Soumitra R Eachempati1, Lynn J Hydo, Philip S Barie. 1. Department of Surgery, Weill Medical College of Cornell University and Anne and Max A. Cohen Surgical Intensive Care Unit, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY 10021, USA. sre2003@med.cornell.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite a paucity of validation, the Ranson score is still the most popular method for gauging the severity of pancreatitis. HYPOTHESES: The Ranson score more accurately predicts outcomes in patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) when compared with APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) III scores, and the individual components of the Ranson score differ in their capacities to predict outcome in patients with SAP. METHODS: Patients admitted with SAP to a university surgical intensive care unit (ICU) were studied prospectively. Each component and the total Ranson score were recorded. Also recorded were the APACHE II and III scores. These Ranson variables were compared using univariate analysis of variance for mortality, need for operative debridement, and need for an ICU stay for longer than 7 days. Significant variables were then analyzed by a multivariate analysis of variance to assess independent predictors of mortality, the need for debridement, and prolonged length of stay. Data are given as the mean +/- SEM. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients (21.1% mortality), aged 61.8 +/- 1.9 years, were studied. The mean APACHE III score was 48.2 +/- 3.3, and the mean ICU stay was 10.4 +/- 2.1 days. The number of positive Ranson variables was significantly higher in nonsurvivors compared with survivors (5.6 +/- 0.5 vs 3.4 +/- 0.2; P<.001), as were the APACHE III score (76.9 +/- 9.9 vs 40.5 +/- 2.5; P<.001) and ICU stay (24.9 +/- 7.5 vs 76.5 +/- 1.9 days; P =.002). Ranson variables that predicted mortality included values for blood urea nitrogen, calcium, base deficit, and fluid sequestration. CONCLUSIONS: The Ranson score remains a valid predictor of outcomes in patients with SAP, and individual Ranson variables determined 48 hours after hospital admission predicted adverse outcomes more accurately than early Ranson variables in patients with SAP.
BACKGROUND: Despite a paucity of validation, the Ranson score is still the most popular method for gauging the severity of pancreatitis. HYPOTHESES: The Ranson score more accurately predicts outcomes in patients with severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) when compared with APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) III scores, and the individual components of the Ranson score differ in their capacities to predict outcome in patients with SAP. METHODS:Patients admitted with SAP to a university surgical intensive care unit (ICU) were studied prospectively. Each component and the total Ranson score were recorded. Also recorded were the APACHE II and III scores. These Ranson variables were compared using univariate analysis of variance for mortality, need for operative debridement, and need for an ICU stay for longer than 7 days. Significant variables were then analyzed by a multivariate analysis of variance to assess independent predictors of mortality, the need for debridement, and prolonged length of stay. Data are given as the mean +/- SEM. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients (21.1% mortality), aged 61.8 +/- 1.9 years, were studied. The mean APACHE III score was 48.2 +/- 3.3, and the mean ICU stay was 10.4 +/- 2.1 days. The number of positive Ranson variables was significantly higher in nonsurvivors compared with survivors (5.6 +/- 0.5 vs 3.4 +/- 0.2; P<.001), as were the APACHE III score (76.9 +/- 9.9 vs 40.5 +/- 2.5; P<.001) and ICU stay (24.9 +/- 7.5 vs 76.5 +/- 1.9 days; P =.002). Ranson variables that predicted mortality included values for blood ureanitrogen, calcium, base deficit, and fluid sequestration. CONCLUSIONS: The Ranson score remains a valid predictor of outcomes in patients with SAP, and individual Ranson variables determined 48 hours after hospital admission predicted adverse outcomes more accurately than early Ranson variables in patients with SAP.
Authors: Jan J De Waele; Eric Hoste; Stijn I Blot; Uwe Hesse; Piet Pattyn; Bernard de Hemptinne; Johan Decruyenaere; Dirk Vogelaers; Francis Colardyn Journal: Crit Care Date: 2004-11-02 Impact factor: 9.097