RESUMO
Background Acute pancreatitis is an acute gastrointestinal emergency with significant morbidity and mortality if not treated. It can lead to local as well as systemic complications and has a prevalence of 51.07%. Laboratory investigations such as amylase and lipase and ultrasound scan are typically used for the diagnosis. A contrast-enhanced CT scan is considered the gold standard. Both laboratory and radiological investigation-based scoring systems have been reported in the literature and are in practice. However, these modalities demand several laboratory investigations and are expensive. Our study aims to determine the congruency of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the modified CT severity index score (MCTSI) with the revised Atlanta classification in assessing the severity of acute pancreatitis. In addition, the accuracy of NLR and MCTSI is determined. The secondary objective is to determine whether NLR can predict the severity of acute pancreatitis to the same extent as MCTSI through expensive radiological imaging and other clinical scoring systems through a list of investigations. Methodology The data for this study were collected retrospectively and patients with a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis were included through the nonprobability convenience sampling method. All patients underwent relevant laboratory workup (including complete blood count) and radiological workup (including CT scan) during their hospital stay. The main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of NLR and MCTSI, and the congruency of these with the revised Atlanta classification in assessing the severity of acute pancreatitis. Results A total of 166 patients with acute pancreatitis were included, of which 107 (64.45%) were males and 59 (35.55%) were females, with a mean age of 43.7. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of NLR were 67%, 90.9%, and 76%, respectively, whereas the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MCTSI were 95%, 13.6%, and 62%, respectively. The area under the curve for NLR was 0.855 whereas that for MCTSI was determined to be 0.645. Conclusions NLR has a good concordance with the revised Atlanta classification and assesses the disease severity, especially in moderate-to-severe cases of acute pancreatitis compared to MCTSI. In addition, NLR can be used in acute and/or resource-poor settings to predict the severity of acute pancreatitis.
RESUMO
Background and objectives Stone in the biliary tract is one of the most common causes of hospitalization. However, it is difficult to determine the prevalence of gallstones in the general population because they are often asymptomatic. Thus, management lies in the proper clearance of the common bile duct (CBD) along with the removal of the gallbladder, for which it must be diagnosed on time with proper accuracy. Imaging modalities including magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) provide true visualization of choledocholithiasis with comparable sensitivities. The gold standard ERCP is an invasive procedure and may cause complications, such as pancreatitis, perforation, and bleeding. EUS is a minimally invasive procedure to assess the biliary tract using high-frequency sound waves. Until now the EUS has not been addressed much in our local tertiary care setups and this study was conducted to evaluate its accuracy in the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. The objective of our study is to determine the diagnostic accuracy (specificity and sensitivity) of EUS versus ERCP for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. Materials and methods This retrospective study was conducted on patients suspected of having choledocholithiasis undergoing both EUS and ERCP based on their history, clinical symptoms, and laboratory test results including upper abdominal pain, deranged liver function enzymes, and a dilated CBD on radiology. EUS was initially performed for the diagnosis of extrahepatic biliary obstruction followed by one or more of the confirmatory criterion standard tests (including ERCP). In order to reduce the chances of passage of stone resulting in negative analysis, only those patients were included in which both procedures were conducted temporally close together (24-72 hours in most instances). The main outcome measures were diagnostic accuracy with the help of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) using a receiver operating characteristic curve. A total of 123 patients met the inclusion criteria via non-probability consecutive sampling methods. Results The mean age of our study population was 50.30 ± 13.91. We included 63 males (51.2%) and 60 females (48.8%). The most frequent indication for undergoing diagnostic procedures was deranged liver function tests (67.47%). The frequent comorbidities reported were hypertension (29.26%), diabetes (21.95%), chronic liver disease (16.26%), and ischemic heart disease (4.87%). Mean alkaline phosphatase and gamma-glutamyl transferase levels were markedly raised from the baseline in the study population. Post-ERCP complications were also reported in some of the study participants. About 85 patients (69.10%) were diagnosed with choledocholithiasis among the study participants. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS was compared with ERCP revealed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.930, standard error of 0.031, 95% confidence interval of 0.868-0.991, the sensitivity of 89.5%, specificity of 96.5%, positive predictive value of 91.9%, and negative predictive value of 95.3%. Conclusion It is recommended that ERCP can be selectively conducted or excluded in patients with biliary obstruction in case of EUS negative, thus minimizing the complications and morbidity associated with an invasive procedure, with our results showing a comparative diagnostic accuracy of EUS.