急性胰腺炎严重程度床边指数与血清钙比值对急性胰腺炎严重程度的预测价值

目的评估入院24 h内急性胰腺炎严重程度床边指数(BISAP)与血清钙比值(BISAP/Ca)在急性胰腺炎(AP)严重程度中的预测价值。方法纳入2020年1月1日至2022年12月31日就诊于苏州大学附属第一医院的AP患者711例。根据AP严重程度将711例患者分为轻症AP组(586例)和重症AP组(包括中度重症、重症AP患者, 125例), 根据是否发生呼吸系统功能障碍分为无呼吸系统功能障碍组(594例)和呼吸系统功能障碍组(117例)。根据患者入院24 h内指标最差值(最高值或最低值)计算急性生理和慢性健康状况Ⅱ(APACHE-Ⅱ)评分, 根据患者入院24 h内指标检测值计算BISAP评分, 根据患者入院72 h内增强计算机断层扫描结果计算改良计算机断层扫描严重指数(MCTSI)评分。统计学分析采用Mann-WhitneyU检验和卡方检验。使用受试者操作特征曲线(ROC)评估BISAP/Ca对AP严重程度的预测价值, 并根据灵敏度和特异度计算最佳截断值。采用单因素和多因素logistic回归分析AP患者发生呼吸系统功能障碍的危险因素。结果重症AP组住院天数、全身炎症反应综合征患者占...     

三种评分标准对急性胰腺炎病情和预后的评估作用

目的 探讨Ranson、CT严重指数(CTSI)和急性胰腺炎严重程度床边指数(BISAP)三种评分系统在判断急性胰腺炎(AP)病情和预后中的价值.方法 回顾性分析2008年1月至2011年4月共计503例确诊AP患者,包括轻症急性胰腺炎(MAP) 356例,重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)147例,应用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线比较Ranson、CTSI和BISAP评分系统对AP病情严重度的评估价值和对病情预后的预测价值.将SAP分为无脏器功能衰竭组和脏器功能衰竭组,比较3种评分系统对AP并发脏器功能衰竭的预测价值.结果 MAP组和SAP组间的Ranson、CTSI和BISAP评分分值差异均有统计学意义(x2分别为236.88、126.24和101.27,P＜0.01),Ranson评分系统的敏感度(97.3％)和ROC曲线下面积(AUC)值(0.92)最大.在147例SAP患者的无脏器功能衰竭组和脏器功能衰竭组中,Ranson和BISAP评分的差异均有统计学意义(x2分别为17.67和26.12,P＜0.01),敏感度均为100％,特异度分别为96％和85％,BISAP评分的AUC值最大(0.80).在病情改善组和病情恶化组,Ranson和BISAP评分的分值差异具有统计学意义(x2分别为9.53和10.19,P＜0.05),BISAP评分系统的AUC值最大(0.74).结论 3种评分系统均可用于判断AP病情的严重程度.对于SAP并发脏器功能衰竭的风险和预后的判断,BISAP评分优于Ranson评分.BISAP评分简便、易行,为AP临床病情的判断提供了重要手段.     

BISAPG评分对急性胰腺炎严重程度的预测价值

目的 探讨急性胰腺炎严重程度床边指数(BISAP)评分联合空腹血糖(fasting blood glucose, FBG)水平(BISAPG)对急性胰腺炎(AP)严重程度的预测价值。方法 回顾性分析2020年8月至2022年8月在武汉大学人民医院确诊为AP的患者264例,其中诊断为重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)的患者96例,非重症急性胰腺炎(NSAP)168例。收集患者临床相关数据、实验室数据、BISAP评分和入院24小时内FBG。采用多因素Logistic回归模型分析SAP发生的危险因素。用Spearman相关分析法分析BISAP评分和FBG之间的关系。采用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)评估BISAP评分、FBG及BISAPG评分对AP严重程度的预测价值。用校准曲线以及决策曲线分析分别评估BISAPG评分拟合度和临床实用性。结果 SAP组Alb、A/G、RBC值均小于NSAP组,FBG、WBC、AMY、LIPA、PCT、CRP及BISAP评分均大于NSAP组(P<0.05),两组在TG、BMI指数、性别间无统计学差异(P>0.05)。多因素分析显示,BISAP评分及入院24小时内...     

改良BISAP评分系统的建立及其在重症急性胰腺炎早期诊断和预后评估中的意义

目的 建立改良BISAP评分系统，比较并分析BISAP评分系统与改良BISAP评分系统对急性胰腺炎（AP）严重程度及病情评估的价值。方法 新系统的建立：回顾性收集2019年1月—2021年12月中南大学湘雅三医院收治的1 033例AP患者的临床资料。根据修订版Atlanta分级将其分为轻症急性胰腺炎（MAP）组（n=827）和重症急性胰腺炎（SAP）组（n=206），比较两组患者临床特征、实验室指标及影像学资料的差异，将差异有统计学意义的指标进行二元Logistic回归分析，筛选出SAP的独立危险因素，利用受试者特征曲线（ROC曲线）得出各独立危险因素的最大约登指数对应的最佳截断值，并根据不同情况分别赋值为0或1分，结合BISAP评分系统，建立改良BISAP评分系统。新系统验证：回顾性收集2017年1月—2018年12月中南大学湘雅三医院收治的473例AP患者的临床资料，对其进行BISAP评分与改良BISAP评分，利用ROC曲线下面积（AUC）分析比较两个评分系统对AP病情严重程度、预后的预测价值。计数资料应用χ2检验或Fisher精确检验进行两组间比较；计量资料两组间比较采用成组t检...     

急性胰腺炎床旁严重度指数和无害性胰腺炎评分对急性胰腺炎预后的评估价值

目的 评价急性胰腺炎床旁严重度指数(BISAP)与无害性胰腺炎评分(HAPS)评估急性胰腺炎(AP)预后的价值.方法 回顾性分析2003年1月至2010年12月中山大学附属第一医院收治的442例AP患者资料,计算BISAP和HAP评分,绘制受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线并计算曲线下面积(AUC),分析它们对AP严重度、局部并发症、器官功能不全、预后的评估价值,并与传统的Ranson评分进行比较.结果 442例AP患者中,73例(16.5％)为重症急性胰腺炎(SAP).BISAP评分预测SAP、局部并发症、器官功能不全、病死结局的AUC分别是0.90(95％ CI:0.86～ 0.93)、0.82(95％ CI:0.76～0.89)、0.93(95％ CI:0.89 ～0.96)、0.93(95％ CI:0.87 ～0.98).BISAP评分和Ranson评分上述4项指标的AUC差异无统计学意义.HAP评分预测轻症急性胰腺炎(MAP)的特异性为85％,阳性预测值95％,AUC为0.73(95％CI:0.67 ～ 0.79).将BISAP和HAP评分相结合,2种评分均异常的患者发生不良结局的风险逐渐升高.结论 BISAP评分对AP预后的评估价值与Ranson评分相当,但更为简便.HAP评分能简单且准确地预测MAP的预后,BISAP和HAP评分相结合有助于更好地判断AP患者的预后.     

清下化瘀方对急性胰腺炎传统评分系统影响及预后评估Logistic回归分析

[目的]评价清下化瘀方干预对急性胰腺炎(AP)患者各传统评分系统的影响及预后评估。[方法]将60例中重症急性胰腺炎(MSAP)和重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)患者分为治疗组30例,对照组30例,对照组给予西药常规治疗,治疗组在对照组的基础上加服清下化瘀方,2组均治疗7 d后,观察临床疗效。对所有入选的AP患者进行传统常用评分系统BISAP评分、APACHEⅡ评分、MCTSI评分,比较其对AP患者发生MODS的评估功能。[结果]①治疗1周后,治疗组与对照组的BISAP评分、APACHEⅡ评分、MCTSI评分比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),治疗组评分低于对照组。②经ROC曲线分析,MCTSI评分、APACHEⅡ、BISAP评分系统对多器官功能衰竭(MODS)的预测能力相当,AUC均>0.5。③根据ROC分析结果,经Logistic回归分析显示,BISAP评分≥1.5、APACHEⅡ评分≥5.5是AP患者入院14 d内发生MODS的预测指标(P<0.05)。[结论]临床西医常规治疗结合早期清下化瘀方鼻饲可降低MODS发生率。MCTSI评分、APACHEⅡ、BISAP评分对AP预后的评估都有价值。在预测AP患者MODS发生率上,传统评分系统BISAP评分优于APACHEⅡ评分优于MCTSI评分系统。     

细胞因子联合BISAP评分系统早期预测急性胰腺炎严重程度及预后的前瞻性研究

目的分析细胞因子白介素6(IL-6)联合急性胰腺炎严重程度床边指数(BISAP)早期(病程48 h)预测急性胰腺炎预后的临床价值。方法前瞻性选取2013年3月至2014年9月我院收治的确诊为急性胰腺炎(AP)的患者。所有患者入院时即抽取空腹静脉血测定IL-6,采用Ranson评分系统、BISAP评分以及IL-6联合BISAP评分判断胰腺炎患者预后,比较各评分系统的灵敏度以及特异度。结果共84例患者纳入本前瞻性研究,其中SAP 26例,MAP 58例。IL-6联合BISAP评分预测急性胰腺炎患者器官功能衰竭、胰腺坏死优于Ranson评分(P0.05)及BISAP评分;三种评分系统对于预测患者死亡方面无显著差异(P0.05)。结论细胞因子IL-6联合BISAP评分系统对早期预测急性胰腺炎严重程度及预后更有价值。     

不同评分系统在老年急性胰腺炎患者中的比较研究

背景:老年急性胰腺炎(AP)具有病情重、并发症多、死亡率高等特点,早期识别和预测病情对及时诊治老年AP患者具有重要意义。目的:探讨Ranson、BISAP和APACHEⅡ评分系统对老年AP患者的病情严重程度、并发症以及预后的预测价值。方法:纳入2012年7月—2016年6月武汉大学人民医院收治的318例老年AP患者,分别评估Ranson、BISAP、APACHEⅡ评分。应用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)评估不同评分系统对老年AP患者病情严重程度、并发症、预后的预测价值。结果:在318例老年AP患者中,轻度AP患者221例,中度41例,重度56例。51例患者伴有局部并发症,64例伴有全身并发症。治疗总有效率为96. 2%。APACHEⅡ评分预测老年AP患者的病情严重程度、全身并发症、疗效、ICU住院率、死亡率的AUC显著高于Ranson、BISAP评分,而三种评分系统预测局部并发症的AUC无明显差异(P 0. 05)。结论:APACHEⅡ评分对老年AP患者的病情严重程度、全身并发症、疗效、ICU住院率和死亡率的预测能力最强,而在局部并发症的预测方面,三种评分系统无明显差异。     

BISAP评分对急性胰腺炎严重程度及预后评估的临床价值

目的 通过与传统的急性胰腺炎(AP)病情评分系统比较,了解急性胰腺炎严重程度床边指数(BISAP)评分对AP严重程度及预后评估的临床价值.方法 回顾性分析2005年1月至2010年12月间收治的497例AP患者资料,分别进行BISAP、APACHEⅡ、Ranson及Balthazar CT( CTSI)评分,评估病情严重程度.应用受试者工作曲线下面积(AUC)比较BISAP评分与其他各评分系统对AP严重程度及胰腺坏死、器官功能衰竭、患者病死发生的预测能力.结果 497例患者中重症急性胰腺炎(SAP) 101例,轻症急性胰腺炎(MAP) 396例,MAP组和SAP组患者的年龄、性别、病因分布差异无统计学意义.497例患者的BISAP评分、APACHEⅡ评分、Ranson评分的平均分值分别为(1.08±1.01)、(5.79±4.00)、(1.69±1.59)分,两两相关(r值分别为0.612、0.568、0.577,P值均＜0.001).此外,SAP患者的BISAP评分、APACHEⅡ评分、Ranson评分的分值均显著大于MAP患者(P值均＜0.01).BISAP评分预测SAP的AUC值为0.762( 95％ CI 0.722～0.799),阳性截止(cutoff)值为2分,敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值分别为63.4％、83.1％、48.1％、89.4％;预测胰腺坏死的AUC值为0.711(95％CI0.612～0.797),cutoff值为2分,敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值分别为84.6％、46.7％、35.5％、89.7％;预测器官衰竭的AUC值为0.777(95％ CI0.683 ～0.854),cutoff值为2分,敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值分别为93.1％、51.4％、43.5％、94.9％;预测患者病死的AUC值为0.808(95％ CI 0.718 ～0.880),cutoff值为3分,敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值分别为83.3％、67.4％、25.6％、96.8％.BISAP评分与其他评分系统预测SAP各预后指标的差异均无统计学意义.结论 BISAP评分对AP严重程度及预后的评估价值与其他传统的评分系统相同,但其只有5项指标,且均可在入院24h内采集,可以早期、简便地预测SAP,值得在临床推广应用.     

血清胰蛋白酶原-2和血细胞比容在急性胰腺炎病情评估中的作用

背景:我国急性胰腺炎(AP)发病率逐年上升,病死率居高不下,探索可用于判断AP病情严重程度的血液生化指标对AP的诊断和治疗具有重要的临床意义。目的:探讨血清胰蛋白酶原-2(TAT-2)和血细胞比容(HCT)在AP病情严重程度中的预测价值。方法:收集2016年9月—2018年6月江阴市人民医院收治的175例AP患者,根据病情严重程度分为轻度急性胰腺炎(MAP)组、中重度急性胰腺炎(MSAP)组、重度急性胰腺炎(SAP)组,并选取同期健康体检者作为对照组。测定血清TAT-2、HCT,并行BISAP评分、APACHEⅡ评分、Balthazar CT评分。采用ROC曲线分析各指标诊断SAP的价值。结果:四组间TAT-2、HCT、BISAP评分、APACHEⅡ评分、Balthazar CT评分相比差异有统计学意义(P 0. 05)。SAP组TAT-2、HCT明显高于MAP组、MSAP组、对照组(P 0. 05),MSAP组TAT-2、HCT明显高于MAP组、对照组(P 0. 05),MAP组TAT-2、HCT显著高于对照组(P 0. 05)。ROC曲线分析示,TAT-2、HCT以及两者联合预测SAP的敏感性分别为69. 7%、84. 7%、88. 5%,特异性分别为95. 3%、67. 8%、65. 1%,AUC分别为0. 858、0. 783、0. 875。结论:TAT-2、HCT可有效评估AP病情的严重程度,两者联合检测更有助于进一步预测SAP的发生,对于AP的治疗起有重要指导作用。     

The BISAP score,NLR, CRP,or BUN: Which marker best predicts the outcome of acute pancreatitis?

Acute pancreatitis is a common disease, and the mortality rate can be high. Thus, a risk assessment should be performed early to optimize treatment. We compared simple prognostic markers with the bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) scoring system to identify the best predictors of severity and mortality.This retrospective study stratified disease severity based on the revised Atlanta criteria. The accuracies of the markers for predicting severe AP (SAP) were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated for each marker. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of SAP and mortality.The area under the curve (AUC) for the BISAP score was classified as fair for predicting SAP. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio at 48 hours (NLR48 h) and the C-reactive protein level at 48 hours (CRP48 h) had the best AUCs and were independently associated with SAP. When both criteria were met, the AUC was 0.89, sensitivity was 68%, and specificity was 92%. CRP48 h and hematocrit at 48 hours were independently associated with mortality.NLR48 h and CRP48 h were independently associated with SAP but not superior to the BISAP score at admission. Assessing NLR48 h and CRP48H together was most suitable for predicting SAP. The CRP level was a good predictive marker for mortality.     

Clinical significance of melatonin concentrations in predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis

AIM: To assess the value of plasma melatonin in pre-dicting acute pancreatitis when combined with the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ (APACHE Ⅱ) and bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) scoring systems. METHODS: APACHEⅡ and BISAP scores were calculated for 55 patients with acute physiology (AP) in the first 24 h of admission to the hospital. Additionally, morning (6:00 AM) serum melatonin concentrations were measured on the first day after admission. According to the diagnosis and treatment guidelines for acute pancreatitis in China, 42 patients suffered mild AP (MAP). The other 13 patients developed severe AP (SAP). A total of 45 healthy volunteers were used in this study as controls. The ability of melatonin and the APACHEⅡ and BISAP scoring systems to predict SAP was evaluated using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The optimal melatonin cutoff concentration for SAP patients, based on the ROC curve, was used to classify the patients into either a high concen-tration group (34 cases) or a low concentration group (21 cases). Differences in the incidence of high scores, according to the APACHEⅡ and BISAP scoring sys- tems, were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The MAP patients had increased melatonin levels compared to the SAP (38.34 ng/L vs 26.77 ng/L) (P = 0.021) and control patients (38.34 ng/L vs 30.73 ng/L) (P = 0.003). There was no significant difference inmelatoninconcentrations between the SAP group and the control group. The accuracy of determining SAP based on the melatonin level, the APACHEⅡ score and the BISAP score was 0.758, 0.872, and 0.906, respectively, according to the ROC curve. A melatonin concentration ≤ 28.74 ng/L was associated with an increased risk of developing SAP. The incidence of high scores (≥ 3) using the BISAP system was significantly higher in patients with low melatonin concentration (≤ 28.74 ng/L) compared to patients with high melatonin concentration (> 28.74 ng/L) (42.9% vs 14.7%, P = 0.02). The     

Obesity increases the severity of acute pancreatitis: performance of APACHE-O score and correlation with the inflammatory response.

BACKGROUND: Obese patients appear to be at risk for complications of acute pancreatitis (AP). APACHE-O score has been suggested to improve APACHE-II accuracy in predicting severe outcome in AP. AIMS: To determine if APACHE-O adds any predictive value to APACHE-II score and to test the hypothesis that obese patients are at increased risk of severe AP (SAP) because of a more intense inflammatory response to pancreatic injury. METHODS: 102 AP patients were prospectively studied. Using a body mass index (BMI) >30, 28% of the subjects were obese. Nineteen patients developed organ dysfunction and were classified as SAP. Receiver-operating curves for prediction of SAP were calculated using admission APACHE-II and APACHE-O scores. Binary logistic regression was performed to assess if obesity is a risk for SAP and to determine the clinical factors associated with severe disease. Serum levels of IL-6, MCP-1 and CRP as well as Ranson's scores were compared between obese and non-obese patients. RESULTS: Admission APACHE-O (area under the curve AUC 0.895) and APACHE-II (AUC 0.893) showed similar accuracy in predicting severe outcome. BMI was identified as a significant risk for SAP (OR 2.8, p = 0.048) and mortality (OR 11.2, p = 0.022). CRP levels were significantly higher in obese AP patients (p = 0.0001) as well as Ranson's score (p = 0.021). IL-6 and MCP-1 levels were higher in obese patients but did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity is an independent risk for SAP. Admission APACHE-O score is not more accurate than APACHE-II. Our study results suggest that obesity increases the severity of AP by amplifying the immune response to injury.     

Comparative analysis of selected scales to assess prognosis in acute pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate the utility of selected scales to prognosticate the severity and risk for death among patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) according to the revised Atlanta classification published in 2012.

METHODS:

Prospective data regarding patients hospitalized due to AP were analyzed. The final analysis included a total of 1014 patients. The bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP), Panc 3 scores and Ranson scales were calculated using data from the first 24 h of admission.

RESULTS:

Mild AP was diagnosed in 822 (81.1%) cases, moderate in 122 (12%) and severe in 70 (6.9%); 38 (3.7%) patients died. The main causes of AP were cholelithiasis (34%) and alcohol abuse (26.7%). Recurrence of AP was observed in 244 (24.1%) patients. In prognosticating the severity of AP, the most useful scale proved to be the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II (area under the curve [AUC] 0.724 [95% CI 0.655 to 0.793]), followed by BISAP (AUC 0.693 [95% CI 0.622 to 0.763]). In prognosticating a moderate versus mild course of AP, the CT severity index proved to be the most decisive (AUC 0.819 [95% CI 0.767 to 0.871]). Regarding prognosis for death, APACHE II had the highest predictive value (AUC 0.726 [95% CI 0.621 to 0.83]); however, a similar sensitivity was observed using the BISAP scale (AUC 0.707 [95% CI 0.618 to 0.797]).

CONCLUSIONS:

Scoring systems used in prognosticating the course of the disease vary with regard to sensitivity and specificity. The CT severity index scoring system showed the highest precision in prognosticating moderately severe AP (as per the revised Atlanta criteria, 2012); however, in prognosticating a severe course of disease and mortality, APACHE II proved to have the greatest predictive value.     

Comparison of scoring systems in predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis

AIM:To investigate the prognostic usefulness of several existing scoring systems in predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis(AP).METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed the prospectively collected clinical database from consecutive patients with AP in our institution between January 2011 and December 2012.Ranson,Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation(APACHE)-Ⅱ,and bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis(BISAP)scores,and computed tomography severity index(CTSI)of all patients were calculated.Serum C-reactive protein(CRP)levels were measured at admission(CRPi)and after 24h(CRP24).Severe AP was defined as persistent organ failure for more than 48 h.The predictive accuracy of each scoring system was measured by the area under the receiver-operating curve(AUC).RESULTS:Of 161 patients,21(13%)were classified as severe AP,and 3(1.9%)died.Statistically significant cutoff values for prediction of severe AP were Ranson≥3,BISAP≥2,APACHE-Ⅱ≥8,CTSI≥3,and CRP24≥21.4.AUCs for Ranson,BISAP,APACHE-Ⅱ,CTSI,and CRP24 in predicting severe AP were 0.69(95%CI:0.62-0.76),0.74(95%CI:0.66-0.80),0.78(95%CI:0.70-0.84),0.69(95%CI:0.61-0.76),and0.68(95%CI:0.57-0.78),respectively.APACHE-Ⅱdemonstrated the highest accuracy for prediction of severe AP,however,no statistically significant pairwise differences were observed between APACHE-Ⅱand the other scoring systems,including CRP24.CONCLUSION:Various scoring systems showed similar predictive accuracy for severity of AP.Unique models are needed in order to achieve further improvement of prognostic accuracy.     

血液标志物与胰腺外炎症CT评分对急性胰腺炎严重性早期预测的比较

目的:比较血液标志物及胰腺外炎症CT评分(extrapancreatic inflammation on CT score,EPIC)对急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)严重性的早期预测价值.方法:对2010-09/2011-09住院的96例AP患者首个24h内的临床、实验室及CT资料进行分析.临床上重症急性胰腺炎(severe acute pancreatitis,SAP)的标准为:死亡或持续器官衰竭及/或入住ICU,及/或手术治疗.对重症急性胰腺炎组及轻症急性胰腺炎(mild acute pancreatitis,MAP)组患者血液标志物及胰腺外炎症CT评分进行t检验,血液标志物及EPIC预测AP严重性的相关性检验及预测AP严重性的ROC分析,并计算预测敏感性、阳性预测值及准确度.结果:MAP76例,SAP20例.重症患者的血液标志物及胰腺外炎症CT评分均明显较轻症患者的大[白细胞:(15.16±5.06)×109/Lvs(11.05±1.76)×109/L,中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值:18.95±12.13vs6.63±3.44,高敏C-反应蛋白:58.35mg/L±20.47mg/Lvs28.59mg/L±12.92mg/L,D-二聚体:1596.95μg/L±1409.05μg/Lvs412.52μg/L±316.66μg/L,胰腺外炎症CT评分:3.30±0.86vs1.50±0.96,P=0.000].白细胞、中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值、高敏C-反应蛋白、D-二聚体及胰腺外炎症CT评分与AP严重性的Spearman相关系数(rs)分别为0.419、0.571、0.568、0.434及0.61(P=0.000).白细胞、中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值、高敏C-反应蛋白、D-二聚体及胰腺外炎症CT评分对AP严重性预测的曲线下面积分别为0.798(0.670-0.925)、0.906(0.830-0.981)、0.904(0.838-0.970)、0.808(0.638-0.938)以及0.917(0.851-0.983);预测敏感性分别为70.00%、85.00%、85.00%、75.00%及85.00%;阳性预测值分别为58.33%、73.91%、51.52%、48.39%及72.00%;预测准确度分别为83.33%、90.63%、80.21%、78.13%及90.63%.结论:白细胞及D-二聚体对AP严重性的预测价值中等,中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值、高敏C-反应蛋白及胰腺外炎症CT评分的预测价值较高,其中中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值和胰腺外炎症CT评分预测的准确度最高,胰腺外炎症CT评分与AP严重性的相关系数最大,其预测AP严重性的受试者曲线下面积最大.     

Comparison of Existing Clinical Scoring Systems in Predicting Severity and Prognoses of Hyperlipidemic Acute Pancreatitis in Chinese Patients: A Retrospective Study

It is important to identify the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) in the early course of the disease. Clinical scoring systems may be helpful to predict the prognosis of patients with early AP; however, few analysts have forecast the accuracy of scoring systems for the prognosis in hyperlipidemic acute pancreatitis (HLAP). The purpose of this study was to summarize the clinical characteristics of HLAP and compare the accuracy of conventional scoring systems in predicting the prognosis of HLAP.This study retrospectively analyzed all consecutively diagnosed AP patients between September 2008 and March 2014. We compared the clinical characteristics between HLAP and nonhyperlipidemic acute pancreatitis. The bedside index for severity of acute pancreatitis (BISAP), Ranson, computed tomography severity index (CTSI), and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) scores were applied within 48 hours following admission.Of 909 AP patients, 129 (14.2%) had HLAP, 20 were classified as severe acute pancreatitis (SAP), 8 had pseudocysts, 9 had pancreatic necrosis, 30 had pleural effusions, 33 had SIRS, 14 had persistent organ failure, and there was 1 death. Among the HLAP patients, the area under curves for BISAP, Ranson, SIRS, and CTSI in predicting SAP were 0.905, 0.938, 0.812, and 0.834, 0.874, 0.726, 0.668, and 0.848 for local complications, and 0.904, 0.917, 0.758, and 0.849 for organ failure, respectively.HLAP patients were characterized by younger age at onset, higher recurrence rate, and being more prone to pancreatic necrosis, organ failure, and SAP. BISAP, Ranson, SIRS, and CTSI all have accuracy in predicting the prognosis of HLAP patients, but each has different strengths and weaknesses.     

急性胰腺炎患者血清sCD40早期检测的临床意义

背景:CD40是免疫应答中的共刺激分子,通过与其配体CD40L结合,参与介导免疫调节信号。研究显示在多种疾病状态下,外周血和体液可溶性CD40(sCD40)水平异常增高。目的:检测急性胰腺炎(AP)患者的入院早期血清sCD40水平并探讨其临床意义。方法:随机选取72例住院AP患者(MAP 44例,SAP 28例),以ELISA法检测入院24h内血清sCD40水平,21例健康体检者作为对照。以ROC曲线评价早期血清sCD40对AP以及AP相关急性肺损伤(ALI)的诊断效能。结果:AP组入院24 h内血清sCD40水平显著高于对照组(P0.01),其中SAP组又高于MAP组,并与入院24 h内血清CRP水平呈显著正相关(r=0.413,P=0.000)。血清sCD40诊断AP的ROC曲线下面积(AUC)为0.806,最佳诊断界值为≥29.45 pg/mL;预测AP相关ALI的AUC为0.808,诊断效能明显高于APACHEⅡ评分(AUC=0.733)、Ranson评分(AUC=0.648)和血清CRP(AUC=0.625),最佳诊断界值为≥47.96 pg/mL。结论:早期检测血清sCD40有助于早期识别AP、判断病情严重程度以及预测AP相关ALI的发生。     

Early onset of organ failure is the best predictor of mortality in acute pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: APACHE II is a multifactorial scoring system for predicting severity in acute pancreatitis (AP). Organ failure (OF) has been correlated with mortality in AP. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the usefulness of APACHE II as an early predictor of severity in AP, its correlation with OF, and the relevance of an early establishment of OF during the course of AP. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 1999 to November 2001, 447 consecutive cases of AP were studied. APACHE II scores and Atlanta criteria were used for defining severity and OF. RESULTS: Twenty-five percent of patients had severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). APACHE II at 24 h after admission showed a sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of 52, 77, 46, and 84%, respectively, for predicting severity. Mortality for SAP was 20.5%. Seventy percent of patients who developed OF did so within the first 24 hours of admission, and their mortality was 52%. Mortality was statistically significant (p< 0.01) if OF was established within the first 24 hours after admission. CONCLUSIONS: APACHE II is not reliable for predicting outcome within the first 24 hours after admission and should therefore be used together with other methods. OF mostly develops within the first days after admission, if ever. The time of onset of OF is the most accurate and reliable method for predicting death risk in AP.     

Can mean platelet volume play a role in evaluating the severity of acute pancreatitis?

AIM To investigate serum mean platelet volume(MPV) levels in acute pancreatitis(AP) patients and assess whether MPV effectively predicts the disease severity of AP.METHODS We included 117 consecutive patients with AP as the AP group and 34 consecutive patients with colorectal polyps(before endoscopic treatment) as the control group. Complete blood counts, liver function, platelet indices(MPV), coagulation parameters, lactate dehydrogenase(LDH) and C-reactive protein(CRP) were measured on days 1, 2, 3 and 7 after admission. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to compare the sensitivity and specificity of MPV, white blood cell(WBC), LDH and CRP in predicting AP severity. The Modified Glasgow Prognostic Score(m GPS) and the 2012 revised Atlanta criteria were used to evaluate disease severity in AP.RESULTS MPV levels were significantly lower in the AP group than in the control group on day 1(P = 0.000), day 2(P = 0.029) and day 3(P = 0.001) after admission.In addition, MPV values were lower on day 1 after admission than on day 2(P = 0.012), day 3(P = 0.000) and day 7(P = 0.002) in all AP patients. Based on the m GPS, 78 patients(66.7%) were diagnosed with mild and 39 patients(33.3%) with severe AP. There was no significant difference in mean MPV levels between patients diagnosed with mild and severe AP based on the m GPS(P = 0.424). According to the 2012 revised Atlanta criteria, there were 98 patients(83.8%) without persistent organ failure(OF) [non-severe acute pancreatitis(non-SAP) group] and 19 patients(16.2%) with persistent OF(SAP group). MPV levels were significantly lower in the SAP group than in the non-SAP group on day 1 after admission(P = 0.002). On day 1 after admission using a cut-off value of 6.65 f L, the overall accuracy of MPV for predicting SAP according to the 2012 revised Atlanta criteria(AUC = 0.716) had a sensitivity of 91.8% and a specificity of 47.4% and was superior to the accuracy of the traditional markers WBC(AUC = 0.700) and LDH(AUC = 0.697).CONCLUSION MPV can be used at no additional cost as a useful, noninvasive biomarker that distinguishes AP with persistent OF from AP without persistent OF on day 1 of hospital admission.