BACKGROUND Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common surgical condition, with severe AP (SAP) potentially lethal. Many prognostic indices, including; acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score (APACHE II), bedside index of severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP), Glasgow score, harmless acute pancreatitis score (HAPS), Ranson’s score, and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) evaluate AP severity and predict mortality. AIM To evaluate these indices' utility in predicting severity, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality. METHODS A retrospective analysis of 653 patients with AP from July 2009 to September 2016 was performed. The demographic, clinical profile, and patient outcomes were collected. SAP was defined as per the revised Atlanta classification. Values for APACHE II score, BISAP, HAPS, and SOFA within 24 h of admission were retrospectively obtained based on laboratory results and patient evaluation recorded on a secure hospital-based online electronic platform. Data with < 10% missing data was imputed via mean substitution. Other patient information such as demographics, disease etiology, and patient outcomes were also derived from electronic medical records. RESULTS The mean age was 58.7 ± 17.5 years, with 58.7% males. Gallstones ( n = 404, 61.9%), alcohol ( n = 38, 5.8%), and hypertriglyceridemia ( n = 19, 2.9%) were more common aetiologies. 81 (12.4%) patients developed SAP, 20 (3.1%) required ICU admission, and 12 (1.8%) deaths were attributed to SAP. Ranson’s score and APACHE-II demonstrated the highest sensitivity in predicting SAP (92.6%, 80.2% respectively), ICU admission (100%), and mortality (100%). While SOFA and BISAP demonstrated lowest sensitivity in predicting SAP (13.6%, 24.7% respectively), ICU admission (40.0%, 25.0% respectively) and mortality (50.0%, 25.5% respectively). However, SOFA demonstrated the highest specificity in predicting SAP (99.7%), ICU admission (99.2%), and mortality (98.9%). SOFA demonstrated the highest positive predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and overall accuracy in predicting SAP, ICU admission, and mortality. SOFA and Ranson’s score demonstrated the highest area under receiver-operator curves at 48 h in predicting SAP (0.966, 0.857 respectively), ICU admission (0.943, 0.946 respectively), and mortality (0.968, 0.917 respectively). CONCLUSION The SOFA and 48-h Ranson’s scores accurately predict severity, ICU admission, and mortality in AP, with more favorable statistics for the SOFA score.

Backgrounds/AimsRanson's score (RS) and Glasgow score (GS) have been utilized to stratify the severity of acute pancreatitis (AP). The aim of this study was to validate RS and GS for stratifying the severity of acute pancreatitis and audit our experience of managing AP.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective review of patients treated for AP from July 2009 to September 2016. Final severity was determined using the revised Atlanta classification. Mortality and complications were analyzed.ResultsFrom July 2009 to September 2016, a total of 675 patients with a diagnosis of AP were admitted at the hospital. Of them, 669 patients who had sufficient data were analyzed. Their average age±SD was 58.7±17.4 years (range, 21–98 years). There was a male preponderance (n=393, 53.8%). A total of 82 (12.3%) patients had eventual severe pancreatitis. RS demonstrated a sensitivity of 92.7% and a specificity of 52.8% with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 21.5% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 98.1%. GS demonstrated a sensitivity of 76.8% and a specificity of 69.2% with a PPV of 25.8% and a NPV of 95.5%. For severity prediction, areas under the curve (AUCs) for RS and GS were 0.848 (95% CI: 0.819–0.875) and 0.784 (95% CI: 0.750–0.814), respectively (p=0.003). Twelve (1.6%) patients died in the hospital.ConclusionsRS has higher sensitivity, NPV and AUC for predicting severity of AP than GS.

Emergency right hemicolectomy is associated with a significant morbidity and mortality rate. Patients with higher ASA score and who had stoma created fared worse.

No abstract

Background: Abdominal wall hernia is a common surgical condition. Patients may present in an emergency with bowel obstruction, incarceration or strangulation. Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a serious surgical condition associated with significant morbidity. The aim of this study was to describe current management and outcomes of patients with obstructed hernia in the UK as identified in the National Audit of Small Bowel Obstruction (NASBO). Methods: NASBO collated data on adults treated for SBO at 131 UK hospitals between January and March 2017. Those with obstruction due to abdominal wall hernia were included in this study. Demographics, co-morbidity, imaging, operative treatment, and in-hospital outcomes were recorded. Modelling for factors associated with mortality and complications was undertaken using Cox proportional hazards and multivariable regression modelling. Results: NASBO included 2341 patients, of whom 415 (17⋅7 per cent) had SBO due to hernia. Surgery was performed in 312 (75⋅2 per cent) of the 415 patients; small bowel resection was required in 198 (63⋅5 per cent) of these operations. Non-operative management was reported in 35 (54 per cent) of 65 patients with a parastomal hernia and in 34 (32⋅1 per cent) of 106 patients with an incisional hernia. The in-hospital mortality rate was 9⋅4 per cent (39 of 415), and was highest in patients with a groin hernia (11⋅1 per cent, 17 of 153). Complications were common, including lower respiratory tract infection in 16⋅3 per cent of patients with a groin hernia. Increased age was associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio 1⋅05, 95 per cent c.i. 1⋅01 to 1⋅10; P = 0⋅009) and complications (odds ratio 1⋅05, 95 per cent c.i. 1⋅02 to 1⋅09; P = 0⋅001). Conclusion: NASBO has highlighted poor outcomes for patients with SBO due to hernia, highlighting the need for quality improvement initiatives in this group. *Members of the National Audit of Small Bowel Obstruction (NASBO) Steering Group and NASBO Collaborators are co-authors of this study and are listed in Appendix S1 (supporting information) Funding information