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.     

改良客观性BISAP评分对急性胰腺炎严重程度及预后的预测价值

目的探讨改良客观性BISAP评分(MBISAP)对急性胰腺炎(AP)严重程度及预后的预测价值。方法回顾性分析2018年6月—2020年6月川北医学院附属医院收治的313例AP患者资料,将BISAP评分中精神状态这一主观性指标去除,再根据CTSI(CT严重指数)评分标准,将胰腺坏死程度分为4类(0、0～30%、30%～50%、 50%),并给予相应的赋值(0～3分),MBISAP评分由上述指标赋值相加可得,最高为7分。根据受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线将313例胰腺炎患者分为MBISAP低级别组(MBISAP 3分)和MBISAP高级别组(MBISAP≥3分) 2组。比较2组基线资料、临床结局,非正态分布的计量资料2组间比较采用MannWhitney U秩和检验;计数资料2组间比较采用χ~2检验或Fisher精确检验。ROC曲线下面积(AUC)分析比较MBISAP评分、BISAP评分、CTSI评分对AP病情严重程度、预后的预测价值。结果 2组患者在年龄(Z=-5.480,P 0.001)、病因(χ~2=36.536,P 0.001)、住院时间(Z=-6.038,P 0.001)、病死率(P 0.001)、胰周感染(P 0.001)、多器官功能障碍综合征(MODS)(P 0.001)、BISAP评分(χ~2=215.320,P 0.001)、CTSI评分(P 0.001)之间存在明显差异。随着MBISAP评分的增加,AP病情严重程度、病死率、胰周感染、MODS的发生呈增加趋势(P值均0.001)。在预测SAP方面,MBISAP评分AUC=0.898(95%CI:0.859～0.929,P 0.001),敏感度为71.43%,特异度为90.53%;当MBISAP≥3时为最佳临界值,优于BISAP评分(AUC=0.868,P 0.05)、CTSI评分(AUC=0.827,P 0.05)。在预测AP患者死亡方面,MBISAP评分AUC=0.925 (95%CI:0.890～0.952,P 0.001),敏感度为88.89%,特异度为82.89%;当MBISAP≥3时为最佳临界值,与BISAP评分(AUC=0.915,P 0.05)、CTSI评分(AUC=0.879,P 0.05)相似。在预测AP胰周感染方面,MBISAP评分AUC=0.842(95%CI:0.796～0.880,P 0.001),敏感度为72.22%,特异度为84.07%;当MBISAP 2时为最佳临界值,优于BISAP评分(AUC=0.776,P 0.05),但比CTSI评分(AUC=0.932,P 0.05)较差。在预测AP患者合并MODS方面,MBISAP评分AUC=0.874(95%CI:0.832～0.909,P 0.001),敏感度为76.19%,特异度为84.93%,当MBISAP 2时为最佳临界值,与BISAP评分(AUC=0.855,P 0.05)、CTSI评分(AUC=0.829,P0.05)相似。结论 MBISAP评分在预测AP患者的严重程度及胰周感染方面优于BISAP评分,预测AP患者死亡及MODS方面也有较好的价值,相比BISAP评分能够更准确、客观地评估AP患者情况。     

血清脂肪酶联合Ranson或BISAP评分系统诊断急性胰腺炎严重程度的效果分析

目的探讨血清脂肪酶联合Ranson或BISAP评分系统在急性胰腺炎严重程度中的诊断意义。方法选取2012年2月-2015年2月惠东县第二人民医院收治的急性胰腺炎患者314例,分为轻症急性胰腺炎(MAP)组(n=202)和重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)组(n=112)。对所有患者分别进行血清脂肪酶检测、Ranson评分、BISAP评分、脂肪酶联合Ranson或BISAP评分。计量资料组间比较采用t检验,计数资料组间比较采用χ2检验,不同评估方法间曲线下面积(AUC)、约登指数比较采用Z检验。结果 SAP患者的血清脂肪酶水平、Ranson评分值、BISAP评分值均显著高于MAP患者,差异均有统计学意义(t值分别为14.89、11.89、5.12,P值分别为0.003、0.007、0.037)。预测器官功能衰竭、胰腺坏死和病死率的AUC中,脂肪酶联合BISAP评分系统均高于BISAP评分,差异均有统计学意义(Z值分别为7.54、7.11、7.57,P值分别为0.033、0.031、0.030);脂肪酶联合Ranson评分系统均高于Ranson评分,差异均有统计学意义(Z值分别为5.23、5.78、6.18,P值分别为0.037、0.034、0.032);脂肪酶联合BISAP评分系统均高于脂肪酶联合Ranson评分系统,差异均有统计学意义(Z值分别为13.55、8.33、7.66,P值分别为0.005、0.029、0.031)。脂肪酶联合Ranson评分系统预测器官功能衰竭、胰腺坏死和病死率的约登指数均高于Ranson评分,差异均有统计学意义(Z值分别为5.17、6.89、7.35,P值分别为0.038、0.032、0.027);脂肪酶联合BISAP评分系统的约登指数均高于BISAP评分,差异均有统计学意义(Z值分别为7.54、7.22、9.57,P值分别为0.030、0.031、0.025),脂肪酶联合BISAP评分系统的约登指数均高于脂肪酶联合Ranson评分系统,差异均有统计学意义(Z值分别为10.11、10.23、13.24,P值分别为0.020、0.019、0.010)。结论脂肪酶联合Ranson或BISAP评分系统在诊断急性胰腺炎严重程度时较单独采用Ranson评分系统、BISAP评分系统准确性高,其中脂肪酶联合BISAP评分系统敏感性更高,更具有临床诊断价值。     

BISAP评分在重症急性胰腺炎预后的评估价值

目的探讨新型BISAP评分体系(bedside index for severity in AP)对重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)的评估价值。方法选取2008年9月-2012年2月我科收治的重症急性胰腺炎的患者68例,进行BISAP评分。BISAP评分标准包括患者入院24 h内的尿素氮水平、受损精神状态、全身炎症反应综合征、年龄、胸腔积液5项内容。结果 68例SAP患者中,BISAP评分1分的0人(0),2分的21人(30.9%),3分的30人(44.1%),4分的15人(22.1%),5分的2人(2.9%)。68例患者中死亡6例,病死率8.8%,其中BISAP评分4分的死亡4人,占26.7%,BISAP评分5分的死亡2人,占100%,不同评分之间病死率差异有显著统计学意义(P<0.01)。而在相同评分中,不同CT分级对预后没有显著差异。结论 BISAP评分系统作为一种新型的、简便的评分体系可推广应用于SAP预后的评估。     

HAP评分联合BISAP评分及D-二聚体检测对重症急性胰腺炎有较高的预后评估价值

目的：探讨HAP评分联合急性胰腺炎严重程度床边指数（BISAP）评分及血浆D-二聚体水平对重症急性胰腺炎（SAP）预后评估的价值。方法：选取2017年6月-2018年12月在东莞市人民医院收治的急性胰腺炎（AP组）患者180例,其中,轻症急性胰腺炎（MAP组）56例,中度重症急性胰腺炎（MSAP组）60例,SAP（SAP组）64例。根据住院期间预后情况分为预后良好组（33例）和预后不良组（31例）。180例健康体检者作为对照组。对AP患者进行无害性胰腺炎（HAP）评分、BISAP评分;免疫比浊法检测血浆D-二聚体水平;采用受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线评估HAP评分、BISAP评分及血浆D-二聚体水平对SAP患者预后评估的价值;Z检验比较预后价值。结果：AP组患者血浆D-二聚体水平较对照组明显升高（P＜0.05）;随着AP病情的加重,患者HAP评分、BISAP评分及血浆D-二聚体水平逐渐升高（P均＜0.05）。预后不良组SAP患者HAP评分、BISAP评分及血浆D-二聚体水平较预后良好组明显升高（P均＜0.05）;HAP评分、BISAP评分、血浆D-二聚体水平单独预测SAP患者不良预后的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.826（95%CI：0.724~0.928）、0.838（95%CI：0.741~0.935）、0.831（95%CI：0.730~0.932）,截断值分别为1.765、2.420、0.950mg/L,敏感度分别为74.2%、87.1%、80.6%,特异性分别为75.8%、69.7%、75.8%;三者联合预测的ROC曲线下面积为0.952（95%CI：0.905~0.999）,敏感度为96.8%,特异性为81.8%;联合预测SAP患者不良预后与单独预测比较,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论：SAP患者HAP评分、BISAP评分及血浆D-二聚体水平明显升高,三者联合检测对SAP具有较高的预后评估价值。     

BISAP评分系统对急性胰腺炎严重程度评估的荟萃分析

目的评估BISAP评分系统在预测急性胰腺炎（AP）严重程度的临床应用价值。方法计算机检索Medline、EMBASE、ScienceDirect、Springerlink、CBM、中国知网、万方以及维普数据库2000年1月至2013年3月的文献,按照严格的纳入标准收集BISAP评分系统预测AP严重程度的文献,采用QUADAS量表进行文献质量评价,利用Meta—Disc1．4统计软件进行异质性分析和定量合成,计算汇总的敏感度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比和受试者特征性工作（ROC）曲线下面积（AUC）,结果均采用95％可信区间（95％CI）表示。结果共纳入文献11篇,包括7篇中文论著和4篇英文论著。按QUADAS量表进行分级,其中A级4篇,B级5篇,C级2篇。6篇文献以BISAP2分为cutoff值、9篇文献以BISAP3分为cutoff值（4篇文献采用两个cutoff值）预测SAP。前者汇总的诊断比值比为8．03（95％C15．66～11．38）,后者为7．49（95％C15．35～10．49）,两组文献均存在中等程度的异质性（I^2=63．3％,P=0．018;I^2=56．1％,P=0．019）。以BISAP2分为cutoff值预测AP严重程度的汇总的敏感度、特异度、阳性似然比、阴性似然比和AUC分别为59％（95％CI56％-63％）、82％（95％CI80％-83％）、3．50（95％CI 2．96～4．14）、0．45（95％CI 0．36～0．56）和0．82;以BISAP3分为cutoff值时分别为44％（95％CI41％～47％）、90％（95％CI89％-91％）、4．59（95％CI3．31-6．37）、0．64（95％C10．61-0．68）和0．64。前者有较高的敏感度,较低的特异度,AUC较大;后者敏感度低,特异度高,AUC较小。结论BISAP预测SAP的最佳的cutoff值为2分。其漏诊率较低,且误诊率在可接受范围内,适合在临床应用及推广。     

检测血液凝血功能的变化对评估急性胰腺炎患者病情的意义

目的:评价凝血酶原时间(PT)、部分活化凝血酶原时间(APTT)、纤维蛋白原浓度(FIB)和D-二聚体(D-dimer)对急性胰腺炎（acute pancreatitis,AP）病情观察的意义。方法：将入选的62例AP病人分为轻症 (mild acute pancreatitis，MAP)组和重症 (Severe acute pancreatitis，SAP)组，同时选健康体检者30例为对照组；另外按是否伴发全身炎症反应综合征（SIRS）再次分组，即SIRS阳性组和SIRS阴性组；采用免疫散射比浊法、酶联免疫吸附法检测各组血PT、APTT、FIB、D-D水平并进行比较。结果：与健康对照组和MAP组比较，SAP组患者血PT、APTT、FIB 和D-D水平均有显著升高(P <0.05)， MAP组与对照组比较， PT、APTT值有轻度升高，但组间差异不显著（P>0.05)，而FIB、D-D值与对照组比较, 有显著升高(P<0.05)；SIRS阳性组PT、APTT、FIB 及D-D值均较SIRS阴性组有显著升高(P<0.05)。结论：SAP病人存在凝血和纤溶系统异常，其对评估急性胰腺炎病情变化及预后有一定临床意义。     

BISAP评分对急性胰腺炎患者病情严重度及预后评估价值的研究

目的研究BISAP评分系统对急性胰腺炎(AP)患者病情严重程度及预后指标包括住院天数、有无局部并发症、全身并发症、器官衰竭及治疗转归等的评估价值,并与既往经典评分Ranson、CTST进行比较。方法采用回顾性临床研究方法,研究2001年2月-2011年11月上海市第一、第十人民医院及松江区中心医院收治的急性胰腺炎病例707例,对所有急性胰腺炎患者进行BISAP、Ranson和CT评分。受试者工作曲线(ROC曲线)分析三种评分系统对急性胰腺炎严重程度及预后的评估价值。结果 707例急性胰腺炎患者中急性轻型胰腺炎613例,急性重型胰腺炎94例。BISAP评分对急性胰腺炎轻重、局部并发症、全身并发症、器官衰竭及死亡的受试者工作曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.77、0.68、0.83、0.83、0.88。对急性胰腺炎死亡的判断,BISAP及Ranson评分均有较好的独立预测价值,优于CTSI评分。结论 BISAP评分对急性胰腺炎轻重分型、局部并发症、全身并发症和器官衰竭的发生及死亡均有较强的预测价值,与平均住院天数呈正相关;对急性胰腺炎死亡有独立预测价值,且时效性强,可以在急性胰腺炎发病早期发现重症趋势。     

BISAP评分系统对重症急性胰腺炎的评估价值

目的 探讨新型BISAP评分体系(bedside index for severity in AP)对重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)的评估价值。方法 选取临床拟诊为SAP的患者68例,分别进行BISAP、APACHEⅡ、Ranson以及CTSI评分。BISAP评分标准包括患者入院24h内的尿素氮水平、受损精神状态、全身炎症反应综合征、年龄、胸腔积液5项内容。以BISAP≥3分、APACHEⅡ≥8分、Ranson≥3分、CTSI≥3分为SAP的评估标准,分析这几种评分系统评估SAP的正确率。结果 68例患者中,BISAP≥3分者43例,占63.2％;APACHEⅡ≥8分者41例,占60.3％;Ranson≥3分者41例,占60.3％;CTSI≥3分者46例,占67.6％。BISAP评分系统与APACHEⅡ评分系统、Ranson评分系统以及CTSI评分系统比较,评估SAP的正确率均无显著性统计学差异。结论 BISAP评分系统作为一种新型的、简便的评分体系可推广应用于SAP的评估。     

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...     

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     

新CT评分系统预测急性胰腺炎病情严重程度的临床研究

目的 在综合急性胰腺炎(AP)患者胰腺外炎症征象及胰腺坏死程度基础上,建立一种新CT评分系统--胰腺外炎症和胰腺坏死CT指数(EPIPN)评分系统.以初步探讨其预测AP病情严重程度和预后的诊断价值.方法 回顾分析2006年8月至2007年12月住院确诊的77例AP患者的临床资料,包括年龄、性别、病因、起病72 h C反应蛋白(CRP)水平、Ranson评分、人院48 h时APACHEⅡ评分,器官衰竭发生情况、腹痛消失时间、住院时间等.所有患者人院后2～3 d行增强CT检查,获得CT严重指数(CTSI)评分和EPIPN评分,CTSI≥7分为重症AP(SAP),EPIPN>5分为SAP.应用ROC曲线比较EPIPN和CTSI预测AP病情严重程度的诊断效力,初步分析EPlPN和CTSI与AP临床预后指标的相关性.结果 77例患者中男34例,女43例,平均年龄51.79岁(22～92岁).胆源性63例,高血脂6例,酒精性1例,原因不明7例.14例(18.2%)患者曾发生器官衰竭.EPIPN和CTSI预测SAP的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.82(95%可信区间0.73～0.91)、0.72(95%可信区间0.59～0.86),CTSI≥7预测SAP的灵敏度、特异度分别为80.4%和55%,EPIPN>5预测SAP的灵敏度、特异度分别为91.3%和63%.EPIPN与AP患者住院时间、APACHEⅡ评分、CRP有良好的相关性.结论 EPIPN可准确预测和评估AP病情严重程度和预后,其诊断效力优于CTSI.EPIPN简便实用,具有良好的临床应用价值.     

生物学标志物对急性胰腺炎严重程度预测的研究进展

急性胰腺炎(AP)是由多种病因导致胰酶激活,继以胰腺局部炎症反应为主要特点,根据有无胰腺局部并发症和器官功能衰竭的出现及持续时间将急性胰腺炎分为轻、中重度、重度3级[1].临床上约80％是轻中度急性胰腺炎,通常经过对因治疗和保守治疗后通常预后良好,然而约20％会进展为重症急性胰腺炎(SAP).SAP病程早期是由于多种病...     

Value of adipokines in predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis: Comprehensive review

AIM: To analyze the prognostic value of adipokines in predicting the course, complications and fatal outcome of acute pancreatitis (AP).METHODS: We performed the search of PubMed database and the systemic analysis of the literature for both experimental and human studies on prognostic value of adipokines in AP for period 2002-2012. Only the papers that described the use of adipokines for prediction of severity and/or complications of AP were selected for further analysis. Each article had to contain information about the levels of measured adipokines, diagnosis and verification of AP, to specify presence of pancreatic necrosis, organ dysfunction and/or mortality rates. From the very beginning, study was carried out adhering to the PRISMA checklist and flowchart for systemic reviews. To assess quality of all included human studies, the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool was used. Because of the high heterogeneity between the studies, it was decided to refrain from the statistical processing or meta-analysis of the available data.RESULTS: Nine human and three experimental studies were included into review. In experimental studies significant differences between leptin concentrations at 24 and 48 h in control, acute edematous and acute necrotizing pancreatitis groups were found (P = 0.027 and P < 0.001). In human studies significant differences between leptin and resitin concentrations in control and acute pancreatitis groups were found. 1-3 d serum adiponectin threshold of 4.5 μg/mL correctly classified the severity of 81% of patients with AP. This threshold yielded a sensitivity of 70%, specificity 85%, positive predictive value 64%, negative predictive value88% (area under curve 0.75). Resistin and visfatin concentrations differ significantly between mild and severe acute pancreatitis groups, they correlate with severity of disease, need for interventions and outcome. Both adipokines are good markers for parapancreatic necrosis and the cut-off values of 11.9 ng/mL and 1.8 ng/mL respectively predict the high ranges of radiological scores. However, the review revealed that all nine human studies with adipokines are very different in terms of methodology and objectives, so it is difficult to generalize their results. It seems that concentrations of the leptin and resistin increases significantly in patients with acute pancreatitis compared with controls. Serum levels of adiponectin, visfatin and especially resitin (positive correlation with Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, Ranson and C-reactive protein) are significantly different in mild acute pancreatitis and severe acute pancreatitis patients, so, they can serve as a markers for the disease severity prediction. Resistin and visfatin can also be used for pancreatic and parapancreatic necrosis prediction, interventions needs and possible, outcome.CONCLUSION: High levels of adipokines could allow for prediction of a severe disease course and outcome even in small pancreatic lesions on computed tomography scans.     

Low-grade inflammation for predicting severe acute pancreatitis in patients with hypertriglyceridemic acute pancreatitis

Objectives

We aimed to evaluate the association between low-grade inflammation (LGI) and the severity of hypertriglyceridemic acute pancreatitis (HTG-AP).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 311 patients with HTG-AP who were admitted to the Department of Gastroenterology, Fujian Provincial Hospital between April 2012 and March 2021. Inpatient medical and radiological records were reviewed to collect the clinical manifestations, disease severity, and comorbidities. C-reactive protein (CRP) level, white blood cell (WBC) count, platelet (PLT) count, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) were considered LGI components and were combined to calculate a standardized LGI score. The association between the LGI score and the severity of HTG-AP was analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

Results

Of the 311 patients with HTG-AP, 47 (15.1%) had mild acute pancreatitis (MAP), 184 (59.2%) had moderately severe acute pancreatitis (MSAP), and 80 (25.7%) had severe acute pancreatitis (SAP), respectively. Patients with MSAP and SAP had a higher LGI score than those with MAP (1.50 vs −6.00, P < 0.001). Univariate logistic regression analysis revealed that patients with LGI scores in the fourth quartile were more likely to have MSAP and SAP (odds ratio [OR] 21.925, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.014–95.867, P < 0.001). The multivariate logistic regression analysis confirmed that low calcium (OR 0.105, 95% CI 0.011–0.969, P = 0.047) and high LGI score (OR 1.253, 95% CI 1.066–1.473, P = 0.006) were associated with MSAP and SAP. When predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis, the LGI score had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (0.7737) compared to its individual components.

Conclusion

An elevated LGI score was associated with a higher risk of SAP in patients with HTG-AP.