4项评分系统对重症急性胰腺炎预后评估的受试者工作特征曲线分析

doi:10.3736/jcim20090105

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the value of Ranson, acute physiology and chronic health evaluationⅡ (APACHEⅡ), Balthazar CT and pancreatitis outcome prediction (POP) scoring systems in predicting the prognosis of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP).
Methods

A total of 253 consecutive patients with SAP, admitted into West China Hospital of Sichuan University from January 2004 to August 2007 were studied retrospectively. Data associated to Ranson, APACHEⅡ, Balthazar CT and POP scoring systems after admissions were recorded. Four outcome signals including death, local complications, operation transformation, and development of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) were analyzed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were also drawn and the areas under the ROC curve (AUC) were obtained to compare the sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, and likelihood ratio positive test (LRPT) of the clinical scoring systems in assessing the prognosis of SAP.
Results

Through comparison of AUC, Ranson score could be used to predict the outcomes except for local complications (P=0.00), and all its diagnosis threshold was 5. APACHEⅡscore showed that it could assess the outcomes of SAP except for local complications (P=0.00). Its thresholds in mortality, operation transformation, and incidence of MODS were 14, 10, and 12 respectively. Balthazar CT could predict all the outcomes, and the threshold was 6. POP score could predict all the outcomes except for local complications, and its predictive value in mortality was particularly prominent. The sensitivity and specificity of POP in predicting death were 0.90 and 0.92 as the cutoff was no less than 14. The thresholds of POP in mortality, operation transformation, and incidence of MODS were 14, 8, and 10 respectively.
Conclusion

The prognostic ability of the four scoring systems is not the same. Ranson, APACHEⅡ and POP scoring systems can predict the severity of SAP and entire complication, but they can't predict the local complications. POP score may predict the mortality well, and Balthazar CT scanning can predict all the outcomes, but the sensitivity and specificity are low.

Key words: Acute necrotizing pancreatitis, Prognosis, Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation, Patient outcome assessment

Jing-yun Fan, Zong-wen Huang, Jia Guo. Value of four scoring systems for predicting prognosis of severe acute pancreatitis. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2009, 7(1): 34-40.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote| Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

URL: http://www.jcimjournal.com/EN/10.3736/jcim20090105

http://www.jcimjournal.com/EN/Y2009/V7/I1/34

TrendMD

Figures/Tables 8

Table 1

Figure 1

Table 2

Figure 2

Table 3

Figure 3

Table 4

Figure 4

References 21

[1]	Group of Pancreatopathy, Branch Association for Diseases of Digestive System, Chinese Medical Association. Draft criteria for diagnosis and treatment of acute pancreatitis in China[J]. Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi, 2004,43(3):236-238
	中华医学会消化病学分会胰腺疾病学组. 中国急性胰腺炎诊治指南(草案)[J]. 中华内科杂志, 2004,43(3):236-238
[2]	Whitcomb DC . Acute pancreatitis[J]. N Engl J Med, 2006,354(20):2142-2150 doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp054958
[3]	Mortele KJ, Wiesner W, Intriere L, Shankar S, Zou KH, Kalantari BN, Perez A, Sonnenberg EV, Ros PR, Banks PA, Silverman SG . A modified severity index for evaluating acute pancreatitis: improved correlation with patients' outcome[J]. AJR, 2004,183(5):1261-1265 doi: 10.2214/ajr.183.5.1831261
[4]	Ranson JH, Rifkind KM, Roses DF, Fink SD, Eng K, Spencer FC . Prognostic signs and role of operative management in acute pancreatitis[J]. Surg Gynecol Obstet, 1974,139(1):69-81
[5]	Ranson JH . The timing of biliary surgery in acute pancreatitis[J]. Ann Surg, 1979,189(5):654-663 doi: 10.1097/00000658-197905000-00016
[6]	Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE . APACHEⅡ: a severity of disease classification system[J]. Crit Care Med, 1985,13(10):818-829 doi: 10.1097/00003246-198510000-00009
[7]	Balthazar EJ, Freeny PC, van Sonnenberg E .Imaging and intervention in acute pancreatitis[J]. Radiology, 1994,193(2):297-306 doi: 10.1148/radiology.193.2.7972730
[8]	Harrison DA, D'Amico G, Singer M .The Pancreatitis Outcome Prediction(POP) Score: a new prognostic index for patients with severe acute pancreatitis[J]. Crit Care Med, 2007,35(7):1703-1708 doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000269031.13283.C8
[9]	Hanley JA, McNeil BJ .The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curve[J]. Radiology, 1982,143(1):29-36 doi: 10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747
[10]	Modrau S, Floyd AK, Thorlacius-Ussing O . The clinical value of procalcitonin in early assessment of acute pancreatitis[J]. Am J Gastroenterol, 2005,100(7):1593-1597 doi: 10.1111/ajg.2005.100.issue-7
[11]	Gong ZH, Wang XP . Prognosis and treatment of acute pancreatitis evaluated by evidence-based medicine[J]. Yi Xian Bing Xue, 2002,2(2):116-119
	龚自华, 王兴鹏 . 用循证医学的原理评价急性胰腺炎的预后和治疗[J]. 胰腺病学, 2002,2(2):116-119
[12]	Wang ZQ, Li JS . The progress of CT evaluation in acute pancreatitis[J]. Yi Xue Yan Jiu Sheng Xue Bao, 2002,15(5):450-452
	王中秋, 黎介寿 . 急性胰腺炎CT评价及进展[J]. 医学研究生学报, 2002,15(5):450-452
[13]	Le XH, Xie HZ . Evaluation of scoring systems in acute pancreatitis[J]. Xian Dai Xiao Hua Ji Jie Ru Zhen Liao, 2007,12(3):195-199
	乐星华, 谢会忠 . 急性胰腺炎评分标准的评价[J]. 现代消化及介入诊疗, 2007,12(3):195-199
[14]	Knoepfli AS, Kinkel K, Berney T, Morel P, Becker CD, Poletti PA . Prospective study of 310 patients: can early CT predict the severity of acute pancreatitis?[J]. Abdom Imaging, 2007,32(1):111-115 doi: 10.1007/s00261-006-9034-y
[15]	Miskovitz P . A new prognostic system for severe acute pancreatitis[J]. Crit Care Med, 2007,35(7):1787-1788 doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000269369.43690.60
[16]	Chatzicostas C, Roussomoustakaki M, Vlachonikolis IG, Notas G, Mouzas Ⅰ, Samonakis D, Kouroumalis EA . Comparison of Ranson, APACHE Ⅱ and APACHE Ⅲ scoring systems in acute pancreatitis[J]. Pancreas, 2002,25(4):331-335 doi: 10.1097/00006676-200211000-00002
[17]	Wang YQ, Zhou MQ, Zhao J, Shen CL . Value of APACHE Ⅱ, Ranson and Balthazar scoring system predicting the severity and prognosis and indicating therapy for severe acute pancreatitis[J]. Lin Chuang Wai Ke Za Zhi, 2007,15(2):109-111
	王约青, 周鸣清, 赵坚, 沈承澜 .APACHEⅡ, Ranson, Balthazar评估系统对重症急性胰腺炎诊断及预后评估的参考价值[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2007,15(2):109-111
[18]	Liu Y, Lu Z, Li ZS, Dong YH, Zhang WJ, Pan X . Prediction of outcome in acute pancreatitis: a comparative study of APACHE Ⅱ, Ranson and Balthazar computed tomography scoring systems[J]. Yi Xian Bing Xue, 2006,6(4):196-200
	刘岩, 路筝, 李兆申, 董元航, 张文俊, 潘雪 . APACHEⅡ, Ranson和CT评分系统对重症急性胰腺炎预后评价的比较[J]. 胰腺病学, 2006,6(4):196-200
[19]	Chen ZZ, Wang Z, Tan Y, Zhang Y, Ying SP, Yang ZH, Zhou C . Muti-detectorspiral CT scoring system to evaluate the severity of acute pancreatitis — the association of Balthazar and APACHE Ⅱ[J]. Zhonghua Ji Zhen Yi Xue Za Zhi, 2003,12(7):492-494
	陈再智, 王志, 谭晔, 张燕, 应申鹏, 杨正汉, 周诚 . 急性胰腺炎严重度的多层螺旋CT评价——Balthazar CT 评分与APACHEⅡ评分的相关性[J]. 中华急诊医学杂志, 2003,12(7):492-494
[20]	Zou XP, Gu C, Liu MD, Li YH, Qian C . A comparative study on three clinical criteria in predicting outcome of patients with acute pancreatitis[J]. Zhonghua Xiao Hua Za Zhi, 2007,27(1):32-35
	邹晓平, 顾超, 刘明东, 李运红, 钱铖 . 三种临床评分标准对急性胰腺炎预后的评估价值比较[J]. 中华消化杂志, 2007,27(1):32-35
[21]	Toosie A, Chang L, Renslo R, Arnell T, Bongard F, Stabile BE, De Virgilio C . Early computed tomography is rarely necessary in gallstone pancreatitis[J]. Am Surg, 1997,63(10):904-907

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 10

[1]	Dong Yang, Yong-ping Du, Qing Shen, Wei Chen, Yan Yu, Guang-lei Chen. Expression of alpha-smooth muscle actin in renal tubulointerstitium in patients with kidney collateral stasis. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2008, 6(1): 41-44
[2]	Hai-feng Wei, Bai-liu Ya, Ling Zhao, Cui-fei Ye, Li Zhang, Lin Li. Evaluation of tongue manifestation of blood stasis syndrome and its relationship with blood rheological disorder in a rat model of transient brain ischemia. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2008, 6(1): 73-76
[3]	Xi Lin, Jian-ping Liu. Herbal medicines for viral myocarditis. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2008, 6(1): 76
[4]	Xi Lin, Jian-ping Liu. Tai chi for treating rheumatoid arthritis. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2008, 6(1): 82
[5]	Liang-ping Hu, Hui Gao. Discrimination of errors in statistical analysis of medical papers published in the first issue of 2006 in Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2008, 6(1): 98-106
[6]	Yan-bo Zhu , Qi Wang, Cheng-yu Wu, Guo-ming Pang, Jian-xiong Zhao, Shi-lin Shen, Zhong-yuan Xia , Xue Yan . Logistic regression analysis on relationships between traditional Chinese medicine constitutional types and overweight or obesity. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2010, 8(11): 1023-1035
[7]	Wei Xu, Meng Shi, Jian-gang Liu, Cheng-long Wang . Collagen protein expressions in ischemic myocardium of rats with acute myocardial infarction and effects of qi-tonifying, yin-tonifying and blood-activating herbs and detoxifying and blood-activating herbs. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2010, 8(11): 1041-1047
[8]	Tao Wang , Feng Qin. Effects of Chinese herbal medicine Xiaoyao Powder on monoamine neurotransmitters in hippocampus of rats with postpartum depression. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2010, 8(11): 1075-1079
[9]	Ying Xu , Chang-chun Zeng , Xiu-yu Cai , Rong-ping Guo , Guang Nie , Ying Jin. Chromaticity and optical spectrum colorimetry of the tongue color in different syndromes of primary hepatic carcinoma. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2012, 10(11): 1263-1271
[10]	Xiang-ying Mao , Qin Bian , Zi-yin Shen. Analysis of the osteogenetic effects exerted on mesenchymal stem cell strain C3H10T1/2 by icariin via MAPK signaling pathway in vitro. Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, 2012, 10(11): 1272-1278

Scoring system	AUC	Standard difference	95% confidence interval	Youden index	Sensitivity	Specificity	Cutoff	LRPT
Ranson	0.90	0.03	0.85-0.95	0.63	0.93	0.70	≥5	3.13
APACHEⅡ	0.93	0.02	0.89-0.98	0.75	0.90	0.85	≥14	5.81
Balthazar CT	0.74*	0.04	0.66-0.82	0.41	0.70	0.71	≥6	2.45
POP	0.96	0.01	0.94-0.99	0.82	0.90	0.92	≥14	11.25

Scoring system	AUC	Standard difference	95% confidence interval	P	Youden index	Sensitivity	Specificity	Cutoff	LRPT
Ranson	0.57	0.04	0.49-0.65	0.10	0.14	0.89	0.26	≥5	1.19
APACHEⅡ	0.57	0.04	0.50-0.64	0.11	0.21	0.75	0.45	≥7	1.38
Balthazar CT	0.67*	0.04	0.60-0.74	0.00	0.23	0.53	0.70	≥6	1.77
POP	0.53	0.04	0.44-0.61	0.56	0.16	0.53	0.64	≥10	1.44

Scoring system	AUC	Standard difference	95% confidence interval	Youden index	Sensitivity	Specificity	Cutoff	LRPT
Ranson	0.78	0.05	0.69-0.88	0.45	0.81	0.63	≥5	2.22
APACHEⅡ	0.77	0.05	0.68-0.86	0.51	0.94	0.57	≥10	2.18
Balthazar CT	0.89	0.04	0.81-0.97	0.63	0.94	0.69	≥6	3.01
POP	0.78	0.05	0.70-0.87	0.47	1.00	0.47	≥8	1.90

Scoring system	AUC	Standard difference	95% confidence interval	Youden index	Sensitivity	Specificity	Cutoff	LRPT
Ranson	0.90	0.02	0.86-0.94	0.67	0.85	0.83	≥5	4.91
APACHEⅡ	0.91	0.02	0.87-0.95	0.69	0.82	0.87	≥12	6.32
Balthazar CT	0.74*	0.03	0.67-0.80	0.35	0.58	0.76	≥6	2.46
POP	0.86	0.03	0.82-0.91	0.59	0.80	0.79	≥10	3.86

Value of four scoring systems for predicting prognosis of severe acute pancreatitis

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Cited

Like

Abstract

Cite this article

Share this article