Establishment of a modified BISAP scoring system and its clinical significance in the early diagnosis and prognostic evaluation of severe acute pancreatitis / 临床肝胆病杂志

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.

Assessment of Severity of Pancreatitis by Computerized Tomography Using Revised Atlanta Classifica?on and Comparison with BISAP Clinical Scoring System

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.

The value of red blood cell distribution width to platelet ratio and C-reactive protein to albumin ratio combined with BISAP scores in the assessment of acute pancreatitis / 中华急诊医学杂志

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.

Comparison of BISAP and Ranson’s score for predicting severe acute pancreatitis and establish the validity of BISAP score

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.

Escala BISAP en pancreatitis aguda. Azogues 2016-2017. Estudio descriptivo / BISAP scale in acute pancreatitis. Azogues 2016-2017. Descriptive study

Objetivo: aplicar la escala Bedside Index for Severity in Acute Pancreatitis (BISAP) a los expedientes clínicos de pacientes con diagnóstico de pan-creatitis aguda en el hospital Homero Castanier Crespo, Azogues enero de 2016 a diciembre de 2017.Metodología: se realizó un estudio cuantitativo, descriptivo y retrospectivo, se trabajó con el universo de expedientes clínicos con reporte de pan-creatitis aguda de 2016 a 2017. Los datos se analizaron con los programas SPSS versión 20 y Excel, utilizando distribuciones de frecuencia y porcen-tajes. Resultados: se estudiaron 79 casos, encontrando una edad media de 48.5 años; el 57% correspondió al sexo femenino. Se obtuvo una mortalidad en general del 12.7%; siendo la forma leve el 79.7% de los casos sin fallecimientos; contrastando con la forma grave con el 20.3%, de los cuales el 62.5% fallecieron.Conclusiones: BISAP demostró ser un predictor de mortalidad, accesible, rápido y útil. Se aprecia una tendencia al incremento de la mortalidad conforme se eleva el puntaje de la escala, siendo esta directamente proporcional a la aparición de complicaciones locales y sistémicas propias de la enfermedad.

Objective: to apply the Bedside Index for Severity in Acute Pancreatitis (BISAP) scale to the clinical records of patients diagnosed with acute pancreatitis at the Hospital Homero Castanier Crespo, Azogues January 2016 to December 2017. Methodology: a quantitative, descriptive and retrospective study was carried out; the universe of clinical records with reports of acute pancreatitis was worked from 2016 to 2017. The data were analyzed with the SPSS version 20 and Excel programs, using frequency distributions and percentages. Results: a total of 79 cases were studied, finding an average age of 48.5 years; the 57% corresponded to the female sex. A general mortality of 12.7% was obtained; being the mild form 79.7% of the cases without deaths; and contrasting with the serious form with 20.3%, of which 62.5% died.Conclusions: BISAP proved to be a mortality predictor; it is accessible, fast and useful. A tendency to increase mortality at the same time in the score of the escalation was observed, being this directly proportional to the incidence of local and systemic complications of the disease.

Estimation of Blood Urea Nitrogen as an Indicator of Severity in Acute Pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is an acute inflammatory process of the pancreas with variable involvement of the pancreas, regional tissues around the pancreas, or remote organ systems. The aim of study was to evaluate Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) as an indicator of severity and single prognostic indicator in acute pancreatitis and to Compare BUN with Ranson’s and BISAP criteria in prediction of SAP and mortality. Methods: A prospective observational study, total 72 patients participated in this study. All Patients presenting to the Emergency and Outpatient Departments of Medicine, Chalmeda Anand Rao Institute of Medical Sciences, Karimnagar from October 2015 to September 2016 with suspicion of acute pancreatitis. Results: In the study, of these 66 (91.7%) were male and 6 (8.3%) were female. Mean age of the study subjects was 38.47 + 11.01. Mean age of patients with SAP was slightly higher than with non severe pancreatitis (41.89 vs. 37.33) but not statistically significant (p=0.55). 75% of the Pancreatitis was due to alcohol (54 out of 72), followed by gallstones in 13.88% (10/72). Conclusion: BISAP score within the first 24 hours of admission stratifies patients according to their risk of mortality and onset of organ failure.

Utility of surgical APGAR score in predicting post-operative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing laparotomy – A prospective study

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.

Evaluation of six scoring systems and four laboratory tests in the prognostic assessment of severe acute pancreatitis / 中华消化杂志

Objective To evaluate the six scoring systems and four laboratory tests,including pancreatitis outcome prediction (POP),Ranson score,bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP),acute physiology and chronic health evaluation Ⅱ (APACHE Ⅱ),systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS),and Glasgow score as well as four laboratory tests including C-reactive protein (CRP),hematocrit (HCT),blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and serum creatinine (Scr) in the prognostic assessment of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP).Methods From January 2016 to December 2017,at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital,151 SAP patients who met the enrollment criteria were retrospectively analyzed.According to the time from onset to treatment,the patients were divided into less than three days group (n=102) and over three days group (n=49).The evaluation of six scoring systems and four laboratory tests,including CRP,HCT,BUN and Scr at 0,24 and 48 h after hospitalization in the prognostic assessment of SAP patients was measured by receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve.Results The Ranson score had the highest area under curve (AUC) value (0.916) in the evaluation of the prognosis of SAP patients less than three days group followed by BISAP,APACHE Ⅱ,Glasgow and POP score,and their AUC values were 0.832,0.823,0.793,and 0.787,respectively,all of them were statistically significant in the prognostic assessment of SAP patients in less than three days group (all P＜0.05).There were statistically significant of BISAP and APACHE Ⅱ scores in the prognostic evaluation of SAP patients in over three days group (both P＜0.05),and the AUC values were 0.751 and 0.735,respectively,which were less than those of SAP patients in less than three days group.There were statistical significance of BUN and Scr at 24 and 48 h after hospitalization in the prognostic assessment of SAP patients in less than three days group (all P＜0.05),and the AUC values were 0.856,0.853 and 0.793,0.874,respectively.There were statistical significance of BUN at 0,24,48 h and Scr at 48 h after hospitalization in the prognostic assessment of SAP patients in over three days group (all P＜0.05),and the AUC value was 0.709,0.754,0.742 and 0.716,respectively.Conclusions Ranson,POP and Glascow score systems are only suitable for patients with SAP less than three days.APACHE Ⅱ,BISAP score systems,BUN and Scr can be used to evaluate patients with SAP over three days,but are more suitable for patients with SAP less than three days group.

Índice clínico de gravedad en pancreatitis aguda como predictor de mortalidad en pancreatitis aguda en el servicio de urgencias / Bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis as a predictor of mortality in acute pancreatitis in the Emergency Service

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.

The role of four criteria in assessment of the severity and prognosis of hyperlipidemic acute pancreatitis / 中华内科杂志

Objective To explore the four criteria,including bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis(BISAP),Ranson score,modified CT severity index(MCTSI) and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation scoring system Ⅱ (APACHE Ⅱ) in assessment of severity and prognosis of hyperlipidemic acute pancreatitis.Methods A total of 326 patients with hyperlipidemic acute pancreatitis were studied retrospectively from August 2006 to July 2015.The discrepancy of the four criteria in assessment of severity and prognosis of hyperlipidemic acute pancreatitis was compared with chi-square test and receiver operating characteristic curve.Results The incidences of moderately severe acute pancreatitis and severe acute pancreatitis,local complications and mortality of patients with BISAP score ≥3,Ranson score ≥3,APACHE Ⅱ score≥8 and MCTSI score≥4 were significantly higher than BISAP score ＜ 3,Ranson score ＜ 3,APACHE Ⅱ score ＜ 8 and MCTSI ＜ 4 respectively (all P ＜ 0.05).As far as severity was concerned,the sensitivity and AUC of APACHE Ⅱ were 57％ and 0.814,which were higher than the other systems.The second most sensitive criterion was BISAP.In assessment of local complications,the sensitivity and AUC of MCTSI were 68％ and 0.791,which were higher than the other three.The most sensitive criterion to predict mortality was BISAP with sensitivity 89％ and AUC 0.867,which was followed by APACHE Ⅱ.Conclusions All four criteria can be used to determine the severity,local complications and mortality.Generally,BISAP is simple and easy to practice,and better than the other three.

Comparative study between BISAP and Ransons score in predicting severity of acute pancreatitis

Background: Acute pancreatitis is an acute inflammation of the pancreas is an increasingly common abdominal disorder presenting as major surgical challenge to general surgeons worldwide. Early identification of patients at risk of developing a severe attack has great importance for instituting therapeutic interventions and improved outcome. Accurate prediction of severity is important in order to improve survival. There are several assessment criteria in order to predict prognosis and severity of acute pancreatitis, which help in guiding patient triage and management. However, nothing is proven to perform significantly better in clinical settings than good clinical judgment. Ideal predicting criteria should, therefore be simple, non-invasive, accurate and quantitative and assessment tests are easily available. Aim and objectives: It was a prospective study to assess the accuracy of BISAP scoring system vs Ranson’s scoring system in predicting Severity in an attack of acute pancreatitis and to compare predictability of organ failure, necrosis and mortality between BISAP scoring and Ranson’s Scoring system. Materials and methods: All patients admitted to Govt. Stanley Hospital with complaints of pain abdomen diagnosed to have Acute Pancreatitis on clinical examination and further investigations. Sample size consists of 100 patients with acute pancreatitis. BISAP score and Ranson’s score is calculated in all such patients based on data obtained within 24 hours of hospitalization and at 48 hours. Results: In this study, the two different scoring systems (BISAP and Ranson’s) were compared and analyzed to assess the severity in patients with acute pancreatitis. An attempt also made to compare this study with previous similar studies done by others. Acute pancreatitis found to be 10 times more J. Lalithkumar, T. Chitra, N. Kodieswaran. Comparative study between BISAP and Ranson’s score in predicting severity of acute pancreatitis. IAIM, 2016; 3(9): 23-33. Page 24 common in males than females in this study. The mean length of hospital stay was 12.03 ± 6.8 days in this study. In this study, increasing BISAP and Ranson’s scores was correlated well with the duration of hospital stay. In this study, 86 patients were diagnosed to have mild and moderately severe acute pancreatitis grouped under MAP, and 14 patients found to have severe acute pancreatitis. All the 14 patients were correctly predicted by BISAP score. The scores were assessed by correlating the scores with three factors: organ failure, necrosis and mortality. The analysis for organ failure showed BISAP score has sensitivity of 71.43%, specificity of 95.35%, PPV of 71.43%, NPV of 95.35%, diagnostic accuracy of 92%; whereas Ranson’s score has sensitivity of 78.57%, specificity of 74.42%, PPV of 43.33%, NPV of 95.52 %, diagnostic accuracy of 88%. In this study, 7/20 patients with BISAP> 3 and 8/14 patients with Ranson’s >3, developed pancreatic necrosis. The statistical analysis for the prediction of necrosis has sensitivity of (81.82%, 90.91%), specificity of (94.35%, 77.53%), PPV of (64.29%, 43.56%), NPV of (97.67%, 98.57%), diagnostic accuracy of (93%, 91%) for BISAP and Ranson’s respectively. In this study, 4 patients with severs acute pancreatitis were expired. All 4 deaths were correctly predicted by BISAP score. The statistical analysis for the prediction of necrosis has sensitivity of (100%, 88.57%), specificity of (95.83%, 64.42%), PPV of (50%, 31.33%), NPV of (100%, 96.52%), diagnostic accuracy of (96%, 93%) for BISAP and Ranson’s respectively. In this study, patients developed pancreatic necrosis, acute renal failure, MODS, septicemia. These complications were more likely seen in patients with BISAP ≥ 3, and Ranson’s > 3, hence concluded that these are the patients in high risk group, who requires intensive monitoring and probably early intervention if necessary. Conclusion: From this study, alcohol (59%) was found to be the most common etiological factor for acute pancreatitis. Males were more commonly affected than females with a ratio of 10:1. The most common age groups of patients affected were in 4th decade of life. The overall mortality in patients with severe acute pancreatitis was 4% BISAP score is equally effective in finding out the frequency of severity and predicting mortality in patients with acute pancreatitis as Ranson's score. Moreover, its components are easily available and it does not require 48 hours for completion of assessment as compared to Ranson's score. It is an accurate tool to classify patients into mild and severe disease; it is easy to perform and can be done on the bedside of patients with acute pancreatitis in every setup.

Clinic significance of four clinical scoring systems in evaluating prognosis of acute pancreatitis / 天津医药

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.

BISAP and APACHEⅡ scores in predicting the severity and organ failure of patients with acute pancreatitis / 中华胰腺病杂志

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.

Comparison of BISAP, Ranson's, APACHE Ⅱ and CTSI scores in evaluating the severity of acute pancreatitis / 中华消化外科杂志

Objective To investigate the value of the bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP),Ranson's,APACHE Ⅱ and computed tomography severity index (CTSI) scoring system in evaluating the severity of acute pancreatitis.Methods The clinical data of 385 patients with acute pancreatitis who were admitted to the Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University from 2005 to 2011 were retrospectively analyzed.The values of 4 scoring systems including BISAP,Ranson's,APACHE Ⅱ and CTSI in predicting the incidences of severe acute pancreatitis,local complications and death were investigated by Chi-square test and receiver operating characteristic curv e.Odds ratio (OR) was calculated.The differences of areas under the curves (AUC) were analyzed using the Z test.Results The incidences of severe acute pancreatitis,local complications and mortality of patients with BISAP score ≥ 3 were 64.4％ (56/87),16.1％ (14/87) and 8.0％ (7/87),which were significantly higher than 13.4％ (40/298),6.4％ (19/298) and 0.3 ％ (1/298) of patients with BISAP score ≤ 2 (x2 =93.4,8.1,19.7,P ＜ 0.05).The incidences of severe acute pancreatitis,local complications and mortality of patients with Ranson's score≥3 were 52.7％ (48/91),22.0％ (20/91) and 7.7％ (7/91),which were significantly higher than 16.3％ (48/294),4.4％ (13/294) and 0.3％ (1/294) of patients with Ranson's score ≤2 (x2 =49.2,27.3,18.5,P ＜0.05).The incidences of severe acute pancreatitis,local complications and mortality of patients with APACHE Ⅱ score ≥ 8 were 46.6％ (27/58),20.7％ (12/58) and 8.6％ (5/58),which were significantly higher than 21.1％ (69/327),6.4％ (21/327) and 0.9％ (3/327) of patients with APACHE Ⅱ score≤7 (x2 =17.0,12.8,14.4,P ＜0.05).The incidences of severe acute pancreatitis,local complications and mortality of patients with CTSI score ≥4 were 51.4％ (19/37),51.4％ (19/37),16.2％ (6/37),which were significantly higher than 22.2％ (77/347),4.0％ (14/347),0.6％ (2/347) of patients with CTSI score≤3 (x2 =15.1,95.3,40.1,P ＜ 0.05).The sensitivity,specificity,positive and negative predictive values of BISAP were 58％,89％,64％,86％,respectively,and the AUC was 0.848,which were significantly higher than the other 3 systems (Z =2.02,4.22,4.78,P ＜ 0.05).The sensitivity,specificity,positive and negative predictive values of CTSI were 58％,95％,51％ and 96％,respectively,and the AUC was 0.926,which was significantly higher than the other 3 systems (Z =3.99,3.24,4.06,P ＜ 0.05).The sensitivity,specificity,positive and negative predictive values of BISAP were 88％,79％,8％ and 100％,respectively,and the AUC was 0.855,with no significant difference compared with the other 3 systems (Z =0.81,0.03,0.14,P ＞ 0.05).Conclusions The accurate rate of BISAP in predicting the severe acute pancreatitis is higher than Ranson's,APACHE Ⅱ and CTSI.The accurate rate of CTSI in predicting the incidence of local complications is higher than the other 3 systems.There is no significant difference of the 4 systems in predicting the mortality.The BISAP scoring system is helpful in early diagnosis of severe acute pancreatitis,and making the individualized treatment plan,thus improving the prognosis of patients.

Evaluation of BISAP and HAP scoring system in predicting prognosis of acute pancreatitis / 中华胰腺病杂志

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.

BISAP como predictor de gravedad en pacientes con pancreatitis aguda: experiencia en el Servicio de Emergencia del Hospital Daniel A. Carrión del Perú / BISAP as severity predictor in patients with acute pancreatitis: experience in the emergency service at Daniel A. Carrión Hospital in Peru

Acute pancreatitis is an inflammatory disease resulting from the autodigestion of the pancreas by the pancreatic enzymes secreted by this organ. Many parameters and scores have been developed with the purpose of accurate and early prediction of the severity of this disease in order to reduce its mortality rates. In 2008, the BISAP score was validated. This score has five variables for predicting mortality, which can be easily performed when the patient is admitted to the emergency service. Objective: To determine the sensibility and specificity of BISAP’s score to predict severity in the emergency Department of the Daniel A. Carrion Hospital. Methods: Patients with diagnosis of acute pancreatitis, between June 2009 and May, 2010 were included. Severity scores were assessed in order to predict the progress. Results: 162 patients were evaluated, 123 female (75.9 percent), and 39 male (24.1 percent). The average age of presentation was of 47 years. 14.8 percent (24 patients) were diagnosed with severe pancreatitis. The ROC curve was 0.801; 0.795 and 0.857 for the RANSON, APACHE II and BISAP, respectively. In was not possible to analyze the mortality prediction, because the number of deaths in this study was only 2. Conclusions: BISAP’s score is a simpler method for predicting the severity of the patients with acute pancreatitis in the first 24 hours in the emergency department with an efficacy comparable to traditional scores. In this study it was not possible to assess BISAP’s score as predictor of mortality for the patients with acute pancreatitis.

La pancreatitis aguda es una enfermedad inflamatoria que resulta de la autodigestión del páncreas por las enzimas que secreta el propio órgano. Muchos parámetros y scores han sido creados con la intensión de lograr predecir adecuada y precozmente la gravedad de la pancreatitis para así poder disminuir su mortalidad. En 2008 se validó el score BISAP, el cual consta de cinco variables para la predicción de mortalidad las cuales pueden realizarse fácilmente al momento del ingreso del paciente a la emergencia. Objetivo: Determinar si el BISAP es útil como factor pronóstico para predecir la gravedad de la pancreatitis aguda. Métodos: Estudio donde fueron incluidos pacientes con diagnóstico de pancreatitis aguda entre junio de 2009 y mayo de 2010 y se evaluó scores de gravedad para predecir la evolución de la enfermedad. Resultados: 162 pacientes fueron evaluados con el score BISAP, 123 mujeres (75,9 por ciento) y 39 varones (24,1 por ciento), edad promedio 47 años; 14,8 por ciento (24 pacientes) fueron diagnosticados con pancreatitis grave. El área bajo la curva para el score de RANSON, APACHE II y BISAP fue 0,80; 0,795 y 0,857, respectivamente. No fue posible analizar la predicción de mortalidad porque sólo se presentaron 2 defunciones. Conclusiones: BISAP es un método más sencillo y rápido que puede ser utilizado como predictor de gravedad en los servicios de emergencia y con eficacia comparable a los scores tradicionales.

Evaluation of bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis in predicting severity and prognosis of acute pancreatitis / 中华胰腺病杂志

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.

Validación del Score de BISAP como Sistema Pronóstico en Pancreatitis Aguda / Score Bisap validation as a prognostic system in acute pancreatitis

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.

Value of bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis scoring system in diagnosing severe acute pancreatitis / 中华胰腺病杂志

Objective To evaluate the value of the Bedside Index for Severity in Acute Pancreatitis (BISAP) in diagnosing severe acute pancreatitis. Methods Sixty-eight patients with suspected diagnosis of severe acute pancreatitis were collected and were scored by BISAP, APACHE Ⅱ , Ranson and CTSI scoring systems, respectively. BISAP scoring system included the blood urea nitrogen, impaired mental status,systemic inflammatory response syndrome, age, and pleural effusion. The diagnosis criteria of severe acute pancreatitis was BISAP ≥ 3 points or APACHE IⅡ ≥ 8 points, Ranson ≥ 3 points, CTSI ≥ 3 points. The diagnostic accuracy of SAP of these scoring systems was calculated. Results Among these 68 cases, 63.2％(43/68) were graded ≥ 3 points in BISAP scoring system;60.3％ (41/68) were marked ≥8 points in APACHE Ⅱ scoring system; 60.3％ (41/68) were scored ≥ 3 points in Ranson scoring system; and 67.6％(46/68) were scored ≥3 points in CTSI scoring system. There was no statistical difference between BISAP scoring system and other three scoring systems in diagnosing severe acute pancreatitis. Conclusions As a new and simple scoring system, BISAP scoring system can be widely used in the diagnosis of severe acute pancreatitis.