Affordable Access

deepdyve-link
Publisher Website

Severity assessment of acute pancreatitis using CT severity index and modified CT severity index: Correlation with clinical outcomes and severity grading as per the Revised Atlanta Classification.

Authors
  • Sahu, Biswanath1
  • Abbey, Pooja1
  • Anand, Rama1
  • Kumar, Ashok2
  • Tomer, Shaili1
  • Malik, Ekta3
  • 1 Department of Radio-Diagnosis, Lady Hardinge Medical College and Associated Hospitals, New Delhi, India. , (India)
  • 2 Department of Surgery, Lady Hardinge Medical College and Associated Hospitals, New Delhi, India. , (India)
  • 3 Department of Biochemistry, Lady Hardinge Medical College and Associated Hospitals, New Delhi, India. , (India)
Type
Published Article
Journal
Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging
Publisher
Medknow Publications
Publication Date
Jan 01, 2017
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
152–160
Identifiers
DOI: 10.4103/ijri.IJRI_300_16
PMID: 28744075
Source
Medline
Keywords
Language
English
License
Unknown

Abstract

To assess the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP) using computed tomography (CT) severity index (CTSI) and modified CT severity index (MCTSI), to correlate with clinical outcome measures, and to assess concordance with severity grading, as per the revised Atlanta classification (RAC). In this prospective study approved by the Institutional Review Board (November 2014 to March 2016), sixty patients with AP (as per the RAC definition) underwent contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) 5-11 days (median 6 days) after symptom onset. Two radiologists, blinded to clinical parameters, independently assessed CTSI and MCTSI (differences were resolved by consensus). Clinical outcome parameters included duration of stay in the hospital and intensive care unit (ICU), presence of persistent organ failure (OF), evidence of infection, need for intervention, and mortality. We included 60 cases [36 males, age range 19-65 (mean 37) years]. As per the RAC, 26 patients had mild AP, 12 moderately severe, and 22 severe AP. According to CTSI and MCTSI, mild, moderate, and severe cases were 27 (45%), 19 (31.7%), 14 (23.3%) and 24 (40%), 10 (16.7%), 26 (43.3%), respectively. MCTSI was concordant with the RAC grading in 54 (90.0%), CTSI was concordant in 47 (78.3%), and both were concordant in 43 (71.7%) cases. Area under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUROC) was compared by the Hanley and McNeil method. Both CTSI and MCTSI were significantly associated with outcome parameters (P < 0.001), except duration of ICU stay. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and accuracy of CTSI for detecting moderate/severe disease were 97.1%, 100%, 100%, and 98.3% respectively, and of MCTSI were 100%, 92.3%, 94.4%, and 96.7% respectively. Both CTSI and MCTSI showed significant correlation with clinical outcome parameters, and good concordance with RAC grading of severity. MCTSI showed a higher sensitivity but lower specificity than CTSI in differentiating mild from moderate/severe AP.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times