Acute Pancreatitis severity scoring index: Prospective study to identify determinants in Pakistan

  • Tanveer Hussain faculty member rmu
  • Muhammad Hanif
  • Ramlah Ghazanfor
  • Sarmad Arslan
  • Ibia Nawaz
  • Muhammad Umar
Keywords: Acute Pancreatitis, Ranson’s Criteria, Modified Ranson criteria, BISAP criteria, APACHE II criteria.

Abstract

Introduction: The purpose of the study was to compare different parameters used in Ranson’s Criteria, Bedside Index of Severity in Acute Pancreatitis (BISAP), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE-II), and modified computed tomography severity index (MCTSI) for predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis and formulate a new scoring system to assess the severity of acute pancreatitis based on their prognostic severity index in the local population.

Materials and Methods: This prospective pilot study was conducted at Rawalpindi Medical University allied hospitals from August 2019 to December 2019. All patients with a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis were included in the study through non-probability convenient sampling. Different scoring parameters were entered into standardized proforma.

Results: 100 patients were included in the pilot study with a mean age of 46.53 ± 15.324. Among 24 parameters from APACHE-II, Ranson’s, BISAP, and MCTSI, only 11 parameters, Pleural effusion (PE), Pancreatic necrosis (PN), LDH, serum Calcium (Sca++), Pulse, GCS, MCTS1, Base deficit, Po2, BUN-24, and BUN-48 were significantly related(at 10% level of significance) with the severity of acute pancreatitis. Similarly out of 24, 10 parameters AST, LDH, Sca++, Pulse, PE, PN, Base deficit, MCTS1, Po2, and BUN 48were significantly covered more than 50% of the area in AUC analysis. Our proposed criteria based on 9 parameters LDH, Sca++, Pulse, PE, PN, Base deficit, MCTS1, Po2, and BUN 48which were blowing by the two methods (ANOVA and ROC). The sensitivity and specificity were higher with our proposed criteria 93.1% and 60.6%respectively as compared to the Ranson’s, modified Ranson, BISAP, and APACHE-II criteria.

Conclusion: The newly proposed criteria for the assessment of the severity of AP is superior as compared to old criteria.

References

1. Spanier BW, Dijkgraaf MG, Bruno MJ: Epidemiology, aetiology and outcome of acute and chronic pancreatitis: an update. Best Pract Res ClinGastroenterol 2008;22:45–63
2. C. D. Kim, Current status of acute pancreatitis in Korea”, The Korean Journal of Gastroenterology, vol 42, no.1,pp 1-11,2003.
3. B. Sandzen, M. Rosenmullar, M. Haapamaki, E. Nilsson, H. C. Stenlund, and M. Oman, First attack of acute pancreatitis in Sweden 1988-2003: incidence, aetiological classification, procedures and mortality – a register study,” BMC Gastroenterology, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 18, 2009.
4. T. Omdal, J. Dale, S. A. Lie, K. B. Iversen, H. Flaatten, and K.Ovrebo, Time trends in incidence, etiology and case fatality rate of the first attack of acute pancreatitis,” Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 46, no. 11,pp.1389-1398, 2011.
5. Banks PA. Epidemiology, natural history, and predictors of disease outcome in acute and chronic pancreatitis.GastrointestEndosc. Dec. 2002; 56(6 Suppl): 226-30
6. Pongprasobchai S, Thamcharoen R, Manat- Sathit S: Changing of the etiology of acute pancreatitis after usingasystematicsearch. J Med Assoc Thai 2009;92:S38- S42.
7. Wang GJ, Gao CF, Wei D, Wang C, Ding SQ:Acute pancreatitis: etiology and common pathogenesis. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15:1427-1430.
8. Banks PA, Bollen TL, Dervenis C, et al. Classification of acute pancreatitis–2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus. Gut. 2013; 62: 102– 11.
9. Frey CF. Gallstone pancreatitis. Surg. Clin. North Am. 1981; 61: 923– 38.
10. Kim YS, Kim Y, Kim SK, Rhim H. Computed tomographic differentiation between alcoholic and gallstone pancreatitis: significance of distribution of infiltration or fluid collection. World J. Gastroenterol. 2006; 12: 4524– 8.
11. Andersen AM, Novovic S, Ersboll AK, Hansen MB. Mortality in alcohol and biliary acute pancreatitis. Pancreas. 2008; 36: 432– 4.
12. Kim DB, Chung WC, Lee JM, Lee KM, Oh JH, Jeon EJ. Analysis of factors associated with the severity of acute pancreatitis according to etiology. Gastroenterol. Res. Pract. 2017; 2017: 1219464.
13. Zheng Y, Zhou Z, Li H et al. A multicenter study on etiology of acute pancreatitis in Beijing during 5 years. Pancreas. 2015; 44: 409– 14.
14. Bradley EL 3rd. A clinically based classification system for acute pancreatitis. In Summary of the international symposium on acute pancreatitis, Atlanta, GA, 11-13 September 1992. Arch Surg 1993;128:586-90.
15. Banks PA, Bollen TL, Dervenis C., etal.Classification of acute pancreatitis—2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definition by international consensus. Gut 2013;62:102–11
16. Balthazar EJ, Freeny PC, Van Sonnenberg E. Imaging and intervention in acute pancreatitis, Radiology 1994;193:297-306.
17. Mounzer R, Langmead CJ, Wu BU, Evans AC, Bishehsari F, Muddana V, Singh VK, Slivka A, Whitcomb DC, Yadav D, Banks PA, Papachristou GI. Comparison of Existing Clinical Scoring Systems to Predict Persistent Organ Failure in Patients ith Acute Pancreatitis. Gastroenterology 2012 Mar 13.
18. AH Kumar, MS Griwan, A comparison of APACHE II, BISAP, Ranson’s score and modified CTSI in predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis based on the 2012 revised Atlanta Classification, 2018;6(2):127-131. Gastroenterology Report.
Published
2020-09-30
How to Cite
1.
Hussain T, Hanif M, Ghazanfor R, Arslan S, Nawaz I, Umar M. Acute Pancreatitis severity scoring index: Prospective study to identify determinants in Pakistan. JRMC [Internet]. 30Sep.2020 [cited 22Oct.2020];24(3):264-9. Available from: http://journalrmc.com/index.php/JRMC/article/view/1412