重症急性胰腺炎APACHEⅡ评分的应用价值

目的探讨APACHEⅡ评分在预测重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)严重度和预后中的作用.方法采用APACHEⅡ评分系统对52例SAP患者进行评分分析. 结果 SAP患者APACHEⅡ评分均值为(16.60±9.07)(8～40)分.其中分值为SAPⅡ级高于SAPⅠ级、死亡组高于存活组(均Ρ< 0.01).随着分值的增高,SAP的预测死亡风险率和实际病死率呈逐渐上升趋势(Ρ<0.01);且后两者之间呈正相关关系 (r=0.91, Ρ<0.01).结论 APACHEⅡ评分系统对评估SAP病情危重程度及预后具有参考价值.     

缺血修饰白蛋白和Ranson评分在急性胰腺炎中的相关性

[摘 要] 目的 探讨血浆缺血修饰白蛋白（IMA）水平与Ranson评分在急性胰腺炎（AP）中的相关性。方法采用回顾性研究方法,选取2013年1月至2015年1月期间宝鸡市中心医院收治的161例AP患者,将其分为重症急性胰腺炎（SAP）和轻症急性胰腺炎（MAP）两组。计算并比较两组患者的临床资料、血常规、血生化、IMA、Ranson评分等指标。采用Spearman检验对IMA水平与Ranson评分之间进行相关性分析。结果（1）SAP组BMI、饮酒率、胰淀粉酶水平、IMA水平、Ranson评分均高于MAP组（P < 0.05）;（2）出现腹腔感染18例,假性囊肿11例,术后出血14例,胰腺坏死12例,器官功能衰竭8例,死亡4例。其中胰腺坏死时,IMA为（90.49±17.83） U/mL,Ranson评分为（4.50±2.39）,与无胰腺坏死患者相比,两指标均显著升高（P < 0.05）;在死亡患者中,IMA为（101.82±23.49） U/mL,Ranson评分为（6.50±2.38）,两指标均高于非死亡患者（P < 0.05）;（3）Spearman相关分析显示,IMA水平与Ranson评分之间呈线性正相关,r=0.846（P < 0.001）。结论 在急性胰腺炎中,IMA与Ranson评分显著相关,IMA对急性胰腺炎严重性和预后具有早期预测价值。     

Ranson评分与Glasgow评分对急性胰腺炎严重程度及预后评估的对比分析

目的探讨Ranson评分与Glasgow评分对急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)疾病严重程度及预后预测价值的差异。方法回顾性地收集自2014年7月至2016年7月230例AP病人的临床资料,结合中国胰腺炎诊治指南(2007)将病人分为轻症胰腺炎(mild acute pancreatitis,MAP)组、重症胰腺炎(severe acute pancreatitis,SAP)组。按照各评分系统相应评分标准对病人进行Ranson评分和Glasgow评分。比较组间病人一般临床资料及Ranson评分、Glasgow评分的差异,ROC曲线比较两评分系统对AP疾病严重程度及预后预测价值的差异。结果 MAP组与SAP组病人一般情况相比差异无统计学意义(P均0.05),而SAP组病人Ranson评分、Glasgow评分结果相对较高,与MAP组相比差异有统计学意义(P均0.05)。Ranson评分预测SAP的敏感性和特异性分别为61.16%和66.52%,Glasgow评分预测SAP的敏感性和特异性分别为44.40%和77.32%,两者预测SAP的曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.69和0.67,组间差异无统计学意义(P0.05);Ranson评分预测AP病人住院期间死亡的敏感性和特异性分别为75.00%和63.55%、Glasgow洋分预测AP病人住院期间死亡的敏感性和特异性分别为62.53%和75.26%,而两者预测AP病人住院期间死亡的AUC分别为0.85和0.66,组间差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论Ranson评分在AP病人疾病严重程度和预后判断方面较Glasgow评分具有更高的稳定性和可信度,值得临床进一步研究证实。     

��̬APACHE �����ֺ�POSSUM��������֢���������������е�����Ӧ��

目的探讨动态APACHEⅡ评分和POSSUM评分在重症急性胰腺炎治疗中联合应用的价值。方法1995～2002年对43例重症急性胰腺炎病人每日进行APACHEⅡ评分，均先予非手术治疗，如评分下降，继续支持治疗，如评分进行性上升，考虑有感染性坏死、腹腔内出血、胃肠道穿孔原因时急诊手术、每次手术后均进行POSSCM评分，并计算术后并发症发生概率和死亡发生概率。结果根据动态评分结果，16例采用非手术治疗，16例单次手术，11例多次手术结论动态，APACHEⅡ评分能较好判断手术时机，POSSUM评分能较好地预测术后并发症、死亡的发生，并能对需再次手术病例起较好的预警作用。     

A comparison of the Ranson, Glasgow, and APACHE II scoring systems to a multiple organ system score in predicting patient outcome in pancreatitis

BACKGROUND: Systems for evaluating acute pancreatitis are useful in hospitalized patients. Traditional systems of evaluation are well established but might be outdated. We propose a Multiple Organ System Score (MOSS) containing data that are more consistently collected and which are accurate in predicting patient outcome. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 49 patients was completed. We determined if the physician obtained all of the variables necessary to calculate Ranson, Glasgow, or APACHE II scores, if these scores were predictive of patient outcome in the form of length of hospital stay (LOS), and if new, more frequently evaluated variables could be used. RESULTS: None of the patients could be assigned complete scores. According to Spearman rank correlation, both Glasgow and MOSS showed correlation with patient outcome when APACHE II and Ranson did not. CONCLUSIONS: Although larger studies should be performed, the MOSS is useful in predicting outcomes of patients with acute pancreatitis.     

APACHE O评分系统对急性胰腺炎预后的评估价值

急性胰腺炎是一种常见的外科急腹症,病情复杂．预后差．APACHE Ⅱ评分系统是目前一较全面的多冈素预后评分系统,但仍存在一定局限性。APACHEO评分系统（APACHEⅡ评分加肥胖指标评分）是近年提出的一种急性胰腺炎预后评分系统日,本文旨在通过比较APACHE O评分与APACHEⅡ评分对急性重症胰腺炎的判断能力,对急性胰腺炎局部、全身并发症及死亡率的预测价值,旨在明确APACHE O评分系统对急性胰腺炎预后的评估价值.     

A modified gastrointestinal failure score for patients with severe acute pancreatitis

Purpose

No consensus has been reached to define gastrointestinal failure (GIF) associated with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). Reintam and colleagues proposed a scoring system of GIF for critically ill patients, but its suitability for patients with SAP is questionable. The present study evaluates a modified GIF score we developed to assess the GIF of patients with SAP.

Methods

The subjects of this study were 52 patients with SAP treated between September 2010 and July 2011. We recorded the Reintam’s GIF score, our modified GIF score, the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score, the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, and other clinical values during the first 3 days after admission. The prognostic value of the modified GIF score, for evaluating the severity and outcomes of SAP, was also assessed.

Results

Compared with the Reintam’s GIF score, the modified GIF score seemed to be more valuable for predicting hospital mortality (the area under curve, AUC 0.915 vs. 0.850), multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) (AUC 0.829 vs. 0.766), and pancreatic infection (AUC 0.796 vs. 0.776). Moreover, combining the modified GIF score and the SOFA or APACHEII scores resulted in more accurate prediction of the prognosis of SAP than either score alone.

Conclusion

The modified GIF score is useful for assessing gastrointestinal system function, which may serve as an early prognostic tool to evaluate the severity and predict the outcomes of SAP.     

Improved prediction of outcome in patients with severe acute pancreatitis by the APACHE II score at 48 hours after hospital admission compared with the APACHE II score at admission. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation

HYPOTHESIS: The 48-hour APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) II score is a better predictor of pancreatic necrosis, organ failure, and mortality in patients with severe acute pancreatitis than the score at hospital admission. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of 125 patients with acute pancreatitis. SETTING: A tertiary public teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Patients with severe acute pancreatitis as defined by 3 or more Ranson criteria or a hospital stay of longer than 6 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pancreatic necrosis, organ failure, and mortality. RESULTS: A significant association was found between the 48-hour score and the presence of pancreatic necrosis (P<.001), organ failure (P =.001), and death (P<.001). By contrast, the APACHE II score at admission was significantly associated only with the presence of organ failure (P =.007). Deteriorating APACHE II scores over 48 hours were significantly associated with a fatal outcome (P =.03). The combined APACHE II score (defined as the sum of the admission and 48-hour scores) was significantly higher among nonsurvivors than survivors (P<.001), and was strongly associated with the presence of pancreatic necrosis (P =.001) and organ failure (P<.001). The 48-hour and combined scores accurately predicted outcome in 93% of the patients compared with 75% by the admission score. CONCLUSIONS: The 48-hour APACHE II score has improved predictive value compared with the admission score for identifying patients with severe acute pancreatitis who have a poor outcome. A deteriorating APACHE II score at 48 hours after admission may identify patients at risk for an adverse outcome.     

Invalidation of the APACHE II scoring system for patients with acute trauma.

The APACHE II scoring system has been promulgated as a useful tool in the assessment of the severity of injury and prognosis for acutely ill patients. The physiologic basis for stratification is weighted toward older patients with chronic medical conditions. Recently, the APACHE II system has been proposed as a method for determining diagnosis related group (DRG) reimbursement for individual trauma patients. The present study applied the APACHE II scoring system to 280 patients with blunt or penetrating trauma who had documented systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg. Fifty-seven (20%) died of their injuries within the first 24 hours. APACHE II scores were recorded both in the emergency room (ED) and at 24 hours following admission. Injury Severity Scores (ISS), Revised Trauma Scores (RTS), and TRISSCAN were calculated. The APACHE II (n = 223) recorded at 24 hours (2.5 +/- 0.2) was significantly less than that recorded in the ED (6.6 +/- 0.3, p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney analysis). Using regression analysis, there was no correlation between APACHE II and ISS if recorded in the ED (r2 = 0.06) or 24 hours following admission (r2 = 0.08). APACHE II also demonstrated a poor correlation with the length of hospital stay (r2 = 0.03 [ED], = 0.19 [24 hours]). Whereas APACHE II may be helpful in defining severity of disease among patients with acute-on-chronic medical conditions, the classification lacks an anatomic component, which is essential to assess the magnitude of acute injury in patients who are typically otherwise healthy.     

Prediction of outcome in acute pancreatitis: a comparative study of APACHE II, clinical assessment and multiple factor scoring systems

The APACHE II severity of disease classification system has been examined prospectively in 160 patients with acute pancreatitis. Using clinical and simple laboratory data APACHE II was able to provide useful discrimination between uncomplicated, complicated and fatal attacks within a few hours of admission. Peak APACHE II scores (recorded during the first 3 days) had a prognostic accuracy similar to the multiple factor scoring systems, but then incurred a similar delay. Patients could be graded according to their risk of death or of developing a major complication; no deaths occurred in patients with a peak APACHE II score less than 10. APACHE II can be repeated daily, uncomplicated attacks demonstrating falling scores in association with clinical improvement, in contrast to the rising scores associated with clinical deterioration in those dying early. APACHE II appears to reflect any continuing disease activity and may prove a useful means of monitoring the course of the illness and response to therapy.     

重症急性胰腺炎的严重度与风险评估

重症急性胰腺炎发病急,病情进展迅速,病死率高.为了能够更及时合理地进行临床干预,使疾病的治疗更行之有效,本文简要介绍了通过临床表现、危险因素、评分系统、影像学检查及实验室检查等方面对重症急性胰腺炎的严重度与风险进行评估.     

Cholangitis score: a scoring system to predict severe cholangitis in gallstone pancreatitis

Abstract. Background/Purposes: Emergency biliary decompression and stone extraction are mandatory for patients with gallstone pancreatitis who have ampullary stone impaction or persistent stones and pus in the bile duct (severe cholangitis). The aim of this study was to devise a simple scoring system for the prediction of complicating severe cholangitis in gallstone pancreatitis. Methods: Clinical signs, laboratory data, and ultrasonography (US) findings at the time of admission, and the bile duct pathology at the time of bile duct exploration, were reviewed in 66 patients with gallstone pancreatitis. Variables which discriminated 26 patients with bile duct stones from 40 without were defined as predictive factors of bile duct stones. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the optimal cutoff values of numerical variables. One point was allocated to each predictive factor, and the total score was defined as the cholangitis score (CS). Bile duct pathology identified at the time of bile duct exploration was graded into three categories: mild, moderate, and severe cholangitis. A threshold value of the CS, claimed to be predictive of severe cholangitis, was determined by using the ROC curve. Results: The scoring system consisted of four predictive factors: (1) pyrexia (temperature ≧38 °C), (2) elevated serum bilirubin (≧2.2 mg/dl), (3) dilated bile duct (≧11 mm maximum diameter on US), and (4) bile duct stones detected on US. The scoring system predicted severe cholangitis with 92% sensitivity and 98% specificity in patients with scores of three or four points. Conclusions: Patients with gallstone pancreatitis who meet three or four of the above predictive factors at the time of admission are likely to have severe cholangitis, and should be rapidly treated by biliary decompression and stone extraction. Received: July 13, 2001 / Accepted: November 16, 2001     

A simple tool for mortality prediction in burns patients: APACHE III score and FTSA

Prediction of outcome for patients with major thermal injury is important to inform clinical decision making, alleviate individual suffering and improve hospital resource allocation. Age and burn size are widely accepted as the two largest contributors of mortality amongst burns patients. The APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) III-j score, which incorporates patient age, is also useful for mortality prediction, of intensive care populations. Validation for the burns specific cohort is unclear.     

Severity assessment and prognosis definition in patients with the acute pancreatitis

Investigation of white blood cell and lymphocyte concentration and white blood cell intoxication index (WBCII), integral systems APACHE II and Ranson reliably reflected the severity of clinical status in patients with acute pancreatitis and had prognostic value. At the same time white blood cell concentration and indices of APACHE II reflected to lesser extent the severity of clinical status, and white blood cell concentration didn't have any prognostic value. Application of lymphocyte concentration and WBCII can be recommended in urgent surgery for evaluation of clinical status and prognosis at early stages of diagnostics and treatment of acute pancreatitis.     

Integration of APACHE II and III scoring systems in extremely high risk patients with acute renal failure treated by dialysis

OBJECTIVE: Acute physiology, age, chronic health evaluation II and III (APACHE II and III) scoring systems obtained on the day of the initiation of dialysis were compared the mortality rate among in critically ill patients with acute renal failure requiring dialysis. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Intensive care units in a tertiary care university hospital in Taiwan. PATIENTS: 100 patients diagnosed with acute renal failure and requiring dialysis were admitted to intensive care units from January 1997 through December 1998. INTERVENTIONS: Information deemed necessary to compute the APACHE II and APACHE III score on the day of dialysis initiation was collected. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The overall hospital mortality rate was 71%. The relationship between APACHE II and APACHE III scores for patients was linear and correlated significantly in all subgroups. Goodness-of-fit was good for APACHE II and APACHE III models. Both reported good areas under receiver operating characteristic curve. Death in most patients was related to a higher APACHE II or APACHE III score during the 24 h immediately preceding the initiation of acute hemodialysis. Our results indicated a significant rise in mortality rates associated with higher APACHE II or III scores among all patients. Although less than 60%, the mortality rates markedly increased extent when APACHE II score of 24 or higher or APACHE III score above 90 had mortality rates exceeding 85%. CONCLUSION: Both predictive models demonstrated a similar degree of overall goodness-of-fit. Although APACHE II showed better calibration, APACHE III was better in terms of discrimination. The prediction accuracy of the APACHE II score for extremely high-risk patients is further enhanced by specific utility of APACHE III scoring as a second prediction model when the AII score is 24 or higher.     

重症急性胰腺炎手术时机的再探讨

目的 在改变早期手术为积极、有效、综合的非手术治疗的基础上．进一步探讨重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)的手术时机，以降低死亡率。方法 对1990至1997年收治的143例SAP进行分析．所有病人均在ICU行监护及支持治疗。前期(1990～1994年)，对胰腺感染(包括感染性胰腺坏死或液体积聚及胰腺脓肿)均急诊行引流及清创手术；近期(1995～1997年)采取延期手术的方法，将胰腺感染局限或胰腺脓肿作为手术指征。结果 胰腺感染局限或脓肿者的手术次数及手术死亡率明显低于有感染性胰腺坏死或液体积聚立即手术者(P<0．05)。结论 胰腺感染局限时手术治疗的效果优于胰腺感染未局限时手术，常一次手术成功。     

重症急性胰腺炎58例临床分析

目的探讨重症急性胰腺炎的临床特点及有效治疗方法,以提高对重症急性胰腺炎的诊治和管理水平。方法回顾性分析58例重症急性胰腺炎患者的临床资料,并分析其诊治的临床效果。结果总并发症发生率44.8%(26/58),总病死率29.3%(17/58),总治愈率70.7%(41/58),并发症发生率:保守治疗组为46.9%(15/32,外科手术治疗组为42.3%(11/26),P>0.05;病死率:保守治疗组31.3%(10/32),外科手术治疗组为26.9%(7/26),P>0.05;治愈率:保守治疗组为71.9%(23/32)。外科手术组为69.2%(18/26),P>0.05。结论正确把握重症急性胰腺炎的治疗时机与指征,合理选择治疗方式,对于决定重症急性胰腺炎的预后至关重要。