急性胰腺炎严重程度临床应用评分进展

急性胰腺炎是消化系统常见疾病之一,包括急性轻型胰腺炎及急性重症胰腺炎。重症者病情凶险,死亡率高。早期发现疾病重症趋势能更好地指导临床治疗。本文就急性胰腺炎严重程度的临床应用评分进展进行综述。     

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。     

BISAPG评分对急性胰腺炎严重程度的预测价值

目的 探讨急性胰腺炎严重程度床边指数(BISAP)评分联合空腹血糖(fasting blood glucose, FBG)水平(BISAPG)对急性胰腺炎(AP)严重程度的预测价值。方法 回顾性分析2020年8月至2022年8月在武汉大学人民医院确诊为AP的患者264例,其中诊断为重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)的患者96例,非重症急性胰腺炎(NSAP)168例。收集患者临床相关数据、实验室数据、BISAP评分和入院24小时内FBG。采用多因素Logistic回归模型分析SAP发生的危险因素。用Spearman相关分析法分析BISAP评分和FBG之间的关系。采用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)评估BISAP评分、FBG及BISAPG评分对AP严重程度的预测价值。用校准曲线以及决策曲线分析分别评估BISAPG评分拟合度和临床实用性。结果 SAP组Alb、A/G、RBC值均小于NSAP组,FBG、WBC、AMY、LIPA、PCT、CRP及BISAP评分均大于NSAP组(P<0.05),两组在TG、BMI指数、性别间无统计学差异(P>0.05)。多因素分析显示,BISAP评分及入院24小时内...     

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。     

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.     

红细胞分布宽度-白蛋白比值联合BISAP评分对急性胰腺炎严重程度及死亡率的预测价值

目的 探讨红细胞分布宽度(RDW)与血清白蛋白(ALB)比值联合急性胰腺炎床边严重程度指数(BISAP)对急性胰腺炎(AP)严重程度及30 d死亡率的预测价值。方法 对2017年1月至2022年7月海安市人民医院收治的321例AP患者进行回顾性分析,确定AP的严重程度。通过受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线比较RDW/ALB、BISAP评分及两者联合对AP严重程度及30 d死亡率的预测价值。结果 重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)占所有患者的18.7%(60/321),30 d内总死亡率为4.7%(15/321)。SAP组患者心率、呼吸频率、血糖、血清AST、ALT、尿素氮、血肌酐、RDW、血淀粉酶及BISAP评分均显著高于非SAP组(P <0.05),而血小板计数、血钙浓度和ALB显著低于非SAP组(P<0.05)。ROC曲线展示BISAP评分、RDW/ALB及两者联合预测SAP的曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.751(95%CI 0.681～0.822),0.792(95%CI 0.726～0.858)和0.826(95%CI 0.760～0.892)。BISAP评分、RDW/ALB及联...     

TyG指数、GLR联合BISAP评分对高甘油三酯血症性急性胰腺炎严重程度的早期预测价值分析

目的 分析甘油三酯-葡萄糖(TyG)指数、葡萄糖与淋巴细胞比值(GLR)联合急性胰腺炎严重程度床边指数(BISAP)评分对高甘油三酯血症性急性胰腺炎(HTG-AP)严重程度的早期预测价值。方法 回顾性分析2018年5月至2023年5月武汉市第三医院收治的166例HTG-AP患者的临床资料,其中非重症组113例,重症组53例。比较两组入院24 h内采集的临床资料,采用多因素logistic回归分析重症HTG-AP发生的独立影响因素,采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析TyG指数、GLR、BISAP评分预测重症HTG-AP的效能。结果 重症组高血压病、糖尿病人数比例大于非重症组,住院时间长于非重症组,淋巴细胞(LYM)、钙(Ca²⁺)水平低于非重症组,红细胞体积分布宽度(RDW)、D-二聚体(DDI)、C反应蛋白(CRP)、空腹血糖(FPG)、总胆固醇(TC)、甘油三酯(TG)、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(HDL-C)、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)、TyG指数、GLR水平及BISAP评分高于非重症组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。多因素logistic回归分析...     

腹内高压与急性胰腺炎严重程度的相关性分析

目的探讨腹内高压(intra-abdominal hypertension,IAH)与急性胰腺炎(acutepancreatitis,AP)疾病严重程度的相关性,为临床诊治提供参考。方法选择AP患者58例,根据APACHEⅡ评分分为轻症急性胰腺炎(minor acute pancreatitis,MAP)组和重症急性胰腺炎(severe acut epancreatitis,SAP)组。监测腹内压(intra-abdominal pressure,IAP),比较两组IAH发生率,分析APACHEⅡ评分与IAP相关性;统计两组患者住院时间、并发症发生率、病死率等临床指标。将SAP组患者分为IAH组和非IAH组,比较两组临床指标情况。结果 MAP组患者IAH发生率为0.00%,SAP组患者IAH发生率为65.22%,差异有统计学意义(P0.01)。两组住院时间、并发症发生率及病死率比较,差异有统计学意义(P0.01)。SAP患者IAP与APACHEⅡ评分明显相关(r=0.769,P=0.043)。结论 IAH显著影响AP患者严重程度,SAP患者APACHEⅡ评分与IAP明显相关,SAP患者应全程监测IAP,做到早期发现与治疗,控制腹腔压力,有利于改善MAP情况、状态及脏器功能。     

Ranson和APACHEⅡ评分对重症急性胰腺炎患者死亡风险的评估价值

目的 探讨急性生理学和慢性健康状况评分系统(APACHEⅡ)和Ranson评分系统对重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)患者死亡评估价值.方法 收集四川大学华西医院收入的SAP患者185例入院后临床资料,行24 h内Ranson评分和APACHEⅡ评分,分别计算死亡组和生存组的两种评分及存活概率.分析两种评分系统的相关性,采用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线)下面积评价二者对死亡的结果评估.结果 185例SAP患者Ranson评分为1～10(4.72±2.18)分;入院24 h内APACHEⅡ评分为2～33(12.36±6.39)分;死亡组Ranson评分为3～10(6.53±1.74)分,APACHEⅡ评分为5～33(19.32±5.86)分;与生存患者的评分比较差异有显著性(P<0.05).Ranson评分、APACHEⅡ评分进行Spearman等级直线相关分析见2项评分间均呈正相关(r=0.61)(P值均为0.00).2个评分系统对SAP患者结局为死亡和生存进行ROC曲线分析后可以看出,Ranson评分、APACHEⅡ评分均可以预测SAP的死亡概率(P=0.00),但2项评分差异无特异性(P>0.05).诊断阈值分别为5和14.结论 Ranson评分和APACHEⅡ评分可以很好地预测SAP患者的死亡概率,预测价值相似.临床亟需新的预测评分系统出现.     

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...     

BISAP联合凝血指标对急性胰腺炎严重程度评估的意义

目的:研究BISAP(bedside index for severity in AP)评分联合凝血指标对急性胰腺炎(acute pancreatitis,AP)严重程度评估的意义.方法:回顾2008-2012年中国医科大学附属盛京医院收治的166例AP患者的临床资料.对所有患者进行入院24h的BISAP、APACHE-Ⅱ评分,48h的Ranson’s及发病72h内CTSI评分,入院24h内抽取静脉血测定部分凝血活酶活化时间、凝血酶原时间、D-二聚体(D-dimer)、纤维蛋白原及血小板水平.分析凝血指标及BISAP评分对AP严重程度判断的意义,并通过ROC曲线分析二者联合对AP严重程度评估的意义.结果:多因素Logistic回归分析发现,D-dimer对AP严重程度评估具有独立预测意义;随着BISAP评分增加,SAP的比率增加;BISAP评分系统评估AP严重程度以2为临界点时Youden指数最大(0.541),ROC曲线下面积为0.836(0.776-0.896),并不逊于传统评分系统;BISAP评分系统联合D-dimer能更好地评估AP患者的严重程度.结论:BISAP是临床判断AP轻重程度的简单有效的指标,将BISAP与D-dimer联合应用使得对AP严重程度的评估更为准确.     

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.     

Diagnosis and predicting severity in acute pancreatitis]

Acute pancreatitis is an inflammatory disease of pancreas which come from various etiologies. The pathologic spectrum of acute pancreatitis varies from mild edematous pancreatitis to severe necrotizing pancreatitis. To diagnose and to predict severity in acute pancreatitis, various biochemical marker, imaging modalities and clinical scoring system are needed. Ideal parameters should be accurate, be performed easily and enable earlier assess. Unfortunately, no ideal parameter is available up to date. Serum amylase and lipase are still useful for the diagnosis but meaningless in predicting severity. C-reactive protein and inflammatory cytokines are promising single parameters to predict the severity. CT finding is also an useful determinant of severity, but is expensive and is delayed in assessment.     

Balthazar computed tomography severity index is superior to Ranson criteria and APACHE Ⅱ scoring system in predicting acute pancreatitis outcome

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.     

Balthazar computed tomography severity index is superior to Ranson criteria and APACHE Ⅱ scoring system in predicting acute pancreatitis outcome

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 contrast-enhanced 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 > or =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 > or =5 significantly correlated with death, complication present, and prolonged length of stay. Patients with a CTSI > or =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 > or =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.     

APACHE system is better than Ranson system in the prediction of severity of acute pancreatitis

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.