AIM: To investigate whether administration of Ringer's solution (RL) could have an impact on the outcome of acute pancreatitis (AP). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on 103 patients [68 men and 35 women, mean age 51.2 years (range, 19-92 years)] hospitalized between 2011 and 2012. All patients admitted to the Department of Gastroenterology of the Central Clinical Hospital of the Ministry of Interior (Poland) with a diagnosis of AP who had disease onset within 48 h of presentation were included in this study. Based on the presence of persistent organ failure (longer than 48 h) as a criterion for the diagnosis of severe AP (SAP) and the presence of local complications [diagnosis of moderately severe AP (MSAP)], patients were classified into 3 groups: mild AP (MAP), MSAP and SAP. Data were compared between the groups in terms of severity (using the revised Atlanta criteria) and outcome. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on the type of fluid resuscitation: the 1-RL group who underwent standard fluid resuscitation with a RL 1000 mL solution or the 2-NS group who underwent standard fluid resuscitation with 1000 mL normal saline (NS). All patients from both groups received an additional 5% glucose solution (1000-1500 mL) and a multi-electrolyte solution (500-1000 mL). RESULTS: We observed 64 (62.1%) patients with MAP, 26 (25.24%) patients with MSAP and 13 (12.62%) patients with SAP. No significant difference in the distribution of AP severity between the two groups was found. In the 1-RL group, we identified 22 (55.5%) MAP, 10 (25.5%) MSAP and 8 (20.0%) SAP patients, compared with 42 (66.7%) MAP, 16 (24.4%) MSAP and 5 (7.9%) SAP cases in the 2-NS group (P = 0.187). The volumes of fluid administered during the initial 72-h period of hospitalization were similar among the patients from both the 1-RL and 2-NS groups (mean 3400 mL vs 3000 mL, respectively). No significant differences between the 1-RL and 2-NS groups were found in confirmed pancreatic necrosis [10 patients (25%) vs 12 patients (19%), respectively, P = 0.637]. There were no statistically significant differences between the 1-RL and 2-NS groups in the percentage of patients who required enteral nutrition (23 patients vs 17 patients, respectively, P = 0.534). Logistic regression analysis confirmed these findings (OR = 1.344, 95%CI: 0.595-3.035, P = 0.477). There were no significant differences between the 1-RL and 2-NS groups in mortality and the duration of hospital stay (median of 9 d for both groups, P = 0.776). CONCLUSION: Our study failed to find any evidence that the administration of RL in the first days of AP leads to improved clinical outcomes.
AIM: To investigate whether administration of Ringer's solution (RL) could have an impact on the outcome of acute pancreatitis (AP). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on 103 patients [68 men and 35 women, mean age 51.2 years (range, 19-92 years)] hospitalized between 2011 and 2012. All patients admitted to the Department of Gastroenterology of the Central Clinical Hospital of the Ministry of Interior (Poland) with a diagnosis of AP who had disease onset within 48 h of presentation were included in this study. Based on the presence of persistent organ failure (longer than 48 h) as a criterion for the diagnosis of severe AP (SAP) and the presence of local complications [diagnosis of moderately severe AP (MSAP)], patients were classified into 3 groups: mild AP (MAP), MSAP and SAP. Data were compared between the groups in terms of severity (using the revised Atlanta criteria) and outcome. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on the type of fluid resuscitation: the 1-RL group who underwent standard fluid resuscitation with a RL 1000 mL solution or the 2-NS group who underwent standard fluid resuscitation with 1000 mL normal saline (NS). All patients from both groups received an additional 5% glucose solution (1000-1500 mL) and a multi-electrolyte solution (500-1000 mL). RESULTS: We observed 64 (62.1%) patients with MAP, 26 (25.24%) patients with MSAP and 13 (12.62%) patients with SAP. No significant difference in the distribution of AP severity between the two groups was found. In the 1-RL group, we identified 22 (55.5%) MAP, 10 (25.5%) MSAP and 8 (20.0%) SAPpatients, compared with 42 (66.7%) MAP, 16 (24.4%) MSAP and 5 (7.9%) SAP cases in the 2-NS group (P = 0.187). The volumes of fluid administered during the initial 72-h period of hospitalization were similar among the patients from both the 1-RL and 2-NS groups (mean 3400 mL vs 3000 mL, respectively). No significant differences between the 1-RL and 2-NS groups were found in confirmed pancreatic necrosis [10 patients (25%) vs 12 patients (19%), respectively, P = 0.637]. There were no statistically significant differences between the 1-RL and 2-NS groups in the percentage of patients who required enteral nutrition (23 patients vs 17 patients, respectively, P = 0.534). Logistic regression analysis confirmed these findings (OR = 1.344, 95%CI: 0.595-3.035, P = 0.477). There were no significant differences between the 1-RL and 2-NS groups in mortality and the duration of hospital stay (median of 9 d for both groups, P = 0.776). CONCLUSION: Our study failed to find any evidence that the administration of RL in the first days of AP leads to improved clinical outcomes.
Authors: Enrique de-Madaria; Gema Soler-Sala; José Sánchez-Payá; Inmaculada Lopez-Font; Juan Martínez; Laura Gómez-Escolar; Laura Sempere; Cristina Sánchez-Fortún; Miguel Pérez-Mateo Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2011-08-30 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Gang Zhao; Jun-Gang Zhang; He-Shui Wu; Jin Tao; Qi Qin; Shi-Chang Deng; Yang Liu; Lin Liu; Bo Wang; Kui Tian; Xiang Li; Shuai Zhu; Chun-You Wang Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-04-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Matthew D Haydock; Anubhav Mittal; Heath R Wilms; Anthony Phillips; Maxim S Petrov; John A Windsor Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Madhavi Bhoomagoud; Thomas Jung; Jorunn Atladottir; Thomas R Kolodecik; Christine Shugrue; Anamika Chaudhuri; Edwin C Thrower; Fred S Gorelick Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2009-05-18 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Boris Jung; Thomas Rimmele; Charlotte Le Goff; Gérald Chanques; Philippe Corne; Olivier Jonquet; Laurent Muller; Jean-Yves Lefrant; Christophe Guervilly; Laurent Papazian; Bernard Allaouchiche; Samir Jaber Journal: Crit Care Date: 2011-10-13 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: María M Adeva-Andany; Carlos Fernández-Fernández; David Mouriño-Bayolo; Elvira Castro-Quintela; Alberto Domínguez-Montero Journal: ScientificWorldJournal Date: 2014-10-21
Authors: Maisam Abu-El-Haija; Soma Kumar; Jose Antonio Quiros; Keshawadhana Balakrishnan; Bradley Barth; Samuel Bitton; John F Eisses; Elsie Jazmin Foglio; Victor Fox; Denease Francis; Alvin Jay Freeman; Tanja Gonska; Amit S Grover; Sohail Z Husain; Rakesh Kumar; Sameer Lapsia; Tom Lin; Quin Y Liu; Asim Maqbool; Zachary M Sellers; Flora Szabo; Aliye Uc; Steven L Werlin; Veronique D Morinville Journal: J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 2.839
Authors: Mariusz Rosołowski; Michał Lipiński; Marek Dobosz; Marek Durlik; Stanisław Głuszek; Katarzyna Kuśnierz; Paweł Lampe; Ewa Małecka-Panas; Ewa Nowakowska-Duława; Magdalena Nowak-Niezgoda; Barbara Radomańska; Renata Talar-Wojnarowska; Urszula Wereszczyńska-Siemiątkowska; Grażyna Rydzewska Journal: Prz Gastroenterol Date: 2016-06-08
Authors: Ari Leppäniemi; Matti Tolonen; Antonio Tarasconi; Helmut Segovia-Lohse; Emiliano Gamberini; Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Chad G Ball; Neil Parry; Massimo Sartelli; Daan Wolbrink; Harry van Goor; Gianluca Baiocchi; Luca Ansaloni; Walter Biffl; Federico Coccolini; Salomone Di Saverio; Yoram Kluger; Ernest Moore; Fausto Catena Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2019-06-13 Impact factor: 5.469