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.     

急性胰腺炎不同评分体系在新分类标准中的再评价

目的重新评价BISAP、APACHEⅡ、CTSI等评分体系对急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)新分类内重度急性胰腺炎(severe acute pancreatitis,SAP)的评价价值。方法收集2013年9月至2014年10月北京协和医院收治的136例AP患者临床资料及入院BISAP、CTSI、APACHEⅡ、SIRS、Glasgow、Ranson评分,评估各评分体系与新分类的相关性,用ROC曲线分析各评分预测病情严重程度的准确性,并评价其对预后的判断价值。结果 (1)136例AP患者中,轻度急性胰腺炎组50例(36.8%),中度重症胰腺炎组61例(44.9%),重症胰腺炎组25例(18.4%)。(2)BISAP、APACHEⅡ、CTSI评分与疾病严重程度相关(P0.05)。(3)BISAP、APACHEⅡ和CTSI评分对新分类中SAP预测准确性AUC值分别为0.904、0.942和0.823,最佳预测值分别为3分(敏感度84%,特异度86.5%,阳性似然比6.216,阴性似然比0.185)、10分(敏感度96%,特异度86.5%,阳性似然比7.104,阴性似然比0.046)和4分(敏感度96%,特异度56.8%,阳性似然比2.220,阴性似然比0.070)。(4)BISAP评分与疾病复发相关(P0.05)。结论 BISAP、APACHEⅡ、CTSI评分与新分类相关性较好,其中BISAP、APACHEⅡ评分对SAP的预测最为准确,BISAP≥3分或APACHEⅡ≥10分提示SAP。     

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.     

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。     

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。     

早期中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值联合载脂蛋白A-Ⅰ对急性胰腺炎严重程度的预测价值

目的探讨中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值(NLR)联合载脂蛋白A-Ⅰ(ApoA-Ⅰ)水平对急性胰腺炎(AP)病情严重程度的预测价值。方法回顾性研究2015年1月—2019年12月西南医科大学附属医院收治的460例AP患者。其中轻型急性胰腺炎(MAP) 250例,中度重型急性胰腺炎(MSAP) 166例,重型急性胰腺炎(SAP) 44例。收集AP患者的基本资料、实验室指标[入院24 h内的中性粒细胞计数(NEU)、淋巴细胞计数(LYM)、血清TG、血清TC、HDL-C、LDL-C,载脂蛋白包括ApoA-Ⅰ及ApoB]、系统评分(Ranson、BISAP、MCTSI评分)。计量资料多组间比较采用单因素方差分析或Kruskal-Wallis H秩和检验。将单因素分析中有统计学意义的变量进行logistic回归分析。Spearman相关性分析用于评价数据间的相关性。受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)用于评价指标的诊断效能,MedCalc软件检验其效能差异有无统计学意义。结果 NLR、ApoA-Ⅰ水平在不同严重程度AP组间差异有统计学意义(χ~2=64.124、F=40.277,P值均0.001)。入院时NLR与亚特兰大分级、Ranson评分、MCTSI评分和BISAP评分呈正相关(r值分别为0.370、0.129、0.260、0.122,P值均0.05); ApoA-Ⅰ水平与亚特兰大分级、Ranson评分、MCTSI评分和BISAP评分呈负相关(r值分别为-0.358、-0.220、-0.297、-0.251,P值均0.05)。NLR是非MAP的独立危险因素[OR=1.104,95%CI:1.070～1.140,P 0.001],ApoA-Ⅰ是非MAP的独立保护因素(OR=0.138,95%CI:0.070～0.264,P 0.001); NLR是SAP的独立危险因素(OR=1.163,95%CI:1.107～1.222,P 0.001),ApoA-Ⅰ是SAP的独立保护因素(OR=0.013,95%CI:0.003～0.056,P 0.001)。NLR预测非MAP的AUC=0.700,95%CI:0.656～0.742,P 0.001; ApoA-Ⅰ预测非MAP的AUC=0.684,95%CI:0.640～0.726,P 0.001,联合预测非MAP的AUC=0.748,95%CI:0.706～0.787,P 0.001。两指标联合对非MAP的预测价值优于单一指标(Z值分别为3.439、2.462,P值均0.05)。NLR预测SAP的AUC=0.752,95%CI:0.710～0.791,P 0.001; ApoA-Ⅰ预测SAP的AUC=0.797,95%CI:0.757～0.833,P 0.001,联合预测SAP的AUC=0.857,95%CI:0.822～0.888,P 0.001。两指标联合对SAP的预测价值优于单一指标(Z值分别为3.171、2.630,P值均0.05)。结论入院早期NLR联合Apo A-Ⅰ可作为预测AP严重程度的良好指标。     

BISAP、APACHEⅡ、Ranson评分在预测急性胰腺炎预后中价值对比分析

目的对比分析床边指数(BISAP)、急性生理和慢性健康评估(APACHEII)及Ranson评分对急性胰腺炎(AP)预后的预测价值。方法以广西医科大学第三附属医院收治的58例AP患者为研究对象,所有患者入院后及时行BISAP、APACHEⅡ及Ranson评分,比较三种评分标准对急性胰腺炎严重程度及预后预测价值。结果轻度、重度AP患者BISAP评分[(1.48±0.76)vs(2.72±1.81)]分、APACHEⅡ评分[(2.82±2.18)vs(10.71±2.87)]分、Ranson评分[(1.68±0.35)vs(4.56±2.32)]分比较差异有统计学意义(P0.001)。58例AP患者中预后不良8例,预后良好50例,两组三种评分比较差异显著(P0.05)。BISAP评分对AP严重程度、持续器官功能不全、死亡预测敏感度分别为0.76、0.65、0.64;APACHEⅡ评分对AP严重程度、持续器官功能不全、死亡患者预测敏感度分别为0.72、0.78、0.94;Ranson评分对AP严重程度、持续器官功能不全、死亡患者预测敏感度分别为0.70、0.71、0.72。结论三种评分标准在预测AP严重程度上类似,但在持续器官功能不全、死亡上APACHEⅡ评分预测价值最大,临床根据患者情况合理使用。     

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。     

不同评分系统对判断急性胰腺炎病情及预后的比较研究

目的比较PANC3、SIRSS、HAPS、Ranson’s、CTSI评分对急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)病情严重程度的评估价值,为AP诊治、改善预后提供临床依据。方法回顾性分析昆明医科大学第二附属医院消化内科2013年1月至2016年12月收治的121例AP患者临床资料,计算PANC3、SIRSS、HAPS、Ranson’s、CTSI评分,绘制受试者工作特征曲线(ROC),比较各评分对SAP、局部并发症、全身并发症、死亡的预测价值。结果 MAP组、MSAP组及SAP组5种评分均数比较,差异均有统计学意义(P均0.05),SAP组分值显著高于MAP组及MSAP组;PANC3、SIRSS、HAPS、Ranson’s、CTSI评分与AP病情严重程度有显著相关性(P0.05),HAPS评分与SAP无相关性(P0.05),HAPS评分预测MAP的准确度为90.5%。对预测SAP方面,PANC3评分AUC值、约登指数、敏感度高于其他评分。在预测AP局部并发症方面,CTSI评分AUC值、约登指数、敏感度和特异度高于其他评分。在预测AP全身并发症和死亡方面,Ranson’s评分AUC值、约登指数均高于其他评分。在评估局部并发症、全身并发症、死亡的发生率方面,PANC3≥2分、SIRSS≥2分、Ranson’s≥3分、CTSI≥4分组所占例数均显著高于PANC32分、SIRSS2分、Ranson’s3分、CTSI4分组。结论 Ranson’s评分对预测AP全身并发症和死亡率的诊断价值及准确度高于其他评分,在预测AP局部并发症中CTSI评分诊断价值有显著优势,PANC3评分对预测SAP诊断价值优于其他评分,HAPS对评价MAP准确度更高。     

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。     

Predicting severity of acute pancreatitis

Severity stratification is a critical issue in acute pancreatitis that strongly influences diagnostic and therapeutic decision making. According to the widely used Atlanta classification, "severe" disease comprises various local and systemic complications that are associated with an increased risk of mortality. However, results from recent clinical studies indicate that these complications vary in their effect on outcome, and many are not necessarily life threatening on their own. Therefore, "severe," as defined by Atlanta, must be distinguished from "prognostic," aiming at nonsurvival. In the first week after disease onset, pancreatitis-related organ failure is the preferred variable for predicting severity and prognosis because it outweighs morphologic complications. Contrast-enhanced CT and MRI allow for accurate stratification of local severity beyond the first week after symptom onset. Among the biochemical markers, C-reactive protein is still the parameter of choice to assess attack severity, although prognostic estimation is not possible. Other markers, including pancreatic protease activation peptides, interleukins-6 and -8, and polymorphonuclear elastase are useful early indicators of severity. Procalcitonin is one of the most promising single markers for assessment of major complications and prognosis throughout the disease course.     

Predictors of severity of acute pancreatitis

This article summarizes the sensitivities, specificities, and predictive values of five types of predictors of severity of acute pancreatitis: the clinician's assessment, Ranson and modified Glasgow criteria, peritoneal tap, computed tomographic scan, and individual laboratory tests.     

Predictors of severity and necrosis in acute pancreatitis

C-reactive protein remains the single standard biochemical marker for predicting the severity of AP. Because the combination of clinical-physiological scores and CRP provide good information at 48 hours, research has focused on the predictive ability of various markers when applied in the initial 24 hours after admission to the hospital. After detailed review of the literature, the authors conclude that there is no single tool that serves as the optimal predictor of severity. There are, however, data that support the use of certain tests to improve upon the clinician's early predictive ability on the subsequent course of AP. These include an APACHE II score greater than 7 and IL-6 at the time of admission, and urine TAP, urine trypsinogen-2, and serum PMN elastase at 24 hours (Table 4). These markers only will be able to help the clinician's predictive ability if they can be performed locally and if the results can be available ina timely manner. Future research should focus on promising markers such as procalcitonin, IL-8, IL-I ra, sTNFR, CAPAP, PLA-2, novel markers, and the combined use of more than one marker. The conventional research approach in predicting severity used in the last 15 years has limitations and appears to have reached its maximal potential. Novel conceptions and approaches, such as identification of genetic polymorphisms that predispose to severe course and complications of AP or other approaches are needed for a quantum step forward.     

N-acetylcysteine decreases severity of acute pancreatitis in mice

Oxidative stress plays a major role in the early stage of acute pancreatitis. This study assessed the effects of N-acetylcysteine (NAC), a reduced glutathione (GSH) provider and a direct scavenger of reactive oxygen intermediates, in the course of acute pancreatitis in mice. Acute pancreatitis (AP) was induced by intraperitoneal (i.p.) injections of cerulein. Mice received NAC (1,000 mg/kg, i.p.) every 3 h, starting either 1 h before the first cerulein injection (prophylactic group) or 1 h after the first cerulein injection (therapeutic group), or i.p. saline injections for controls. Severity of AP was evaluated by histology, serum hydrolase levels, and serum and intrapancreatic levels of MCP-1 and interleukin 6 (IL-6). Pancreatic conjugated dienes and intrapancreatic and intrahepatic GSH levels were measured to assess the local and systemic oxidative processes. Acute pancreatitis was also induced with a CDE diet in controls and mice receiving either both NAC ad libidum in drinking water and 1,000 mg/kg i.p. injection once daily. The severity of pulmonary lesions was assessed by arterial blood gases (pO2) and intrapulmonary myeloperoxidase (MPO content) measurements as well as the survival of mice. The severity of cerulein-induced AP was significantly decreased in the prophylactic group compared with the therapeutic and control groups. Prophylactic administration of NAC also decreased the intrapancreatic levels of conjugated dienes compared with controls. The intrapancreatic and systemic release of MCP- 1 and IL-6 was also decreased in the prophylactic group 3 and 6 hours after AP induction. In addition, NAC pretreatment also reduced hepatic IL-6 production at 3 and 6 hours after starting cerulein challenge. In CDE-induced AP, the severity of lung injury (hypoxemia, MPO content) was decreased, and survival was improved by NAC. NAC administered in a prophylactic protocol limits the severity of experimental acute pancreatitis in mice, as well as its systemic complications and related mortality.