An interventional study of Outpatient Management (Group A) and Standard Inpatient Management (Group B) in Acute Pancreatitis (AP) and Biliary Pancreatitis, sponsored by Center for Traumatology and Major Burns, Ben Arous. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Tunisia. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-07-10.
Sponsored by Center for Traumatology and Major Burns, Ben Arous · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Acute pancreatitis is a sudden inflammation of the pancreas that causes severe abdominal pain. Most cases are mild and get better within a few days with basic supportive treatment such as fluids and pain relief. Currently, all patients with acute pancreatitis are admitted to hospital, even those with a very low risk of complications. This study will test whether patients with mild acute pancreatitis can be safely sent home with close follow-up (telephone calls on days 1, 2, and 3 after discharge and a clinic visit on day 4) instead of staying in hospital. Patients will be randomly assigned to either home management or standard hospitalization. We will compare the rate of treatment failure at 30 days between the two groups. We expect that home management will be as safe as hospitalization, while being more convenient for patients and less costly for the health system.
Acute pancreatitis (AP) is one of the most common gastrointestinal causes of emergency hospital admission worldwide. Approximately 80% of cases are classified as mild according to the revised Atlanta Classification (2012) and resolve without organ failure or local complications within three to five days. Despite this favorable prognosis, current practice mandates universal inpatient admission. Only two small studies have explored outpatient management of mild AP, reporting treatment failure rates of 4-12% in the ambulatory arm; however, neither was prospectively randomized nor adequately powered for non-inferiority.
This trial is a prospective, single-center, open-label, two-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial. Patients presenting with mild AP, confirmed by at least two revised Atlanta (2012) criteria and classified as mild by a SIRS score of 0 and a Harmless Acute Pancreatitis Score (HAPS) of 0, will be randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to outpatient management (Group A) or standard inpatient care (Group B). Randomization will use a table of random numbers with a block size of four. Group A patients will receive an initial 4-6 hour supervised observation period in the emergency department, followed by daily teleconsultation on days 1-3 and an in-person clinic visit on day 4. Group B patients will be admitted to hospital per standard institutional protocol. All patients will receive IAP/APA-compliant supportive care and a final 30-day outcome assessment. The primary endpoint is the 30-day treatment failure rate. Non-inferiority will be declared if the upper bound of the one-sided 95% confidence interval for the between-group difference does not exceed 10%.
557 studies on the registry are indexed under Pancreatitis; 164 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 150 is above the median of 100 across 349 interventional studies indexed under Pancreatitis.
Browse Pancreatitis studies →Center for Traumatology and Major Burns, Ben Arous is the lead sponsor of 2 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
The top of the normal range for a blood test, as set by the laboratory that runs it. Each lab prints its own range next to your result.
“≤ 2.5 × ULN” means the result can be up to two and a half times that top value.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
The anaesthetists’ scale of health before surgery: I is healthy, II has a mild illness that is under control, III a severe one, IV a severe illness that is a constant threat to life. V and VI are used for the critically ill and for organ donors.
ULN (upper limit of normal)
The top of the normal range for a blood test, as set by the laboratory that runs it. Each lab prints its own range next to your result.
“≤ 2.5 × ULN” means the result can be up to two and a half times that top value.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
ASA physical status
The anaesthetists’ scale of health before surgery: I is healthy, II has a mild illness that is under control, III a severe one, IV a severe illness that is a constant threat to life. V and VI are used for the critically ill and for organ donors.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Patients receive a 4-6 hour supervised observation in the emergency department, then are discharged with structured ambulatory follow-up: daily teleconsultation on Days 1, 2, and 3; in-person clinic visit with blood sampling on Day 4; open-access emergency readmission at any time; and a 30-day final consultation. All patients receive IAP/APA-compliant supportive care.
Other: Outpatient Management (Group A)
Patients are admitted to the gastroenterology or surgical ward for conventional inpatient care with daily clinical and biological monitoring, intravenous fluids, analgesia, antiemetics, and early oral refeeding per IAP/APA guidelines. Discharge is determined by clinical improvement and full oral diet tolerance. A 30-day follow-up consultation is arranged at discharge.
Other: Standard Inpatient Management (Group B)
Early discharge from the emergency department after 4-6 hours of observation, with structured teleconsultation follow-up on Days 1, 2, and 3, in-person review on Day 4, unrestricted emergency department access, and 30-day outcome assessment.
Conventional ward admission with daily monitoring, intravenous supportive care, and discharge based on clinical improvement.
Treatment Failure Rate at 30 Days
Proportion of patients experiencing at least one of the following: food intolerance (\<50% of a standard meal), persistent nausea or vomiting refractory to antiemetics, uncontrolled pain requiring parenteral analgesia or emergency attendance, new-onset SIRS or HAPS deterioration, or (Group A only) any unplanned hospital admission.
Time frame: 30 days from randomisation
Recurrence of abdominal pain Assessed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)
Recurrence of abdominal pain during the 30-day follow-up period, assessed at each contact point (teleconsultation Days 1, 2, 3; clinic visit Day 4; final visit Day 30) using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). Recurrence is defined as any new episode of abdominal pain scoring ≥4/10 after an initial pain-free interval following discharge or hospital admission.
Time frame: 30 days
SIRS score at 48 hours
Time frame: 48 hours
Organ failure Assessed by the Modified Marshall Scoring System
Rate of organ failure occurring within 30 days of randomisation, assessed using the Modified Marshall Scoring System. Organ failure is defined as a score of ≥2 in any of the three organ systems evaluated: respiratory (PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio), renal (serum creatinine), and cardiovascular (systolic blood pressure). Transient organ failure (resolving within 48 hours) and persistent organ failure (lasting \>48 hours) will be recorded separately.
Time frame: 30 days
Unplanned hospital readmission
Time frame: 30 days
ICU admission rate
Time frame: 30 days
Patient satisfaction Assessed by the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form (PSQ-18)
Patient satisfaction with the allocated management strategy, assessed at the 30-day follow-up visit using the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form (PSQ-18), a validated 18-item instrument evaluating satisfaction across seven domains: general satisfaction, technical quality, interpersonal manner, communication, financial aspects, time spent with doctor, and accessibility. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree). Domain scores are transformed to a 0-100 scale, with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction.
Time frame: 30 days
Plan to share: Undecided
Start is estimated for Jul 2026; primary completion for Feb 2027, 7 months later.
Of 91 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Pancreatitis, half reached primary completion within 32 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 23 and three quarters within 59. This study's planned 7 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 94 studies reached it within 32 months; a quarter within 23 and three quarters within 59.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Jul 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Center for Traumatology and Major Burns, Ben Arous