目的比较BISAP评分与Ranson’s评分在预测急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)的严重度及病死率方面的运用价值。方法以2007年6月到2010年10月入住本院的AP患者为研究对象,资料完整诊断明确者共有652例,采用BISAP(the bedside index for ...目的比较BISAP评分与Ranson’s评分在预测急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)的严重度及病死率方面的运用价值。方法以2007年6月到2010年10月入住本院的AP患者为研究对象,资料完整诊断明确者共有652例,采用BISAP(the bedside index for severity in AP)评分与Ranson’s评分比较,受试者工作特性曲线(receiver-operating curve,ROC)行回顾性分析,在预计AP的严重度及病死率方面的差异。结果在652例患者中,通过发病48 h内出现器官衰竭确定为重症者108例(16.6%),共死亡21例(3.2%),BISAP评分≥3分的44例(6.7%),入院48 h内Ranson’s评分≥3分者213例(32.7%)。BISAP与Ranson’s评分二者在评价预后方面的差异有统计学意义,其中严重度的曲线下面积BISAP、Ranson’s评分系统分别为:0.846(95%CI 0.808～0.883),0.771(95%CI 0.722～0.820);死亡率分别是:0.809(95%CI 0.699～0.920),0.762(95%CI 0.638～0.885)。结论 BISAP评分系统在急性胰腺炎早期,针对患者严重度、死亡率的预后评估的准确性明显高于Ranson’s评分,是目前最简易、及时、连续性强并且对患者而言经济花费少的评分系统,可在临床广泛推广。展开更多
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that addition of obesity score to the APACHE-Ⅱ system can lead to more accurate prediction of severity of acute pancreatitis. However there is scanty information on the usefulness of...BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that addition of obesity score to the APACHE-Ⅱ system can lead to more accurate prediction of severity of acute pancreatitis. However there is scanty information on the usefulness of the combined APACHE-O scoring system in Asian patients. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of Ranson, APACHE-Ⅱ and APACHE-O systems in assessing severity of acute pancreatitis in a local Chinese population. METHODS: One hundred and one consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis were prospectively studied. Body mass index (BMI) was measured on admission. Ranson score, APACHE-Ⅱ and APACHE-O scores were recorded on admission and at 48 hours. By adopting the cut-off levels and definitions advocated in the Atlanta consensus for severe disease, the diagnostic accuracy of the three scoring systems was compared by the area under the curve (AUC) under the receiver operator characteristic curve. RESULTS: Of the 101 patients, 12 (11.9%) patients suffered from severe pancreatitis. Obesity was uncommon and only two patients (2.0%) had BMI >30. Eighty-two (81.2%) patients were normal weight (BMI≤25) whereas 17 (16.8%) were overweight ( BMI 25-30 ). Overweight or obesity (BMI >25) was not associated with severe pancreatitis (P= 0.40). The AUC for admission scores of Ranson, APACHE-Ⅱ, and APACHE-O systems was 0. 549, 0. 904 and 0. 904, respectively. The AUC for 48-hour scores of Ranson, APACHE-Ⅱ and APACHE-O systems was 0.808, 0.955 and 0.951, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The APACHE-Ⅱ scoring system is more accurate than the Ranson scoring system of the prediction of severity in acute pancreatitis. Addition of obesity score does not significantly improve the predictive accuracy of the APACHE-Ⅱ system in our local population with a low prevalence of obesity.展开更多
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
目的比较BISAP评分与Ranson评分在预测急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)的严重程度、死亡结局方面的应用价值。方法运用BISAP(bedside index for severity in AP)评分与Ranson评分对124例AP患者进行回顾性评分,比较轻症组与重症组、...目的比较BISAP评分与Ranson评分在预测急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)的严重程度、死亡结局方面的应用价值。方法运用BISAP(bedside index for severity in AP)评分与Ranson评分对124例AP患者进行回顾性评分,比较轻症组与重症组、死亡组与存活组的评分差异,比较高分组与低分组之间重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)发生率、病死率的差异。结果重症组与轻症组、死亡组与存活组的BISAP及Ranson评分差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。对于Ranson高分组(≥3分)和低分组(<3分)患者SAP发生率间差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),两组病死率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。对于BISAP高分组(≥3分)与低分组(<3分)的SAP及病死率间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论 BISAP评分与Ranson评分对于判断AP严重程度均具有重要参考意义。BISAP简便易行,能够早期对AP患者进行死亡风险评估。展开更多
文摘BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that addition of obesity score to the APACHE-Ⅱ system can lead to more accurate prediction of severity of acute pancreatitis. However there is scanty information on the usefulness of the combined APACHE-O scoring system in Asian patients. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of Ranson, APACHE-Ⅱ and APACHE-O systems in assessing severity of acute pancreatitis in a local Chinese population. METHODS: One hundred and one consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis were prospectively studied. Body mass index (BMI) was measured on admission. Ranson score, APACHE-Ⅱ and APACHE-O scores were recorded on admission and at 48 hours. By adopting the cut-off levels and definitions advocated in the Atlanta consensus for severe disease, the diagnostic accuracy of the three scoring systems was compared by the area under the curve (AUC) under the receiver operator characteristic curve. RESULTS: Of the 101 patients, 12 (11.9%) patients suffered from severe pancreatitis. Obesity was uncommon and only two patients (2.0%) had BMI >30. Eighty-two (81.2%) patients were normal weight (BMI≤25) whereas 17 (16.8%) were overweight ( BMI 25-30 ). Overweight or obesity (BMI >25) was not associated with severe pancreatitis (P= 0.40). The AUC for admission scores of Ranson, APACHE-Ⅱ, and APACHE-O systems was 0. 549, 0. 904 and 0. 904, respectively. The AUC for 48-hour scores of Ranson, APACHE-Ⅱ and APACHE-O systems was 0.808, 0.955 and 0.951, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The APACHE-Ⅱ scoring system is more accurate than the Ranson scoring system of the prediction of severity in acute pancreatitis. Addition of obesity score does not significantly improve the predictive accuracy of the APACHE-Ⅱ system in our local population with a low prevalence of obesity.
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.
文摘目的比较BISAP评分与Ranson评分在预测急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)的严重程度、死亡结局方面的应用价值。方法运用BISAP(bedside index for severity in AP)评分与Ranson评分对124例AP患者进行回顾性评分,比较轻症组与重症组、死亡组与存活组的评分差异,比较高分组与低分组之间重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)发生率、病死率的差异。结果重症组与轻症组、死亡组与存活组的BISAP及Ranson评分差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。对于Ranson高分组(≥3分)和低分组(<3分)患者SAP发生率间差异有统计学意义(P<0.01),两组病死率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。对于BISAP高分组(≥3分)与低分组(<3分)的SAP及病死率间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论 BISAP评分与Ranson评分对于判断AP严重程度均具有重要参考意义。BISAP简便易行,能够早期对AP患者进行死亡风险评估。
