ABSTRACT
ObjectiveTo establish a modified BISAP scoring system， and to investigate the value of the BISAP scoring system versus the modified BISAP scoring system in assessing the severity and condition of acute pancreatitis （AP）. MethodsFor the establishment of the new scoring system， a retrospective analysis was performed for the clinical data of 1 033 patients with AP who were admitted to Third Xiangya hospital of central South University from January 2019 to December 2021， and according to the revised Atlanta classification， they were divided into mild acute pancreatitis （MAP） group with 827 patients and severe acute pancreatitis （SAP） group with 206 patients. The two groups were compared in terms of clinical features， laboratory markers， and imaging data. A binary logistic regression analysis was performed for the statistically significant indicators to screen for the independent risk factors for SAP. The receiver operating characteristic （ROC） curve was used to obtain the optimal cut－off value corresponding to the maximum Youden index for each independent risk factor， and a score of 0 or 1 was assigned depending on different situations， which was integrated into the BISAP scoring system to establish a modified BISAP scoring system. For the validation of the new scoring system， a retrospective analysis was performed for the clinical data of 473 patients with AP who were admitted to Third Xiangya hospital of central South University from January 2017 to December 2018. BISAP score and modified BISAP score were determined for each patient， and the area under the ROC curve （AUC） was used to compare the value of the two scoring systems in predicting the severity and prognosis of AP. The chi－square test or the Fisher’s exact test was used for comparison of categorical data between two groups， and the independent－samples t test and the Mann－Whitney U test were used for comparison of continuous data between two groups. ResultsFor the establishment of the new scoring system， there were significant differences between the MAP group and the SAP group in mode of admission， length of hospital stay， ICU admission rate， number of deaths， underlying diseases， and incidence rate of complications （all P<0.05）. The binary logistic regression analysis showed that body temperature， neutrophil－to－lymphocyte ratio （NLR）， C－reactive protein （CRP）， albumin， triglycerides， D－dimer， fibrinogen， and MCTSI score were independent risk factors for SAP （all P<0.05）. The ROC curve analysis showed that CRP （AUC=0.921）， NLR （AUC=0.798）， D－dimer （AUC=0.768）， and MCTSI score （AUC=0.931） had a good predictive value for SAP， and the combination of these four indicators had an AUC of 0.976 and showed a significantly higher diagnostic efficiency than each indicator alone or the combination of two or three indicators （all P<0.05）. For the validation of the new scoring system， a total of 473 patients were enrolled， with 408 in the MAP group and 65 in the SAP group， and there were significant differences between the two groups in mode of admission， length of hospital stay， ICU admission rate， number of deaths， and incidence rate of complications （all P<0.05）. The modified BISAP score was better than the BISAP score in predicting SAP （AUC： 0.972 vs 0.887， P<0.05）， with an optimal cut－off value of >3 points. The modified BISAP score also had a relatively high value in predicting the mortality of AP patients （AUC=0.910）， but there was no significant difference between the modified BISAP score and the BISAP scoring system （AUC： 0.910 vs 0.896， P=0.707）. ConclusionThe modified BISAP score is better than the BISAP score in predicting the severity of AP and has a relatively high value in predicting the mortality of AP patients， giving a more accurate， objective， and early assessment of the condition of AP patients.
ABSTRACT
Background: Untreated acute pancrea??s can have high morbidity and mortality. It is a serious gastrointes?nal emergency. Its incidence is approximately 51.0 % and it can cause both local and systemic problems. The diagnosis usually involves laboratory tests like amylase and lipase as well as an ultrasound exam. The ideal imaging test is a contrast-enhanced CT scan. This study used scoring systems based on laboratory and radiological inves?ga?ons to determine the clinical progression and outcome. Methods : Pa?ents who were diagnosed with acute pancrea??s and in whom computed tomography was done were included. From the imaging findings, the category and subcategory of acute pancrea??s and types of fluid collec?ons were described in these pa?ents using the revised Atlanta classifica?on. BISAP score was calculated in all these pa?ents. The clinical outcome assessed in these pa?ents is the dura?on of stay in the hospital, mortality, presence of persistent organ failure, the occurrence of infec?on and need for interven?on. Finally, the correla?on between the Revised Atlanta classifica?on and BISAP score was analyzed and compared with clinical outcomes. Results: The analysis of the correla?on between Revised Atlanta classifica?on severity grade and BISAP score, among the n=57 pa?ents with mild acute pancrea??s n=56, had BISAP score less than 3 and only one had BISAP score greater or equal to three. Among the n=25 pa?ents graded as moderately severe acute pancrea??s, n=20 cases had a BISAP score of less than 3 and n=5 had BISAP score greater than or equal to three. Among the n=08 pa?ents graded as severe acute pancrea??s, n=3 had a BISAP score of less than 3 and n=5 had BISAP score greater than or equal to three. Conclusion: Standardizing nomenclature and facilita?ng proper documenta?on of a variety of imaging abnormali?es in acute pancrea??s is made possible by incorpora?ng the new Atlanta categoriza?on system into daily prac?ce. We can triage, predict, and treat pa?ents with acute pancrea??s with greater precision by integra?ng the new Atlanta classifica?on with BISAP clinical grading, significantly improving medical care.
ABSTRACT
Objective:To explore the value of red blood cell distribution width to platelet ratio (RPR), C-reactive protein to albumin ratio (CAR) combined with bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) score in assessing the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP).Methods:The AP patients in the First Affiliated Hospital of Jinzhou Medical University from January to December 2020 were respectively collected. According to the severity of the disease, the patients were divided into the mild acute pancreatitis (MAP) group, moderate severe acute pancreatitis (MSAP) group, and severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) group. The general information and laboratory indicators of the patients were collected and scored according to the BISAP scoring standard. Spearman correlation analysis was used to explore the correlation of RPR, CAR and BISAP score in three groups of patients and their correlation with AP severity. Model 1 [MAP group and non-MAP group (MSAP group + SAP group)] and model 2 [non-SAP group (MAP group + MSAP group) and SAP group] were constructed. Multivariate binary logistic regression was used to analyze the independent factors of the non-MAP group and SAP group. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to calculate the area under the curve (AUC) to analyze the value of RPR, CAR, and BISAP score alone and in combination to judge the severity of AP patients.Results:A total of 197 AP patients who met the criteria were included, including 102 MAP patients, 56 MSAP patients, and 39 SAP patients. There were significant differences in RPR, CAR and BISAP score among patients with different AP severity ( P<0.001). RPR, CAR and BISAP score were positively correlated, and all three were positively correlated with AP severity ( r=0.435, 0.490, 0.628, P<0.001). RPR and CAR were independent factors for the severity of AP, and the combination of RPR, CAR and BISAP score was better than a single indicator in judging the severity of AP patients. The AUC of the three combined in Model 1 and Model 2 were 0.868 and 0.889, respectively. Conclusions:RPR, CAR combined with BISAP score has a good application value in the evaluation of AP, and is suitable for clinical promotion.
ABSTRACT
Background: Pancreatitis can lead to serious complications with severe morbidity and mortality. So an early, quick and accurate scoring system is necessary to stratify the patients according to their severity so as to enable early initiation of required management and care. Scoring system commonly used have some drawbacks. This study aimed to compare bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) and Ranson’s score to predict severe acute pancreatitis and establish the validity of a simple and accurate clinical scoring system for stratifying patients.Methods: This is a prospective comparative study on 100 patients diagnosed with acute pancreatitis admitted in department of general surgery. Parameters included in the BISAP and Ranson’s criteria were studied at the time of admission and after 48 hours. Result of these two were compared with that of revised Atlanta classification.Results: As per the BISAP score, the sensitivity and specificity were 95.8 % (95% CI, 76.8-99.8), 94.7 % (95% CI, 86.3-98.3) whereas positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio 18.21 (95% CI, 6.9-47.44), 0.04 (95% CI, 0.01-0.30) and accuracy was 95 % (95% CI, 88.72%-98.36%). On using Ranson’s score, the sensitivity and specificity were 91.6 (95% CI, 71.5-98.5) and 89.4 (95% CI, 79.8-95) with a positive predictive value 8.71 (95% CI, 4.47-18.96) and negative predictive value of 0.09 (95% CI, 0.02-0.35) and accuracy of 90% (95% CI, 82.38%-95.10%)..Conclusions: BISAP score outperformed Ranson’s score in terms of Sensitivity and specificity of prediction of severe pancreatitis. The authors recommend inclusion of BISAP Scoring system in standard treatment protocol of management of acute pancreatitis.
ABSTRACT
Background: The best model to determine the postoperative complications must be simple and easily applicable to the majority of surgical patients. The complications and their incidence should be precisely defined and estimated. The model should also have a low threshold to identify them. The ASA classification was initially intended as a means to stratify a patient’s systemic illness but not post-operative risk. Although the ASA classification has proved to be a predictive pre-operative risk factor in mortality models, its subjective nature and inconsistent scoring between providers make it less than ideal for performing evidence-based post-operative risk calculation. Aim of the study: The aim of the study was to determine the applicability of the Surgical Apgar Score in post-operative risk stratification for morbidity and mortality during the 30 days postlaparotomy. Materials and methods: In this study, 152 in-patient Visiting Government Stanley Medical College General Hospital from March 2017 to April 2018 had been studied. Patients undergone laparotomy at Department of General Surgery, Government Stanley Medical College were managed by a tier of doctors from anesthetic technicians, medical officer interns, medical officers, postgraduates in general surgery and anesthesiology and their consultants. Interns and postgraduates in general surgery provided the pre and postoperative care and participate in general surgical procedures whenever indicated. Anesthesiologists apart from providing anesthesia during surgery extended their care in the intensive care unit. Parimala, G. Venkatesh, P. Vijayaraghavan. Utility of surgical APGAR score in predicting post-operative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing laparotomy – A prospective study. IAIM, 2019; 6(6): 67-74. Page 68 Results: 132 patients were operated as an emergency and only 20 patients were operated selectively. 86.8% of the surgeries were emergency laparotomies and only 13.2% of the surgeries were elective. This showed our efficient functioning and round the clock services of our emergency theatres. The most common causes in descending order include penetrating injury, intestinal obstruction, peritonitis, perforated duodenal ulcer, blunt injury abdomen, intra-abdominal abscess, hydatid cyst, obstructed hernia, mesenteric ischemia, cholecystitis. A significantly higher complication was noted among female patients at 63.2% compared to male patients at 33.3%. 43.9% of the postoperative complications occurred in emergency setting whereas only 20% of the complications occurred in the elective setting. When the complications were compared with the duration of surgery, those surgeries that lasted more than 120 minutes had a higher complication rate of 68.6% whereas surgeries with a shorter duration only had a complication rate of 26.7%. Conclusion: Surgical Apgar Score is very effective in identifying high-risk patients who are capable of developing significant complications following laparotomy within the first 30 postoperative days. This identification of high-risk patients helps us in the judicious use of healthcare resources towards the proper monitoring and follow up of these patients.
ABSTRACT
Resumen Objetivo: Determinar el BISAP como predictor de mortalidad en pancreatitis aguda en el servicio de urgencias. Materiales y métodos: Estudio de cohorte en pacientes con pancreatitis aguda atendidos en urgencias; se formaron dos grupos de acuerdo con el puntaje de BISAP, bajo riesgo (0-2) y alto riesgo (3-5). El tamaño de la muestra para cada grupo fue de 23,76; sin embargo; se trabajó con 111 pacientes de bajo riesgo y 23 de alto riesgo. La técnica muestral fue no aleatoria por cuota. La mortalidad se midió a las 24 h y a los 7 días. El análisis estadístico incluyó regresión logística y cálculo de la probabilidad. Resultados: Cuando el puntaje BISAP es de alto riesgo, la probabilidad de morir a las 24 h es del 22,7%, y del 76,5% a los 7 días (Chi2 = 13,91; p = 0,002). Discusión y conclusión: El score BISAP permite predecir la probabilidad de morir a las 24 h y a los 7 días.
Abstract Objective: To determine BISAP as a predictor of mortality in acute pancreatitis in the Emergency Service. Materials and methods: A cohort study in acute pancreatitis in emergency service, two groups were formed according to BISAP score, low risk (0-2) and high risk (3-5). The total sample for each group was 23.76, nevertheless it was worked with 111 patients of low risk and 23 of high risk. The sampling technique was non-randomized by quota. Mortality was measured at 24 h and at 7 days. Statistical analysis included logistic regression and probability calculation. Results: When the BISAP score is high risk the probability of dying at 24 h is 22.7% and 76.5% at 7 days (Chi2 = 13.91, P=.002). Discussion and conclusion: The BISAP score allows predicting the probability of dying at 24 h and at 7 days.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Pancreatitis/mortality , Pancreatitis/pathology , Severity of Illness Index , Prognosis , Time Factors , Chi-Square Distribution , Acute Disease , Risk Factors , Cohort Studies , Risk Assessment/methods , Emergency Medical ServicesABSTRACT
Background: Acute pancreatitis refers to an acute inflammatory process of the pancreas, usually accompanied by abdominal pain and elevations of serum pancreatic enzymes. This syndrome is usually a discrete episode, which may cause varying degrees of injury to the pancreas, and adjacent and distant organs. Acute pancreatitis is a serious disease with high morbidity and mortality rates some 80% were mid attack which recovers rapidly with conservative management. The rest of 20 % were severe, with protracted course that needs intensive care and specialized management. Materials and methods: It was a prospective study. First 50 patients attending the surgical emergency ward with clinical features of Acute Pancreatitis were evaluated clinically and subjected to laboratory and radiological investigations as per the designed Performa. Data pertinent to the scoring systems were recorded within 24 hours of admission to the hospital. For each of 50 patients included in the study, BISAP and MCTSI scores were calculated by the manner described by Knaus, et al. and Cardinal Health Database system. Results: BISAP and MCTSI was correlated well for mortality with high positive value of 0.904 which was highly significant (0.01). The ROC analysis for Mortality showed BISAP score had AUC of 0.904, P value (0.001) which was more than MCTSI score which had AUC of 0.845, P value (0.007). So BISAP was highly accurate with P value (0.001) and confidence interval of 0.873. BISAP score was highly sensitive (100%), specificity (60%) at score more than 3.5. MCTSI score sensitivity was 85%, specificity was 77% at score more than 7. Conclusions: BISAP score was found to have more sensitivity, specificity and Diagnostic accuracy than MCTSI score in prediction of assessing the severity of acute pancreatitis. Hence, BISAP score G.V. Manoharan, C. Balamurugan, S. Shanmugam. A comparative evaluation of radiologic and clinical scoring system in the early prediction of severity in acute pancreatitis. IAIM, 2016; 3(7): 159-165. Page 160 found to predict more number of patients and likelihood of progressing to severe disease. Larven, et al. stated the same in their study 42. Hence, BISAP is considered as better available score for assessing the severity than MCTSI score.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the clinic significance of four clinical scoring systems in evaluating prognosis of acute pancreatitis: bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis(BISAP), acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHEⅡ), Ranson’s scoring system, computed tomography severity index (CTSI) in AP. Methods Patients visited our clinic with AP (n=114) in recent 2 years were retrospectively analyzed. BISAP and APACHEⅡscores were obtained at 24 hours after admission; Ranson ’s score was obtained at 48 hours after admission and CTSI are obtained was obtained at 72 hours after admission. Results of four scoring system were compared under different causes and different severity of the dis?ease. Correlation between BISAP score and the other three scores were analyzed and the predicative value of all four scoring systems for severity of AP and death were also compared. Results The mean values of four scoring systems show no signifi?cant difference in AP patients with different etiology (P>0.05). The BISAP score is positively correlated with APACHE-Ⅱ, Ranson ’s score and CTSI score (P<0.01). The four scoring systems all present good predictive value on the severity of AP and death (P<0.01). Conclusion The four scoring systems can all be applied to grading and prognosis for AP of various causes. BISAP is a simple, prompt, economical scoring system in clinical practice.
ABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate the clinical value of bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) and APACHEⅡ score in predicting the severity and organ failure of acute pancreatitis (AP).Methods One hundred eighty-five patients of AP admitted to Department of Gastroenterology of First affiliated Hospital of Soochow University from January 2012 to December 2014 were studied retrospectively.According to BISAP score, patients who were ≥3 points were considered as high risk group, while ＜3 points were considered as low risk group.According to APACHEⅡ score, patients who were ≥ 8 points were considered as high risk group, while ＜ 8 points were considered as low risk group.According to the criteria of Pancreatic Diseases Group of Chinese Society of Gastroenterology of Chinese Medical Association, the patients were diagnosed as mild acute pancreatitis (MAP), moderately severe acute pancreatitis (MSAP), and severe acute pancreatitis (SAP).The BISAP, APACHEⅡ scores were calculated and compared between MAP group and MSAP + SAP group, respectively.The incidence of MSAP + SAP between high risk group and low risk group was also compared.The area of ROC curve (AUC) was used to evaluate the ability of BISAP and APACHEⅡ scoring system for predicting the severity of AP and the multiple organ dysfunction syndromes (MODS).Results Among 185 patients, MAP was identified in 101 patients, MSAP in 76 patients and SAP in 8 patients.Twenty-five MSAP patients developed organ dysfunction, and all the 8 SAP patients developed organ dysfunction.The BISAP scores of MSAP + SAP group and MAP group were (1.43 ± 0.89), (0.38 ± 0.61),andAPACHⅡ scores were (2.45± 1.36), (0.87± 0.62), the scores of MSAP+ SAP group were significantly higher than those in MAP group (P ＜0.01).In the 137 patients of low risk BISAP group, there were 47 MSAP + SAP patients (34.3％), while in the 48 patients of high risk BISAP group, there were 37 MSAP + SAP patients (77.0％);in the 153 patients of low risk APACHEⅡ group, there were 56 MSAP + SAP patients (36.6％), while in the 32 patients of high risk APACHEⅡ group, there were 28 MSAP + SAP patients (87.5％);the incidence of MSAP + SAP patients was significantly higher in high risk group than that in low risk group (P＜0.01).The AUC of BISAP, APACHEⅡ for MSAP+ MAP was 0.804 (95％ CI 0.738 ～ 0.870), 0.794 (95％ CI 0.725 ～ 0.863), and the AUC for organ dysfunction was 0.758 (95％ CI 0.686 ～0.830), 0.781 (95％ CI 0.710 ～0.852) , and the difference between BISAP and APACHE Ⅱ was not statistically significant (P ＞ 0.05).Conclusions The BISAP has the prediction ability for AP severity and prognosis similar to APACHEⅡ , and it consists of only 5 parameters and can be completed in the first 24 h of admission, therefore it is worth of clinical application.
ABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate the bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) and harmless acute pancreatitis (HAP) scoring system in predicting prognosis of acute pancreatitis (AP).Methods A total of 442 AP patients,who were admitted to The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from January 2003 to December 2010,were retrospectively studied.BISAP and HAP scores were evaluated respectively.The value of BISAP and HAP scores in predicting severity,local complications,organ failure and mortality were measured by the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC),and it was compared with that of traditional Ranson's score.Results Among 442 patients,73 patients (16.5％) were diagnosed to have severe acute pancreatitis (SAP).AUC for BISAP score in predicting SAP,local complications,organ failure and mortality were 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).There were no statistically significant differences in AUCs of the four prognostic parameters between BISAP and Ranson's score.The specificity,positive predictive value (PPV),and AUC of HAP score in predicting mild AP were 85％,95％ and 0.73 (95％ CI:0.67 ～ 0.79).The risk of dismal prognosis increased when both BISAP and HAP score were abnormal.Conclusions BISAP and Ranson's score have comparable ability in predicting prognosis of patients with AP.However,BISAP score is simpler.HAP score is a simple and accurate method for predicting prognosis of patients with mild AP.Combination of BISAP score with HAP score can better help predict the prognosis of AP patients.
ABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate the value of bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) in predicting the severity and prognosis of acute pancreatitis (AP) by comparison with traditional scoring systems.MethodsFour hundred ninety-seven patients of AP admitted into Wuxi People's Hospital from January 2005 to December 2010 were studied retrospectively.BISAP,APACHE Ⅱ,Ranson and Balthazar CT (CTSI) scores were calculated,respectively,in order to evaluate the severity.The AUC of ROC was used to evaluate the ability of BISAP and the other scoring systems in predicting the severity of AP and the occurrence of pancreatic necrosis,organ failure and mortality.Results Among 497 patients,mild acute pancreatitis (MAP) was identified in 396 patients and severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) in 101 patients.The gender,age and etiological factors between MAP and SAP were not statistical different.The BISAP,APACHE Ⅱ,Ranson scores of the 4 9 7 patients were 1.08 ± 1.01,5.79 ± 4.00,1.69 ± 1.59,and the scores were intercorrelated(r =0.612,0.568,0.577,P ＜0.001).In addition,the BISAP,APACHE Ⅱ,Ranson scores of SAP patients were significantly higher than those in MAP patients.The AUC of BISAP for SAP was 0.762(95％ CI 0.722 ～0.799),when the cutoff value was 2,the sensitivity,specificity,positive predictive value (PPV),negative predictive value ( NPV ) were 63.39％,83.08％,48.1％,89.4％ ; the AUC of BISAP for pancreatic necrosis was 0.711 (95％ CI 0.612 ～ 0.797),when the cutoff value was 2,the sensitivity,specificity,PPV,NPV were 84.6％,46.7％,35.5％,89.7％ ; the AUC of BISAP for organ failure was 0.777( 95％ CI0.683 ～ 0.854),when the cutoff value was 2,the sensitivity,specificity,PPV,NPV were 93.1％,51.4％,43.5％,94.9％ ; the AUC of BISAP for mortality was 0.808(95％ CI 0.718 ～0.880),when the cutoff value was 3,the sensitivity,specificity,PPV,NPV were 83.3％,67.4％,25.6％,96.8％.In the cases of SAP,the ability of BISAP and the other scoring systems in predicting the prognosis showed no statistical difference.ConclusionsThe BISAP has the prediction ability for AP severity and prognosis similar to other scoring systems,and it consists of only 5 parameters and can be completed in the fast 24 h of admission,therefore it can be used for early predication of SAP,which is worth of clinical application.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCCIÓN: El score de BISAP es un sistema no complicado y factible de realizar en hospitales de referencia como el nuestro, engloba variables clínicas, de laboratorio y de imagen, permitiendo predecir la mortalidad por pancreatitis aguda, dentro de las 24 horas de inicio del cuadro clínico. OBJETIVO: Determinar la validez del score de BISAP en la gravedad y el pronóstico de la Pancreatitis Aguda. MÉTODO: Estudio de validación del score de BISAP en 57 pacientes consecutivos con diagnóstico de pancreatitis aguda al ingreso. Prueba de referencia: los criterios de Atlanta confirmados por evolución clínica grave más allá del quinto día, apoyados en muchos casos por TAC. RESULTADOS: El 71.9% fueron de sexo femenino. La media de edad fue de 45.33 años. La litiasis biliar fue la causa más frecuente (66.7%). Según la prueba de referencia, el 71.9% de casos fueron leves y el 28.1% graves. Según el score de BISAP el 77.2% leves y el 22.8% graves. La sensibilidad y especificidad para el score de BISAP fue del 75% y del 97.56% respectivamente. El valor predictivo positivo fue del 92.31% y el valor predictivo negativo, del 90.91%. CONCLUSIONES: El score de BISAP permite predecir la severidad en la pancreatitis aguda.
BACKGROUND: The BISAP score is a simple system, which englobes clinical features (laboratory and imagenology tests) allowing to predict the mortality in acute pancreatitis within the first 24 hours of hospitalization. OBJECTIVE: To determine the validity of the BISAP score in the prediction of prognosis and severity of acute pancreatitis. METHOD: In order to validate the BISAP score, a study was performed in 57 patients with a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis at the moment of admission. The reference test was the Atlanta criteria which confirmed severe clinical course beyond the fifth day, in many cases supported by CT. RESULTS: 71.9% were women. The mean age was 45.33 years. Biliary lithiasis was the most frequent cause (66.7%). According to the reference test 71.9% were mild and 28.1% severe. According to the BISAP score 77.2% mild and 22.8% severe. The sensitivity and specificity for the BISAP score was of 75% and 97.56% respectively. The predictive positive value was 92.31% and the predictive negative value was 90.91%. CONCLUSIONS: The BISAP score allows to predict the severity of the acute pancreatitis.