Aims of this study: Severe acute pancreatitis has been defined recently based on the persistence of organ failure at 48 hours of admission. The bedside index for severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) score, a simplified scoring system to predict severity of acute pancreatitis, is proposed to be useful in early risk stratification of acute pancreatitis. Our aim was to prospectively compare BISAP score with the already established acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) and modified computed tomography severity index (CTSI) scores in predicting the severity of acute pancreatitis. Materials and methods: A total of 87 consecutive cases presenting with the first attack of acute pancreatitis were included in the study. Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II and BISAP scores were calculated from the worst parameters in the first 24 hours, and modified CTSI was reported at 48 hours of admission. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted, and predictive accuracy of each score was calculated from the area under the curve. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each score. Results: A total of 20 patients (23%) had severe acute pancreatitis with a total of 11 mortalities (12.64%), 10 of them in the severe acute pancreatitis group. Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II, modified CTSI, and BISAP score all correlated well with each other. Modified CTSI and BISAP score also correlated with duration of hospital stay. Areas under the curve for APACHE II (≥8), modified CTSI (≥8), and BISAP score (≥2) were 0.826, 0.806, and 0.811, respectively, suggesting similar predictive accuracy. Conclusion:The BISAP score was similar to APACHE II and modified CTSI in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and NPV. It is much easier to calculate and a useful risk stratification tool. It should be used for early triage and referral to a high dependency unit.

Background: The prognostication of critically ill patients, in a systematic way, based on definite objective data is an integral part of the quality of care in Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) scoring systems provide an objective means of mortality prediction in Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The aims of this study were to compare the performance of APACHE II and APACHE IV in predicting mortality in our intensive care unit (ICU).Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in a 13 bedded intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary level teaching hospital. All the patients above the age of 12 years, irrespective of diagnosis managed in ICU for >24hours were enrolled. APACHE II and APACHE IV scores were calculated based on the worst values in the first 24hours of admission. All enrolled patients were followed up, and outcome was recorded as survivors or non survivors. Observed mortality rates were compared with predicted mortality rates for both the APACHE II and APACHE IV. Receiver operator characteristic curves (ROC) were used to compare accuracy of the two scores.Results: APACHE II score of the patients ranged from 1 to 32 and APACHE IV score of the patients ranged from 25 to 142. There was good correlation between APACHE II and APACHE IV scores with the spearman’s rho value of 0.776 (P<0.01). Discrimination for APACHE II and APACHE IV models were good with area under ROC curve of 0.805 and 0.832 respectively. APACHE IV was more accurate than APACHE II in this regard. The cut-off point with best Youden index for APACHE II was 17 and for APACHE IV were 72 respectively for predicting mortality.Conclusions: Discrimination was better for APACHE IV than APACHE II model however Calibration was better for APACHE II than APACHE IV model in present study. There was good correlation between the two models observed in present study.