BACKGROUND: Early prognostic evaluation of patients with peritonitis is desirable to select high-risk patients for intensive management and also to provide a reliable objective classification of severity and operative risk. This study attempts to evaluate the use of scoring systems such as Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Evaluation score (APACHE II) and Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI) in patients with peritonitis. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted using 101 consecutive patients (69 male, 32 female) having generalized peritonitis over a two-year period. Both scoring systems were applied to patients before laparotomy. Based upon the scores, patients were arranged into three groups. The outcome of patients was noted and the accuracy of the two systems was evaluated. RESULTS: In the MPI system, mortality was 0 in the group of patients with a score of less than 15, while it was 4% in the patients scoring 16-25 and 82.3% in those with scores of more than 25. Similarly, in the APACHE II system, no mortality was noted in patients with scores less than 10. Mortality was 35.29% and 91.7% in the groups scoring 10-20 and more than 20, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both scoring systems are accurate in predicting mortality; however, the APACHE II has definitive advantages and is therefore more useful.
BACKGROUND: Early prognostic evaluation of patients with peritonitis is desirable to select high-risk patients for intensive management and also to provide a reliable objective classification of severity and operative risk. This study attempts to evaluate the use of scoring systems such as Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Evaluation score (APACHE II) and Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI) in patients with peritonitis. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted using 101 consecutive patients (69 male, 32 female) having generalized peritonitis over a two-year period. Both scoring systems were applied to patients before laparotomy. Based upon the scores, patients were arranged into three groups. The outcome of patients was noted and the accuracy of the two systems was evaluated. RESULTS: In the MPI system, mortality was 0 in the group of patients with a score of less than 15, while it was 4% in the patients scoring 16-25 and 82.3% in those with scores of more than 25. Similarly, in the APACHE II system, no mortality was noted in patients with scores less than 10. Mortality was 35.29% and 91.7% in the groups scoring 10-20 and more than 20, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both scoring systems are accurate in predicting mortality; however, the APACHE II has definitive advantages and is therefore more useful.
Authors: Neil Boudville; Anna Kemp; Philip Clayton; Wai Lim; Sunil V Badve; Carmel M Hawley; Stephen P McDonald; Kathryn J Wiggins; Kym M Bannister; Fiona G Brown; David W Johnson Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2012-05-24 Impact factor: 10.121