Prospective evaluation of nonenhanced MR imaging in acute pancreatitis.
ABSTRACT To compare the value of nonenhanced (NE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (NE-MRI) with contrast-enhanced (CE) computed tomography (CT) (CE-CT) scan in assessing acute pancreatitis (AP) and in evaluating the severity index (SI) with clinical outcome.
Patients with AP were prospectively investigated by CE-CT scan and NE-MRI on admission. MRI was performed with fat-saturated T1-weighted imaging, T2-weighted imaging, and MR cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). Balthazar's grading system was used to evaluate the NE-MRI severity index (CTSI, MRISI) and it was compared to the clinical outcome.
A total of 90 patients (median age = 55 years) were included in the study. AP was of biliary etiology in 37 patients (41%). On admission, AP was assessed as grade III by CTSI in four patients (4%), whereas 19 patients were classified grade III by MRISI. The coefficient correlation between CTSI and MRISI was good, with r = 0.6 (P < 0.001). Considering CE-CT scan as the gold standard, sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of NE-MRI for detecting severe AP based on imaging criteria were 100%, 82.6%, 100%, and 21%, respectively. NE-MRI discriminates normal pancreatic parenchyma from edema and necrosis with a correlation between morbidity (P < 0.008).
NE-MRI seems to be a reliable method of staging AP severity in comparison to CE-CT scan.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Acute pancreatitis is a protean disease capable of wide clinical variation, ranging from mild discomfort to apocalyptic prostration. Moreover, the inflammatory process may remain localized in the pancreas, spread to regional tissues, or even involve remote organ systems. This variability in presentation and clinical course has plagued the study and management of acute pancreatitis since its original clinical description. In the absence of accepted definitions for acute pancreatitis and its complications, it has not been possible to devise a clinical classification system useful for case management. Following 3 days of group meetings and open discussions, unanimous consensus on a series of definitions and a clinically based classification system for acute pancreatitis was achieved by a diverse group of 40 international authorities from six medical disciplines and 15 countries. The proposed classification system will be of value to practicing clinicians in the care of individual patients and to academicians seeking to compare interinstitutional data.Archives of Surgery 06/1993; 128(5):586-90. · 4.10 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Two hundred two patients admitted with the clinical suspicion of acute pancreatitis underwent computerized tomography scanning within 36 hours of admission. The diagnostic value of the computerized tomography findings was excellent, with a sensitivity of 92 percent and a specificity of 100 percent. One hundred seventy-six patients with acute pancreatitis defined according to the overall clinical course were included in the prognostic study. The pancreatitis was fatal in 21 patients, severe in 47 patients, and mild in 108 patients. The computerized tomography findings were classified into the following three groups on the basis of the extent of phlegmonous extrapancreatic spread: Group I, no phlegmonous extrapancreatic spread (100 patients, none died); Group II, phlegmonous extrapancreatic spread in one or two areas (28 patients, mortality rate 4 percent); and Group III, phlegmonous extrapancreatic spread in three or more areas (48 patients, mortality rate 42 percent) (p less than 0.0001). The following three scores from prognostic clinical and laboratory data were also obtained: Score 1, zero or one positive sign (82 patients, none died); Score 2, two to four positive signs (54 patients, mortality rate 13 percent); Score 3, five or more positive signs (40 patients, mortality rate 35 percent) (p less than 0.001). The combination of computerized tomography findings and prognostic signs had the best predictive value. Patients in Group III, Score 3 (24 patients) or Group III, Score 2 (19 patients) had mortality rates of 58 percent and 32 percent, respectively, and complications developed in all of the survivors. In addition, all except two acute pancreatitis patients in whom pancreatic abscess developed were found in Group III (p less than 0.0001). Furthermore, for Group III patients, the prediction of death associated with abscesses was enhanced by the number of prognostic signs. The mortality rate increased from 17 percent for Score 2 patients to 81 percent for Score 3 patients (p = 0.0078). As a result of this study, we recommend early computerized tomography for all Score 2 and Score 3 patients, since it allows prompt recognition of patients at high risk for systemic and local complications. Adequate therapy can then be directed to the group of patients to whom it is best suited. Serial computerized tomographies should be reserved for those patients presenting with phlegmonous extrapancreatic spread.The American Journal of Surgery 04/1988; 155(3):457-66. · 2.52 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: During 2002 the International Association of Pancreatology developed evidenced-based guidelines on the surgical management of acute pancreatitis. There were 11 guidelines, 10 of which were recommendations grade B and one (the second) grade A. (1) Mild acute pancreatitis is not an indication for pancreatic surgery. (2) The use of prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotics reduces infection rates in computed tomography-proven necrotizing pancreatitis but may not improve survival. (3) Fine-needle aspiration for bacteriology should be performed to differentiate between sterile and infected pancreatic necrosis in patients with sepsis syndrome. (4) Infected pancreatic necrosis in patients with clinical signs and symptoms of sepsis is an indication for intervention including surgery and radiological drainage. (5) Patients with sterile pancreatic necrosis (with negative fine-needle aspiration for bacteriology) should be managed conservatively and only undergo intervention in selected cases. (6) Early surgery within 14 days after onset of the disease is not recommended in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis unless there are specific indications. (7) Surgical and other forms of interventional management should favor an organ-preserving approach, which involves debridement or necrosectomy combined with a postoperative management concept that maximizes postoperative evacuation of retroperitoneal debris and exudate. (8) Cholecystectomy should be performed to avoid recurrence of gallstone-associated acute pancreatitis. (9) In mild gallstone-associated acute pancreatitis, cholecystectomy should be performed as soon as the patient has recovered and ideally during the same hospital admission. (10) In severe gallstone-associated acute pancreatitis, cholecystectomy should be delayed until there is sufficient resolution of the inflammatory response and clinical recovery. (11) Endoscopic sphincterotomy is an alternative to cholecystectomy in those who are not fit to undergo surgery in order to lower the risk of recurrence of gallstone-associated acute pancreatitis. There is however a theoretical risk of introducing infection into sterile pancreatic necrosis. These guidelines should now form the basis for audit studies in order to determine the quality of patient care delivery.Pancreatology 02/2002; 2(6):565-73. · 2.04 Impact Factor