View clinical trials related to Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing.
Filter by:Walled-off necrosis (WON) is a pancreatic fluid collection, which contains necrotic tissue after four weeks of the onset of acute pancreatitis. Interventions are required to manage patients with infected WON, for which endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided drainage has become a first-line treatment modality. For patients who are refractory to EUS-guided drainage, the step-up treatment including endoscopic necrosectomy (EN) and/or additional drainage is considered to subside the infection. Recent evidence suggests that EN immediately after EUS-guided drainage may shorten treatment duration without increasing adverse events. In this randomized trial, the investigators will compare treatment duration between EN immediately after EUS-guided drainage versus the step-up approach in patients with symptomatic WON.
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.
This is a randomized trial comparing immediate endoscopic necrosectomy vs. step-up endoscopic interventions in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis.
The objective of this study is to evaluate the use of the ABTHERA ADVANCE for patients requiring open abdomen due to necrotizing pancreatitis. The institutions traditional approach is to use the ABTHERA Open Abdomen dressing with Wittmann patch. However, the ABTHERA ADVANCE has shown in vitro to have improved tension on the abdominal wall that may obviate the need for costly Wittmann patch placement.
Although metal stents have been widely used in the endoscopic step-up approach for necrotizing pancreatitis, the exact timing of transmural stent removal has not been well studied. In this prospective, open-label, randomized controlled study, we recruited and enrolled consecutive patients with necrotizing pancreatitis undergoing endoscopic transmural necrosectomy. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to case group (a novel strategy in which the stents were removed during the last necrosectomy when the necrosectomy endpoint was achieved) and control group (the conventional strategy in which the stents were removed after the last necrosectomy when clinical symptoms were relieved and fluid was nearly completely resolved confirmed by imaging). The primary endpoint was the incidence of composite complications within three months of enrollment.
Regulatory Context The CNEDiMTS makes the renewal of registration conditional on the transmission of the results of a well-conducted prospective study, carried out with Hot AXIOS, the objective of which is to evaluate the interest of this device in real conditions of use with regard to effectiveness and complications after a minimum follow-up of 3 months. Operators are trained in the use of the equipment (practice on ex-vivo model and/or prior stent placement) and undertake to comply with the rules and formalities of use. Primary efficacy objective : To evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic trans digestive drainage after use of the Hot AXIOS prosthesis in the treatment of pancreatic collections (incompletely fluid or necrotic) at 3 months. Secondary Objectives : Assessment of the following elements : 1. Morbidity (complication rates) and mortality per- and post-procedure 2. Recurrence rate of pancreatic collection 3. Evolution of the quality of life questionnaire (SQ5D5L) 4. Technical success rate of prosthesis placement and removal success rate of the prosthesis 5. Search for factors predictive of clinical success of endoscopic pancreatic drainage with the Hot Axios prosthesis. Study design Non-interventional/observational (RIPH 3 type), multi-center, prospective study with consecutive inclusions evaluating the Hot AXIOS® prosthetic device. Non-inclusion registry A minimum amount of information will be collected anonymously, including sex, age, indication of drainage and reason for non-inclusion (e.g. refusal of the patient, of the investigator for impossibility of following the patient in the centre or other reasons to be specified). Generic information will be affixed in each centre participating in the study indicating: "In application of the provisions of the Data Protection Act, general information on the possibility that personal data may be used for research purposes must be provided in any establishment or centre where prevention, diagnosis and care activities are carried out". This must be exhaustive and rigorously maintained. Equipment used in endoscopy Hot AXIOS™ - self-expanding metal prosthesis with a lumen diameter of 6 to 20 mm and collar length of 8 and 10 mm or any future similar device marketed under the same name at the time of the study. Technique Insertion of the material under echo-endoscopic control -- possible but not systematic dilatation -- guide wire with hydrophilic tip - Puncture and release under echo-endoscopic control according to the centre's usual practice. Registration The data will be collected anonymously in an electronic computer database using eCRFs. Statistical analysis The evaluation of the clinical success of endoscopic pancreatic necrosectomy with metallic prosthesis will first consist in describing its efficacy according to the criteria described above. Analysis plan : The statistical analysis will first include a description of the study population with the number of patients falling under the indication and treated with the Hot AXIOS system at the recruiting centers (source population), the number of eligible patients who consented to participate in the study, the number of patients included (study population), the number of subjects who made each visit and were analyzed, premature exits (deaths, lost to follow-up) will be reported and described in the form of a flow chart.
Acute pancreatitis (AP) is an inflammatory disease of the pancreas, most commonly caused by gallstones, or excessive use of alcohol. It represents a management challenge and a significant healthcare burden. The incidence of AP ranges globally from 5 to 30 cases per 100.000 inhabitants/year, and there is evidence that the incidence has been rising in recent years. The overall case-fatality rate for AP is roughly 5%, and it is expectedly higher for more severe stages of the disease. In most cases (80%), the outcome of AP is rapidly favorable. However, acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) may develop in up to 20% of cases, and is associated with significant rates of early organ failure (38%), needing some type of surgical/endoscopic intervention (38%) and death (15%). In the United States, AP is a leading cause of inpatient care among gastrointestinal conditions: more than 270.000 patients are hospitalized for AP annually, at an aggregate cost of over 2.5 billion dollars per year. In Europe, the UK incidence of AP is estimated as 15-42 cases per 100.000/year and is rising by 2.7% each year. Despite existing evidence-based practice guidelines for the management of biliary AP, clinical compliance with recommendations is poor, with studies on this field identifying major discrepancies between evidence-based recommendations and daily clinical practice. Audits about biliary AP have been performed in Italy, Germany, France, and England, with quite disappointing results. Indeed, in these audits, the treatment of biliary AP differed substantially from the recommendations. For example, less than 15% of the responders stated that they strictly followed all recommendations included in the guidelines in Germany and 25.8% of patients did not receive definitive treatment for biliary AP within 1 year in the UK. These findings support the view that publication alone of nationally or internationally developed and approved guidelines is insufficient to modify the practice of non-specialists and raises the question of how best to spread guideline recommendations. In 2020, the spread of the virus Covid-19 has represented a pandemic that also had a profound impact on the surgical community. There are many ways through which the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic could have influenced daily clinical practice for patients with biliary AP also leading to a failure to adhere to the recommendations coming from the guidelines, especially those regarding the early and definitive treatment with cholecystectomy or ERCP and sphincterotomy. First of all, the recommendation to postpone all non-urgent endoscopic procedures during the peak of the pandemic. Second, the recommendation to conservatively treat inflammatory conditions such as acute cholecystitis and acute appendicitis wherever possible. Since the clinical compliance with recommendations about AP is poor and the impact of implementing guideline recommendations in biliary AP has not been well studied on a global basis, we launched the MANCTRA-1 study with the aim to demonstrate areas where there is currently a sub-optimal implementation of contemporary guidelines on biliary AP. Moreover, we argue that during the Covid-19 pandemic the tendency to disregard the guidelines recommendations has been more marked than usual and we will try to find out if AP patients' care during the Covid-19 pandemic resulted in a higher rate of adverse outcomes compared to non-pandemic times due to the lack in the compliance of the guidelines. The MANCTRA-1 can identify a number of areas for quality improvement that will require new implementation strategies. Our aim is to summarize the main areas of sub-optimal care to provide the basis for introducing a number of bundles in the management of AP patients to be implemented during the next years. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate which items of the current AP guidelines if disregarded, correlate with negative clinical outcomes according to the different clinical presentations of the disease. Secondary objectives are to assess the compliance of surgeons worldwide to the most up-to-date international guidelines on biliary AP, to evaluate the medical and surgical practice in the management of biliary AP during the non-pandemic (2019) and pandemic Covid-19 periods (2020), and to investigate outcomes of patients with biliary AP treatment during the two study periods.
Retrospective analysis of the cases of traditional open surgery for acute necrotizing pancreatitis, with evaluation of indications for surgery, intraoperative findings, mortality rate and risk factors of mortality.
Severe acute pancreatitis (AP) is a pathology with high morbidity and mortality. Portosplenomesenteric vein thrombosis is a well-known local complication of AP with a variable incidence, which can reach up to 50% in case of severe AP. However, there is no specific recommendation regarding the management of Portosplenomesenteric vein thrombosis. By analogy to all venous thrombosis, the European Society of Gastroenterology recommends curative anticoagulation. However, the efficacy of curative anticoagulation has never been evaluated by prospective studies. In addition, bleeding complications during AP occur in approximately 10% of patients and are associated with a poor prognosis. The investigators wish to conduct an observational multi-center study with epidemiologic aims, including all patients admitted for AP and with a diagnosis of portosplenomesenteric vein thrombosis. The aim of this study is to evaluate the therapeutic management of these patients, the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant treatment for the treatment of Portosplenomesenteric vein thrombosis, and their outcomes.
Introduction: Walled off necrosis (WON) is defined as a well circumscribed pancreatic and/or peri pancreatic necrosis containing a variable amount of necrotic tissue. WON usually occurs >4 weeks after onset of necrotizing pancreatitis. It is associated with significant morbidity and mortality especially if infected. Symptomatic WON should be drained either percutaneously, endoscopically or surgically. Minimal invasive approaches are being increasingly used for effective management of WON as it is associated with less adverse events. Various recent studies have shown that endoscopic approach have improved clinical outcome, less hospital stay and lower cost compared to surgical approach. Endoscopic ultrasound guided drainage of WON with either plastic stents or lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) is mainstay of WON management. A systemic review based on retrospective comparative studies showed no difference regarding treatment success for WON by plastic or metal stents6. However, metal stent had shorter procedure time. A Single center RCT from USA comparing LAMS vs multiple plastic stents for WON has shown that except shorter procedure duration, there was no significant difference in treatment outcomes. To minimize LAMS related adverse events, it should be removed within 3 weeks. However, in the same study 25.8% patients of LAMS group and 55.2% patients of plastic stent group underwent additional intervention within 72 hours for persistent symptoms. Larger diameter, specific stent designs to reduce adverse events should have better outcome with LAMS as compared to plastic stents. Primary outcome of this single center randomized controlled trial is to examine whether dedicated NAGI bi-flanged metal stents (BFMS) are superior to plastic stent in terms of short term and long term success. Aims and Hypothesis: The aim of the current study is to study whether NAGI BFMS are superior to plastic stent in terms of short term and long term success in the EUS guided drainage of WON. The investigators hypothesize that the clinical success with NAGI BFMS would be better than plastic stents in the EUS guided drainage of WON.