AIM: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a process with variable involvement of regional tissues or organ systems. Multifactorial scales included the Ranson, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE Ⅱ) syst...AIM: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a process with variable involvement of regional tissues or organ systems. Multifactorial scales included the Ranson, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE Ⅱ) systems and Balthazar computed tomography severity index (CTSI). The purpose of this review study was to assess the accuracy of CTSI, Ranson score, and APACHE II score in course and outcome prediction of AP. METHODS: We reviewed 121 patients who underwent helical CT within 48 h after onset of symptoms of a first episode of AP between 1999 and 2003. Fourteen inappropriate subjects were excluded; we reviewed the 107 contrastenhanced CT images to calculate the CTSI. We also reviewed their Ranson and APACHE Ⅱ score. In addition, complications, duration of hospitalization, mortality rate, and other pathology history also were our comparison parameters. RESULTS: We classified 85 patients (79%) as having mild AP (CTSI 〈5) and 22 patients (21%) as having severe AP (CTSI ≥5). In mild group, the mean APACHE II score and Ranson score was 8.6±1.9 and 2.4±1.2, and those of severe group was 10.2±2.1 and 3.1±0.8, respectively. The most common complication was pseudocyst and abscess and it presented in 21 (20%) patients and their CTSI was 5.9±1.4. A CTSI ≥5 significantly correlated with death, complication present, and prolonged length of stay. Patients with a CTSI ≥5 were 15 times to die than those CTSI 〈5, and the prolonged length of stay and complications present were 17 times and 8 times than that in CTSI 〈5, respectively. CONCLUSION: CTSI is a useful tool in assessing the severity and outcome of AP and the CTSI ≥5 is an index in our study. Although Ranson score and APACHE II score also are choices to be the predictors for complications, mortality and the length of stay of AP, the sensitivity of them are lower than CTSI.展开更多
目的:探讨并比较不同评分系统对急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)患者病情严重程度预测价值的差异性.方法:回顾分析2011-06/2013-12在辽宁医学院附属第三医院住院并治疗的120例AP患者的临床资料,分别进行床旁急性胰腺炎严重度评分(bed...目的:探讨并比较不同评分系统对急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)患者病情严重程度预测价值的差异性.方法:回顾分析2011-06/2013-12在辽宁医学院附属第三医院住院并治疗的120例AP患者的临床资料,分别进行床旁急性胰腺炎严重度评分(bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis,BISAP)及与急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分Ⅱ(acute physiology and chronic health evaluationⅡ,APACHEⅡ),并绘制受试者工作曲线,比较两者对AP病情严重程度的预测价值.结果:BISAP评分及与APACHEⅡ评分的分值均随着病情的价值、局部并发症、器官衰竭及死亡率的增加而增加,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05).BISAP评分及与APACHEⅡ评分在预测AP患者病情严重程度时,曲线下面积分别为0.821,0.903,前者的敏感度为74.5%,特异度为71.3%,阳性预测值为57.1%,阴性预测值为84.6%,均显著低于APACHEⅡ评分的对应值(分别为87.5%、83.0%、70.8%、90.2%),且差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论:BISAP评分及与APACHEⅡ评分均能对A P患者病情的严重程度进行预测,但前者操作更简单,易于临床推广.展开更多
文摘AIM: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a process with variable involvement of regional tissues or organ systems. Multifactorial scales included the Ranson, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE Ⅱ) systems and Balthazar computed tomography severity index (CTSI). The purpose of this review study was to assess the accuracy of CTSI, Ranson score, and APACHE II score in course and outcome prediction of AP. METHODS: We reviewed 121 patients who underwent helical CT within 48 h after onset of symptoms of a first episode of AP between 1999 and 2003. Fourteen inappropriate subjects were excluded; we reviewed the 107 contrastenhanced CT images to calculate the CTSI. We also reviewed their Ranson and APACHE Ⅱ score. In addition, complications, duration of hospitalization, mortality rate, and other pathology history also were our comparison parameters. RESULTS: We classified 85 patients (79%) as having mild AP (CTSI 〈5) and 22 patients (21%) as having severe AP (CTSI ≥5). In mild group, the mean APACHE II score and Ranson score was 8.6±1.9 and 2.4±1.2, and those of severe group was 10.2±2.1 and 3.1±0.8, respectively. The most common complication was pseudocyst and abscess and it presented in 21 (20%) patients and their CTSI was 5.9±1.4. A CTSI ≥5 significantly correlated with death, complication present, and prolonged length of stay. Patients with a CTSI ≥5 were 15 times to die than those CTSI 〈5, and the prolonged length of stay and complications present were 17 times and 8 times than that in CTSI 〈5, respectively. CONCLUSION: CTSI is a useful tool in assessing the severity and outcome of AP and the CTSI ≥5 is an index in our study. Although Ranson score and APACHE II score also are choices to be the predictors for complications, mortality and the length of stay of AP, the sensitivity of them are lower than CTSI.
文摘目的:探讨并比较不同评分系统对急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)患者病情严重程度预测价值的差异性.方法:回顾分析2011-06/2013-12在辽宁医学院附属第三医院住院并治疗的120例AP患者的临床资料,分别进行床旁急性胰腺炎严重度评分(bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis,BISAP)及与急性生理学及慢性健康状况评分Ⅱ(acute physiology and chronic health evaluationⅡ,APACHEⅡ),并绘制受试者工作曲线,比较两者对AP病情严重程度的预测价值.结果:BISAP评分及与APACHEⅡ评分的分值均随着病情的价值、局部并发症、器官衰竭及死亡率的增加而增加,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05).BISAP评分及与APACHEⅡ评分在预测AP患者病情严重程度时,曲线下面积分别为0.821,0.903,前者的敏感度为74.5%,特异度为71.3%,阳性预测值为57.1%,阴性预测值为84.6%,均显著低于APACHEⅡ评分的对应值(分别为87.5%、83.0%、70.8%、90.2%),且差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论:BISAP评分及与APACHEⅡ评分均能对A P患者病情的严重程度进行预测,但前者操作更简单,易于临床推广.