Comparison of Ranson Criteria and HAPS Score for Prognosis of Patients with Clinical Monitoring due to Non-Biliary Acute Pancreatitis

Z. Koç
{"title":"Comparison of Ranson Criteria and HAPS Score for Prognosis of Patients with Clinical Monitoring due to Non-Biliary Acute Pancreatitis","authors":"Z. Koç","doi":"10.14744/scie.2022.03789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: In our study, we aimed to compare the reliability of the Harmless Acute Pancre-atitis Score (HAPS) score with the widespread, commonly used and reliable scoring system of the Ranson score in terms of prognosis prediction for non-biliary acute pancreatitis (AP) cases. Methods: The study included 73 patients with diagnosis of non-biliary AP with mean age 48 years, admitted for clinical follow-up from January 2016 to June 2021. The Ranson and HAPS scores and clinical progression were compared. For clinical progression, duration of admission, final outcome, and presence of local or systemic complications were assessed. Results: When HAPS and Ranson scores are compared, there was no statistically significant difference identified in the prognosis predictions for patients (p>0.05). Conclusion: The Ranson scoring system, a scoring system with high reliability, is completed in 48 h, while the HAPS score is calculated with three criteria assessed on the patient’s initial clinical admission. The HAPS score, with convenient use, was identified to be as reliable as the Ranson score for prognosis prediction of both mild and severe cases and may be safely used for prognosis of non-biliary AP cases in situations, where the Ranson score cannot be used. ABSTRACT","PeriodicalId":33982,"journal":{"name":"Southern Clinics of Istanbul Eurasia","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Clinics of Istanbul Eurasia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/scie.2022.03789","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: In our study, we aimed to compare the reliability of the Harmless Acute Pancre-atitis Score (HAPS) score with the widespread, commonly used and reliable scoring system of the Ranson score in terms of prognosis prediction for non-biliary acute pancreatitis (AP) cases. Methods: The study included 73 patients with diagnosis of non-biliary AP with mean age 48 years, admitted for clinical follow-up from January 2016 to June 2021. The Ranson and HAPS scores and clinical progression were compared. For clinical progression, duration of admission, final outcome, and presence of local or systemic complications were assessed. Results: When HAPS and Ranson scores are compared, there was no statistically significant difference identified in the prognosis predictions for patients (p>0.05). Conclusion: The Ranson scoring system, a scoring system with high reliability, is completed in 48 h, while the HAPS score is calculated with three criteria assessed on the patient’s initial clinical admission. The HAPS score, with convenient use, was identified to be as reliable as the Ranson score for prognosis prediction of both mild and severe cases and may be safely used for prognosis of non-biliary AP cases in situations, where the Ranson score cannot be used. ABSTRACT
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非胆源性急性胰腺炎临床监测患者预后的Ranson标准与HAPS评分比较
目的:在我们的研究中,我们旨在比较无害急性胰腺炎评分(HAPS)评分与广泛、常用且可靠的Ranson评分系统在非胆源性急性胰腺炎(AP)病例预后预测方面的可靠性。方法:本研究纳入2016年1月至2021年6月入院的73例非胆道性AP患者,平均年龄48岁。比较Ranson和HAPS评分及临床进展。评估临床进展、入院时间、最终结果以及是否存在局部或全身并发症。结果:比较HAPS评分与Ranson评分,两组患者的预后预测差异无统计学意义(p < 0.05)。结论:Ranson评分系统在48 h内完成评分,可靠性高,而HAPS评分是在患者首次临床入院时评估的三个标准来计算的。HAPS评分使用方便,与Ranson评分一样可靠,可用于轻度和重度AP的预后预测,在不能使用Ranson评分的情况下,可安全用于非胆道性AP的预后预测。摘要
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Overview of the Role of Hemogram Parameters in Determining the Severity of Abdominal Pain Comparison of hospital presentations due to tracheal stenosis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic Evaluation of Cases with Stab Wounds Presented to the Emergency Department: A 2-Year Retrospective Analysis Use of Shock Index as a Predictor of Mortality in Patients with Pulmonary Embolism Incidence of Thyroid Cancer in Patients Operated for Hyperthyroidism: Our 10-Year Experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1