Advances in the laboratory diagnostics of acute pancreatitis.

Acute pancreatitis is a rather common abdominal disorder. In most patients the disease is mild, but about 20% of cases develop a severe necrotizing form of the disease with complications. In an emergency setting, the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis remains problematic and several patients with severe disease are diagnosed only at autopsy. Measurements of amylase or lipase are the principal laboratory methods for diagnosing acute pancreatitis. However, their sensitivity and specificity are generally considered unsatisfactory. Recent advances in the knowledge of the pathogenesis of acute pancreatitis and advances in laboratory technology have revealed new diagnostic possibilities. Especially assays based on trypsin pathophysiology have brought new alternatives for diagnostics and severity grading of the disease. Additionally, development of phospholipase A2 determinations and discovery of a new pancreatic protein, pancreatitis-associated protein, are very interesting. This article summarizes the value of new methods in the laboratory diagnostics of acute pancreatitis.

Rapid measurement of urinary trypsinogen-2 as a screening test for acute pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Acute pancreatitis can be difficult to diagnose. We developed a rapid dipstick screening test for pancreatitis, based on the immunochromatographic measurement of urinary trypsinogen-2. METHODS: We prospectively compared the urinary trypsinogen-2 dipstick test with a quantitative urinary trypsinogen-2 assay, a urinary dipstick test for amylase, and serum and urinary amylase assays in 500 consecutive patients with acute abdominal pain at two emergency departments. Acute pancreatitis was diagnosed according to standardized criteria. RESULTS: The urinary trypsinogen-2 dipstick test was positive in 50 of the 53 patients with acute pancreatitis (sensitivity, 94 percent), including all 7 with severe pancreatitis. Two patients with urinary trypsinogen-2 concentrations below the sensitivity threshold of the test (50 ng per milliliter) and one with a very high concentration had false negative results. The test was also positive in 21 of the 447 patients without pancreatitis (specificity, 95 percent), including 7 with abdominal cancers, 3 with cholangitis, and 2 with chronic pancreatitis. The sensitivity and specificity of the dipstick test were similar to those of the quantitative urinary trypsinogen-2 assay and higher than those of the urinary amylase dipstick test. The serum amylase assay had a sensitivity of 85 percent (with a cutoff value of 300 U per liter for the upper reference limit) and a specificity of 91 percent. The sensitivity and specificity of the urinary amylase assay (cutoff value, 2000 U per liter) were 83 and 88 percent, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute abdominal pain seen in the emergency department, a negative dipstick test for urinary trypsinogen-2 rules out acute pancreatitis with a high degree of probability. A positive test usually identifies patients in need of further evaluation.