At present, simple, accurate, and efficient prognostic tools for the evaluation of cases with early-stage sepsis in the emergency department (ED) are lacking. An increased blood urea nitrogen to albumin ratio (BAR) has previously been shown to be a valuable biomarker with predictive utility in several diseases. The relationship between BAR and sepsis patient outcomes, however, is not well-understood. This exploration was thus developed for the exploration of the link between BAR values and the short-term prognosis of cases with sepsis. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort research of sepsis cases admitted to the West China Hospital of Sichuan University ED from July 2015 to June 2016. Laboratory data were collected upon ED admission, and 7-day all-cause mortality was the primary study endpoint. Relationships between BAR values and APACE II and SOFA scores were generated assessed with correlation coefficient heatmaps. Independent risk factors were identified through multivariate analyses, with the curves of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) being employed to gauge the value of BAR as a predictor of the risk of mortality in sepsis cases. Results: In sum, 801 patients participated in the present investigation. BAR values were strongly correlated with APACHE II and SOFA scores. In a multivariate logistic regression assessment, BAR was identified as an independent predictor of mortality among patients with sepsis (HR=1.032, 95% CI: 1.010-1.055, P=0.004). BAR exhibited an AUC of 0.741 (95% CI: 0.688-0.793, P<0.001) when used to predict patient mortality risk, with 5.27 being the optimal BAR cut-off. Conclusion:We found that BAR can be used as a reliable biomarker to predict mortality in patients with sepsis.

Background: Liuhedan is a famous traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) formula used to treat acute pancreatitis (AP) in China. However, there is no systematic reviews for the evidence and the therapeutic effectiveness and safety of Liuhedan for treating AP. The aim of this study is to summarize previous evidence, assessing the efficacy and safety of Liuhedan in the treatment of AP. Methods: We will search the EMBASE, WANFANG DATA, Web of Knowledge, CNKI, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane Library from inception to June 30, 2021 to retrieve relevant studies using the search strategy: (“Liuhedan” OR “Liuhe Pill” OR “Liu-He-Dan”) AND (“pancreatitis” OR “pancreatitides”). Two authors independently judged study eligibility and extracted data. Heterogeneity will be examined by computing the Q statistic and I 2 statistic. Results: This study assessed the efficiency and safety of Liuhedan for treating acute pancreatitis. Conclusions: This study will provide reliable evidence-based evidence for the clinical application of Liuhedan for treating AP. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is unnecessary as this protocol is only for systematic review and does not involve privacy data. The findings of this study will be disseminated electronically through a peer-review publication or presented at a relevant conference.

Condition being studied: Liuhedan is used to treat acute pancreatitis in China. But at present, there is no systematic evaluation report on its therapeutic effectiveness and safety. This protocol aims to reveal the INPLASY 1 International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols INPLASY PROTOCOL Effectiveness and safety of Liuhedan for treating acute pancreatitis A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis To cite: Cheng et al. Effectiveness and safety of Liuhedan for treating acute pancreatitis A protocol for a systematic review and metaanalysis. Inplasy protocol 202110050.

Background: Previous studies have showed that anti-acid therapy with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) can inhibit pancreatic secretion and it may be used in treating acute pancreatitis (AP). But at present, there is no systematic reviews for the evidence and the therapeutic effectiveness and safety of anti-acid therapy with PPIs in AP were not unclear. Therefore, we will undertake a systematic review of the literature to summarize previous evidence regarding this topic, in order to clarify the effectiveness and safety of anti-acid therapy with PPIs in AP. Methods: We will search the EMBASE, WANFANG DATA, Web of Knowledge, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane Library from inception to June 30,2021 to retrieve relevant studies using the search strategy: (“Proton pump inhibitors” OR “PPI” OR “PPIs” OR “Omeprazole” OR “Tenatoprazole” OR “Pantoprazole” OR “acid suppression therapy” OR “acid suppression drugs”) AND (“pancreatitis” OR “pancreatitides”). Two authors independently judged study eligibility and extracted data. Heterogeneity will be examined by computing the Q statistic and I2 statistic. Results: This study assessed the efficiency and safety of proton pump inhibitors for treating acute pancreatitis. Conclusions: This study will provide reliable evidence-based evidence for the clinical application of PPIs for treating AP. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is unnecessary as this protocol is only for systematic review and does not involve privacy data. The findings of this study will be disseminated electronically through a peer-review publication or presented at a relevant conference.