6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Early Changes in Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) Can Predict Mortality in Acute Pancreatitis: Comparative Study between BISAP Score, APACHE-II, and Other Laboratory Markers—A Prospective Observational Study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Changes in BUN have been proposed as a risk factor for complications in acute pancreatitis (AP). Our study aimed to compare changes in BUN versus the Bedside Index for Severity in Acute Pancreatitis (BISAP) score and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II score (APACHE-II), as well as other laboratory tests such as haematocrit and its variations over 24 h and C-reactive protein, in order to determine the most accurate test for predicting mortality and severity outcomes in AP.

          Methods

          Clinical data of 410 AP patients, prospectively enrolled for study at our institution, were analyzed. We define AP according to Atlanta classification (AC) 2012. The laboratory test's predictive accuracy was measured using area-under-the-curve receiver-operating characteristics (AUC) analysis and sensitivity and specificity tests.

          Results

          Rise in BUN was the only score related to mortality on the multivariate analysis ( p=0.000, OR: 12.7; CI 95%: 4.2−16.6). On the comparative analysis of AUC, the rise in BUN was an accurate test in predicting mortality (AUC: 0.842) and persisting multiorgan failure (AUC: 0.828), similar to the BISAP score (AUC: 0.836 and 0.850) and APACHE-II (AUC: 0.756 and 0.741). The BISAP score outperformed both APACHE-II and rise in BUN at 24 hours in predicting severe AP (AUC: 0.873 vs. 0.761 and 0.756, respectively).

          Conclusion

          Rise in BUN at 24 hours is a quick and reliable test in predicting mortality and persisting multiorgan failure in AP patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Classification of acute pancreatitis--2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus.

          The Atlanta classification of acute pancreatitis enabled standardised reporting of research and aided communication between clinicians. Deficiencies identified and improved understanding of the disease make a revision necessary. A web-based consultation was undertaken in 2007 to ensure wide participation of pancreatologists. After an initial meeting, the Working Group sent a draft document to 11 national and international pancreatic associations. This working draft was forwarded to all members. Revisions were made in response to comments, and the web-based consultation was repeated three times. The final consensus was reviewed, and only statements based on published evidence were retained. The revised classification of acute pancreatitis identified two phases of the disease: early and late. Severity is classified as mild, moderate or severe. Mild acute pancreatitis, the most common form, has no organ failure, local or systemic complications and usually resolves in the first week. Moderately severe acute pancreatitis is defined by the presence of transient organ failure, local complications or exacerbation of co-morbid disease. Severe acute pancreatitis is defined by persistent organ failure, that is, organ failure >48 h. Local complications are peripancreatic fluid collections, pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis (sterile or infected), pseudocyst and walled-off necrosis (sterile or infected). We present a standardised template for reporting CT images. This international, web-based consensus provides clear definitions to classify acute pancreatitis using easily identified clinical and radiologic criteria. The wide consultation among pancreatologists to reach this consensus should encourage widespread adoption.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Multiple organ dysfunction score: a reliable descriptor of a complex clinical outcome.

            To develop an objective scale to measure the severity of the multiple organ dysfunction syndrome as an outcome in critical illness. Systematic literature review; prospective cohort study. Surgical intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary-level teaching hospital. All patients (n = 692) admitted for > 24 hrs between May 1988 and March 1990. None. Computerized database review of MEDLINE identified clinical studies of multiple organ failure that were published between 1969 and 1993. Variables from these studies were evaluated for construct and content validity to identify optimal descriptors of organ dysfunction. Clinical and laboratory data were collected daily to evaluate the performance of these variables individually and in aggregate as an organ dysfunction score. Seven systems defined the multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in more than half of the 30 published reports reviewed. Descriptors meeting criteria for construct and content validity could be identified for five of these seven systems: a) the respiratory system (Po2/FIO2 ratio); b) the renal system (serum creatinine concentration); c) the hepatic system (serum bilirubin concentration); d) the hematologic system (platelet count); and e) the central nervous system (Glasgow Coma Scale). In the absence of an adequate descriptor of cardiovascular dysfunction, we developed a new variable, the pressure-adjusted heart rate, which is calculated as the product of the heart rate and the ratio of central venous pressure to mean arterial pressure. These candidate descriptors of organ dysfunction were then evaluated for criterion validity (ICU mortality rate) using the clinical database. From the first half of the database (the development set), intervals for the most abnormal value of each variable were constructed on a scale from 0 to 4 so that a value of 0 represented essentially normal function and was associated with an ICU mortality rate of or = 50%. These intervals were then tested on the second half of the data set (the validation set). Maximal scores for each variable were summed to yield a Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score (maximum of 24). This score correlated in a graded fashion with the ICU mortality rate, both when applied on the first day of ICU admission as a prognostic indicator and when calculated over the ICU stay as an outcome measure. For the latter, ICU mortality was approximately 25% at 9 to 12 points, 50% at 13 to 16 points, 75% at 17 to 20 points, and 100% at levels of > 20 points. The score showed excellent discrimination, as reflected in areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.936 in the development set and 0.928 in the validation set. The incremental increase in scores over the course of the ICU stay (calculated as the difference between maximal scores and those scores obtained on the first day [i.e., the delta Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score]) also demonstrated a strong correlation with the ICU mortality rate. In a logistic regression model, this incremental increase in scores accounted for more of the explanatory power than admission severity indices. This multiple organ dysfunction score, constructed using simple physiologic measures of dysfunction in six organ systems, mirrors organ dysfunction as the intensivist sees it and correlates strongly with the ultimate risk of ICU mortality and hospital mortality. The variable, delta Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score, reflects organ dysfunction developing during the ICU stay, which therefore is potentially amenable to therapeutic manipulation. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              American College of Gastroenterology guideline: management of acute pancreatitis.

              This guideline presents recommendations for the management of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP). During the past decade, there have been new understandings and developments in the diagnosis, etiology, and early and late management of the disease. As the diagnosis of AP is most often established by clinical symptoms and laboratory testing, contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the pancreas should be reserved for patients in whom the diagnosis is unclear or who fail to improve clinically. Hemodynamic status should be assessed immediately upon presentation and resuscitative measures begun as needed. Patients with organ failure and/or the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) should be admitted to an intensive care unit or intermediary care setting whenever possible. Aggressive hydration should be provided to all patients, unless cardiovascular and/or renal comorbidites preclude it. Early aggressive intravenous hydration is most beneficial within the first 12-24 h, and may have little benefit beyond. Patients with AP and concurrent acute cholangitis should undergo endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) within 24 h of admission. Pancreatic duct stents and/or postprocedure rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) suppositories should be utilized to lower the risk of severe post-ERCP pancreatitis in high-risk patients. Routine use of prophylactic antibiotics in patients with severe AP and/or sterile necrosis is not recommended. In patients with infected necrosis, antibiotics known to penetrate pancreatic necrosis may be useful in delaying intervention, thus decreasing morbidity and mortality. In mild AP, oral feedings can be started immediately if there is no nausea and vomiting. In severe AP, enteral nutrition is recommended to prevent infectious complications, whereas parenteral nutrition should be avoided. Asymptomatic pancreatic and/or extrapancreatic necrosis and/or pseudocysts do not warrant intervention regardless of size, location, and/or extension. In stable patients with infected necrosis, surgical, radiologic, and/or endoscopic drainage should be delayed, preferably for 4 weeks, to allow the development of a wall around the necrosis.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol
                Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol
                CJGH
                Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology
                Hindawi
                2291-2789
                2291-2797
                2021
                22 March 2021
                : 2021
                : 6643595
                Affiliations
                Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary and Transplant Surgery, Hospital Universitari Vall D'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: Yousuke Nakai

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6898-5502
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3512-0814
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4972-5315
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6274-5911
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8312-3273
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6110-8280
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1202-4136
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9709-6288
                Article
                10.1155/2021/6643595
                8007377
                33824864
                422b412f-54d7-4835-867e-2c2a0027684f
                Copyright © 2021 Elizabeth Pando et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 9 November 2020
                : 6 March 2021
                : 13 March 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: Obra Social Desentralizada”-CaixaBank Foundation
                Categories
                Research Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article