» Articles » PMID: 35580661

Endoscopic Versus Surgical Step-Up Approach for Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis (ExTENSION): Long-term Follow-up of a Randomized Trial

Abstract

Background & Aims: Previous randomized trials, including the Transluminal Endoscopic Step-Up Approach Versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Step-Up Approach in Patients With Infected Pancreatic Necrosis (TENSION) trial, demonstrated that the endoscopic step-up approach might be preferred over the surgical step-up approach in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis based on favorable short-term outcomes. We compared long-term clinical outcomes of both step-up approaches after a period of at least 5 years.

Methods: In this long-term follow-up study, we reevaluated all clinical data on 83 patients (of the originally 98 included patients) from the TENSION trial who were still alive after the initial 6-month follow-up. The primary end point, similar to the TENSION trial, was a composite of death and major complications. Secondary end points included individual major complications, pancreaticocutaneous fistula, reinterventions, pancreatic insufficiency, and quality of life.

Results: After a mean follow-up period of 7 years, the primary end point occurred in 27 patients (53%) in the endoscopy group and in 27 patients (57%) in the surgery group (risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-1.32; P = .688). Fewer pancreaticocutaneous fistulas were identified in the endoscopy group (8% vs 34%; RR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.08-0.83). After the initial 6-month follow-up, the endoscopy group needed fewer reinterventions than the surgery group (7% vs 24%; RR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.99). Pancreatic insufficiency and quality of life did not differ between groups.

Conclusions: At long-term follow-up, the endoscopic step-up approach was not superior to the surgical step-up approach in reducing death or major complications in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis. However, patients assigned to the endoscopic approach developed overall fewer pancreaticocutaneous fistulas and needed fewer reinterventions after the initial 6-month follow-up. Netherlands Trial Register no: NL8571.

Citing Articles

A systematic review of machine learning-based prognostic models for acute pancreatitis: Towards improving methods and reporting quality.

Critelli B, Hassan A, Lahooti I, Noh L, Park J, Tong K PLoS Med. 2025; 22(2):e1004432.

PMID: 39992936 PMC: 11870378. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004432.


C-reactive protein to serum calcium ratio as a novel biomarker for predicting severity in acute pancreatitis: a retrospective cross-sectional study.

Chen X, Huang Y, Xu Q, Zhang B, Wang Y, Huang M Front Med (Lausanne). 2025; 12:1506543.

PMID: 39991053 PMC: 11842247. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1506543.


Acute Pancreatitis: An Update of Evidence-Based Management and Recent Trends in Treatment Strategies.

Beij A, Verdonk R, van Santvoort H, de-Madaria E, Voermans R United European Gastroenterol J. 2025; 13(1):97-106.

PMID: 39804691 PMC: 11866315. DOI: 10.1002/ueg2.12743.


Clinical update on acute cholecystitis and biliary pancreatitis: between certainties and grey areas.

Fugazzola P, Podda M, Tian B, Cobianchi L, Ansaloni L, Catena F EClinicalMedicine. 2024; 77:102880.

PMID: 39469538 PMC: 11513689. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102880.


When to Intervene in Acute Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Narrative Review of the Optimal Timing for Intervention Strategies.

Paramythiotis D, Karlafti E, Tsavdaris D, Giakoustidis A, Panidis S, Ioannidis A Medicina (Kaunas). 2024; 60(10).

PMID: 39459378 PMC: 11509130. DOI: 10.3390/medicina60101592.