Cargando…
Minimally invasive 'step-up approach' versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (PANTER trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN38327949]
BACKGROUND: The initial treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis is conservative. Intervention is indicated in patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis. In the Netherlands, the standard intervention is necrosectomy by laparotomy followed by continuous postoperative lavage (CPL)...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2006
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1508161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16606471 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-6-6 |
_version_ | 1782128436637073408 |
---|---|
author | Besselink, Marc GH van Santvoort, Hjalmar C Nieuwenhuijs, Vincent B Boermeester, Marja A Bollen, Thomas L Buskens, Erik Dejong, Cornelis HC van Eijck, Casper HJ van Goor, Harry Hofker, Sijbrand S Lameris, Johan S van Leeuwen, Maarten S Ploeg, Rutger J van Ramshorst, Bert Schaapherder, Alexander FM Cuesta, Miguel A Consten, Esther CJ Gouma, Dirk J van der Harst, Erwin Hesselink, Eric J Houdijk, Lex PJ Karsten, Tom M van Laarhoven, Cees JHM Pierie, Jean-Pierre EN Rosman, Camiel Bilgen, Ernst Jan Spillenaar Timmer, Robin van der Tweel, Ingeborg de Wit, Ralph J Witteman, Ben JM Gooszen, Hein G |
author_facet | Besselink, Marc GH van Santvoort, Hjalmar C Nieuwenhuijs, Vincent B Boermeester, Marja A Bollen, Thomas L Buskens, Erik Dejong, Cornelis HC van Eijck, Casper HJ van Goor, Harry Hofker, Sijbrand S Lameris, Johan S van Leeuwen, Maarten S Ploeg, Rutger J van Ramshorst, Bert Schaapherder, Alexander FM Cuesta, Miguel A Consten, Esther CJ Gouma, Dirk J van der Harst, Erwin Hesselink, Eric J Houdijk, Lex PJ Karsten, Tom M van Laarhoven, Cees JHM Pierie, Jean-Pierre EN Rosman, Camiel Bilgen, Ernst Jan Spillenaar Timmer, Robin van der Tweel, Ingeborg de Wit, Ralph J Witteman, Ben JM Gooszen, Hein G |
author_sort | Besselink, Marc GH |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The initial treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis is conservative. Intervention is indicated in patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis. In the Netherlands, the standard intervention is necrosectomy by laparotomy followed by continuous postoperative lavage (CPL). In recent years several minimally invasive strategies have been introduced. So far, these strategies have never been compared in a randomised controlled trial. The PANTER study (PAncreatitis, Necrosectomy versus sTEp up appRoach) was conceived to yield the evidence needed for a considered policy decision. METHODS/DESIGN: 88 patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis will be randomly allocated to either group A) minimally invasive 'step-up approach' starting with drainage followed, if necessary, by videoscopic assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD) or group B) maximal necrosectomy by laparotomy. Both procedures are followed by CPL. Patients will be recruited from 20 hospitals, including all Dutch university medical centres, over a 3-year period. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients suffering from postoperative major morbidity and mortality. Secondary endpoints are complications, new onset sepsis, length of hospital and intensive care stay, quality of life and total (direct and indirect) costs. To demonstrate that the 'step-up approach' can reduce the major morbidity and mortality rate from 45 to 16%, with 80% power at 5% alpha, a total sample size of 88 patients was calculated. DISCUSSION: The PANTER-study is a randomised controlled trial that will provide evidence on the merits of a minimally invasive 'step-up approach' in patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-1508161 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2006 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-15081612006-07-15 Minimally invasive 'step-up approach' versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (PANTER trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN38327949] Besselink, Marc GH van Santvoort, Hjalmar C Nieuwenhuijs, Vincent B Boermeester, Marja A Bollen, Thomas L Buskens, Erik Dejong, Cornelis HC van Eijck, Casper HJ van Goor, Harry Hofker, Sijbrand S Lameris, Johan S van Leeuwen, Maarten S Ploeg, Rutger J van Ramshorst, Bert Schaapherder, Alexander FM Cuesta, Miguel A Consten, Esther CJ Gouma, Dirk J van der Harst, Erwin Hesselink, Eric J Houdijk, Lex PJ Karsten, Tom M van Laarhoven, Cees JHM Pierie, Jean-Pierre EN Rosman, Camiel Bilgen, Ernst Jan Spillenaar Timmer, Robin van der Tweel, Ingeborg de Wit, Ralph J Witteman, Ben JM Gooszen, Hein G BMC Surg Study Protocol BACKGROUND: The initial treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis is conservative. Intervention is indicated in patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis. In the Netherlands, the standard intervention is necrosectomy by laparotomy followed by continuous postoperative lavage (CPL). In recent years several minimally invasive strategies have been introduced. So far, these strategies have never been compared in a randomised controlled trial. The PANTER study (PAncreatitis, Necrosectomy versus sTEp up appRoach) was conceived to yield the evidence needed for a considered policy decision. METHODS/DESIGN: 88 patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis will be randomly allocated to either group A) minimally invasive 'step-up approach' starting with drainage followed, if necessary, by videoscopic assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD) or group B) maximal necrosectomy by laparotomy. Both procedures are followed by CPL. Patients will be recruited from 20 hospitals, including all Dutch university medical centres, over a 3-year period. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients suffering from postoperative major morbidity and mortality. Secondary endpoints are complications, new onset sepsis, length of hospital and intensive care stay, quality of life and total (direct and indirect) costs. To demonstrate that the 'step-up approach' can reduce the major morbidity and mortality rate from 45 to 16%, with 80% power at 5% alpha, a total sample size of 88 patients was calculated. DISCUSSION: The PANTER-study is a randomised controlled trial that will provide evidence on the merits of a minimally invasive 'step-up approach' in patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis. BioMed Central 2006-04-11 /pmc/articles/PMC1508161/ /pubmed/16606471 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-6-6 Text en Copyright © 2006 Besselink et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Besselink, Marc GH van Santvoort, Hjalmar C Nieuwenhuijs, Vincent B Boermeester, Marja A Bollen, Thomas L Buskens, Erik Dejong, Cornelis HC van Eijck, Casper HJ van Goor, Harry Hofker, Sijbrand S Lameris, Johan S van Leeuwen, Maarten S Ploeg, Rutger J van Ramshorst, Bert Schaapherder, Alexander FM Cuesta, Miguel A Consten, Esther CJ Gouma, Dirk J van der Harst, Erwin Hesselink, Eric J Houdijk, Lex PJ Karsten, Tom M van Laarhoven, Cees JHM Pierie, Jean-Pierre EN Rosman, Camiel Bilgen, Ernst Jan Spillenaar Timmer, Robin van der Tweel, Ingeborg de Wit, Ralph J Witteman, Ben JM Gooszen, Hein G Minimally invasive 'step-up approach' versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (PANTER trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN38327949] |
title | Minimally invasive 'step-up approach' versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (PANTER trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN38327949] |
title_full | Minimally invasive 'step-up approach' versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (PANTER trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN38327949] |
title_fullStr | Minimally invasive 'step-up approach' versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (PANTER trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN38327949] |
title_full_unstemmed | Minimally invasive 'step-up approach' versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (PANTER trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN38327949] |
title_short | Minimally invasive 'step-up approach' versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (PANTER trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [ISRCTN38327949] |
title_sort | minimally invasive 'step-up approach' versus maximal necrosectomy in patients with acute necrotising pancreatitis (panter trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial [isrctn38327949] |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1508161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16606471 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-6-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT besselinkmarcgh minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT vansantvoorthjalmarc minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT nieuwenhuijsvincentb minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT boermeestermarjaa minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT bollenthomasl minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT buskenserik minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT dejongcornelishc minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT vaneijckcasperhj minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT vangoorharry minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT hofkersijbrands minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT lamerisjohans minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT vanleeuwenmaartens minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT ploegrutgerj minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT vanramshorstbert minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT schaapherderalexanderfm minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT cuestamiguela minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT constenesthercj minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT goumadirkj minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT vanderharsterwin minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT hesselinkericj minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT houdijklexpj minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT karstentomm minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT vanlaarhovenceesjhm minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT pieriejeanpierreen minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT rosmancamiel minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT bilgenernstjanspillenaar minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT timmerrobin minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT vandertweelingeborg minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT dewitralphj minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT wittemanbenjm minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT gooszenheing minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 AT minimallyinvasivestepupapproachversusmaximalnecrosectomyinpatientswithacutenecrotisingpancreatitispantertrialdesignandrationaleofarandomisedcontrolledmulticentertrialisrctn38327949 |