Observational studyLangenbeck's archives of surgery2017
Early warning score independently predicts adverse outcome and mortality in patients with acute pancreatitis.
Observational study in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessment of the course of acute pancreatitis in the light of aetiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2020Pooled it
- Fluid resuscitation practice in patients with acute pancreatitis in Danish intermediate and intensive care units - a retrospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- B Cells and Double-Negative B Cells (CD27Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review
- Volume, but Not the Location of Necrosis, Is Associated with Worse Outcomes in Acute Pancreatitis: A Prospective Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Accuracy of conventional and novel scoring systems in predicting severity and outcomes of acute pancreatitis: a retrospective study.Lipids in health and disease · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to compare the prognostic value of established scoring systems with early warning scores in a large cohort of patients with acute pancreatitis.
methodsIn patients presenting with acute pancreatitis, age, sex, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade, Modified Glasgow Score, Ranson criteria, APACHE II scores and early warning score (EWS) were recorded for the first 72 h following admission. These variables were compared between survivors and non-survivors, between patients with mild/moderate and severe pancreatitis (based on the 2012 Atlanta Classification) and between patients with a favourable or adverse outcome.
resultsA total of 629 patients were identified. EWS was the best predictor of adverse outcome amongst all of the assessed variables (area under curve (AUC) values 0.81, 0.84 and 0.83 for days 1, 2 and 3, respectively) and was the most accurate predictor of mortality on both days 2 and 3 (AUC values of 0.88 and 0.89, respectively). Multivariable analysis revealed that an EWS ≥2 was independently associated with severity of pancreatitis, adverse outcome and mortality.
conclusionThis study confirms the usefulness of EWS in predicting the outcome of acute pancreatitis. It should become the mainstay of risk stratification in patients with acute pancreatitis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.