Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 16, 2025
08:55
Characterization of MLKL-mediated Plasma Membrane Rupture in Necroptosis
Published on: August 7, 2018
11.1K
RWON Study: The Real-World Walled-off Necrosis Study.
Ankush Pawar1, Ujjwal Sonika1, Manish Kumar1
1Department of Gastroenterology, Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, New Delhi, India.
Clinical Endoscopy
|February 23, 2021
Summary
Endoscopic drainage (ED) for walled-off necrosis (WON) is superior to percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD). ED offers better clinical success, fewer complications, and reduced mortality, leading to shorter hospital stays for WON patients.
Area of Science:
- Gastroenterology
- Interventional Endoscopy
- Pancreatic Diseases
Background:
- Walled-off necrosis (WON) management has shifted towards less invasive methods.
- Real-world data on symptomatic WON treatment outcomes are limited.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the clinical outcomes of different treatment modalities for symptomatic walled-off necrosis (WON).
- To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic drainage (ED) versus percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) for WON.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from 264 patients with symptomatic WON.
- Comparison of outcomes for medical management alone, ED, PCD, and combined approaches.
Main Results:
- Endoscopic drainage (ED) demonstrated higher clinical success rates (91%) compared to percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) (81%).
- ED group experienced significantly lower complication rates (7% vs. 22%), readmission rates (20% vs. 34%), and mortality (4% vs. 19%) than the PCD group.
- Patients undergoing ED had shorter hospital stays (13 days vs. 19 days).
Conclusions:
- Endoscopic drainage (ED) is a more effective and safer treatment for walled-off necrosis (WON) than percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD).
- ED is associated with improved clinical outcomes, reduced complications, lower mortality, and shorter hospitalization periods.
