Evidence Hub

Accelerated vs Step-Up Endoscopic Treatment for Pancreatic Walled-Off Necrosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial (ACCELERATE)

Olsen Ga, Schmidt Pn, H. A, Prahm Ap, Werge Mp, Roug S, Schefte Df, Lauritsen Ml et al.

Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2025

25 participants · 20 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic step-up treatment with ultrasound-guided drainage and necrosectomy has become the gold standard treatment of pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON); however, the length of stay (LOS) in hospital of patients with large WON remains substantial. We hypothesized that an accelerated treatment protocol could reduce LOS and major complications in patients with large WON.

METHODS

This single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial conducted at a tertiary care facility in Denmark included patients with WON >15 cm, randomized to either an accelerated or step-up treatment approach. In the accelerated group, necrosectomy was performed during the index procedure and repeated as needed. In the step-up group, necrosectomy was only performed in cases without clinical improvement. The primary composite endpoints were death, major complications, and LOS >58 days.

RESULTS

The trial, which was prematurely terminated due to concerns of the safety of the patients in the step-up group based on a benefit-to-risk assessment, included 25 patients (12 accelerated, 13 step-up). Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. The primary composite outcome occurred in 8.3% of patients in the accelerated group versus 61.5% in the step-up group (absolute risk reduction 53.5%, RR 0.14; p=0.011). Major complications occurred less frequently in the accelerated group (0.0% vs. 46.2%; p=0.015), and median LOS was shorter (32.5 days [Q1-Q3: 17.5-38.2] vs. 68.5 days…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 25 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free