreatic functions, biliary strictures, need for necrosectomy, total number of interventions, length of hospital and ICU stay, recurrence of WON and unplanned readmissions related to WON.

A reduction in cumulative primary endpoint with the DEN approach by 22.4% (32.2% to 9.8%) in comparison to endoscopic step-up approach was assumed. With a 2-sided significance level of 5% and power of 80%, taking into account a 5% drop-out rate, a total of 108 patients was required to demonstrate this effect. Study collaboration has been established with four other international centres. A estimation of 3 years is required to complete study recruitment.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Pancreatic Necrosis

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

randomised controlled 2 arm trial
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Endoscopic step-up approach

After endoscopic drainage of WON, patients will be reassessed 72 hours after the procedure. If there is no clinical improvement 72 hours after drain placement, a CECT is performed to check the adequacy of the drainage. Irrigation of the WON via a nasocystic drain or endoscopic irrigation (step 1) is performed in case of inadequate drainage. If a nasocystic drain is inserted, 500ml of normal saline, twice a day will be used to irrigate the WON. If endoscopic irrigation is performed, only irrigation with normal saline without necrosectomy is allowed.

Patients are again evaluated 72 hours after step 1. In case of improvement, treatment is conservative; otherwise step 2 will be initiated, which is endoscopic necrosectomy. Further endoscopic necrosectomy will be performed until there is clinical improvement.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Endoscopic necrosectomy with step up approach

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Endoscopic necrosectomy will be performed with a forward-viewing gastroscope into the WON cavity. Debridement of necrotic tissue will be performed with irrigation and/or mechanical removal with endoscopic instruments. For this arm, step up approach will be adopted.

Direct endoscopic necrosectomy approach

Patients in the DEN group will undergo an immediate endoscopic necrosectomy after LAMS placement and balloon dilatation. A 10Fr 5cm double pigtail plastic stent will be inserted within the LAMS after necrosectomy. Patients will be assessed in 72 hours after the procedure. If there is no clinical improvement, a CECT is performed to check the adequacy of the drainage. DEN will be repeated in case of inadequate drainage. Patients will be reassessed every 72 hours and DEN repeated until there is clinical improvement. Subsequently, necrosectomy is performed weekly until a reassessment CECT at 3 weeks.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Endoscopic necrosectomy with direct approach

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Endoscopic necrosectomy will be performed with a forward-viewing gastroscope into the WON cavity. Debridement of necrotic tissue will be performed with irrigation and/or mechanical removal with endoscopic instruments. For this arm, the direct approach will be adopted.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Endoscopic necrosectomy with step up approach

Endoscopic necrosectomy will be performed with a forward-viewing gastroscope into the WON cavity. Debridement of necrotic tissue will be performed with irrigation and/or mechanical removal with endoscopic instruments. For this arm, step up approach will be adopted.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Endoscopic necrosectomy with direct approach

Endoscopic necrosectomy will be performed with a forward-viewing gastroscope into the WON cavity. Debridement of necrotic tissue will be performed with irrigation and/or mechanical removal with endoscopic instruments. For this arm, the direct approach will be adopted.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Adult (≥18 years of age) patients
2. Diagnosis of walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON) based on imaging criteria based on the revised Atlanta classification5
3. Documented history of acute pancreatitis
4. Suspected or confirmed infected WON and/or symptomatic WON causing (i) persistent pancreatic-type pain, and/or ii) gastric outlet or biliary obstruction, and/or (iii) ongoing systemic illness, anorexia, and weight loss, and/or (iv) rapidly enlarging WONs, and/or (v) infected WON\*
5. WON identified at contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) and deemed amenable for EUS-guided drainage
6. WON with a solid component \>30% and/ or percentage of necrosis \>= 30%

Exclusion Criteria

1. Previous invasive interventions for necrotising pancreatitis
2. An acute flare up of chronic pancreatitis
3. Recurrent acute pancreatitis
4. Indicated for emergency laparotomy (i.e. abdominal compartment syndrome, perforation of a visceral organ, bleeding and bowel ischaemia)
5. Contraindications to endoscopic drainage: previous total gastrectomy, gastric bypass surgery, prior surgery for pancreas-related diseases
6. WON not adherent to the GI wall or not accessible for endoscopic drainage
7. Coagulopathy (INR \>1.5), and/or thrombocytopenia (platelets \<50,000/mm3)
8. Pregnancy
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Chinese University of Hong Kong

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

CHAN SHANNON MELISSA

Assistant Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Royal Adelaide Hospital

Adelaide, , Australia

Site Status RECRUITING

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Hong Kong, , Hong Kong

Site Status RECRUITING

Medanta Institute Of Digestive & Hepatobiliary Sciences

Haryāna, , India

Site Status RECRUITING

Asian Institute of Gastroenterology

Hyderabad, , India

Site Status RECRUITING

Deenanath Mangeshkar Hospital & Research Centre

Pune, , India

Site Status RECRUITING

Asan Medical Centre

Asan, , South Korea

Site Status RECRUITING

SoonChunHyang University School of Medicine

Asan, , South Korea

Site Status RECRUITING

Hospital Universitario Rio Hortega

Valladolid, , Spain

Site Status RECRUITING

King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital

Bangkok, , Thailand

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Australia Hong Kong India South Korea Spain Thailand

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Shannon Chan

Role: CONTACT

852-35052627

Anthony Teoh

Role: CONTACT

852-35052627

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Nam Nguyen

Role: primary

Shannon Chan

Role: primary

Rajesh Puri

Role: primary

Sundeep Lakhtakia

Role: primary

Amol Bapaye

Role: primary

Tae Jun Song

Role: primary

Jong Ho Moon

Role: primary

Manuel Pérez-Miranda

Role: primary

Pradermchai Kongkam

Role: primary

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2021.465-T

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.