ArticleBMC gastroenterology2026
Development of a hemodynamic scoring system for acute pancreatitis: an exploratory approach to optimizing fluid resuscitation.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOur study aims to establish and validate a scoring framework based on hemodynamic parameters in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP), and to evaluate its clinical predictive performance and significance in guiding fluid resuscitation.
methodsThe clinical data of AP patients admitted to the ICU for the first time were extracted from the eICU 2.0 and MIMIC-IV 3.1 databases. Subjects were stratified into death and survival groups based on in-hospital outcomes. Key predictors were identified via intergroup comparison, LASSO regression, and multivariable logistic regression, and were used to develop a nomogram prediction model and a cyclic scoring system. Model performance was evaluated via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration plots, Hosmer–Lemeshow test, decision curve analysis, and internal and external validation. The hemodynamic scoring model was constructed by imitating the Framingham risk scoring system, and its clinical utility for fluid resuscitation was assessed via ROC analysis, box plots, and line graphs.
resultsThis study included 707 patients (42 deaths and 665 survivors) from the eICU 2.0 database and 423 patients (38 deaths and 385 survivors) from the MIMIC-IV 3.1 database, all admitted to the ICU for AP. After screening, average arterial pressure (MAP), age shock index (ASI), urea nitrogen (BUN), and potassium ion (K+) were selected to construct a prediction model. The constructed scoring system was internally and externally validated using the eICU 2.0 database and MIMIC-IV 3.1 database, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.74–0.88) and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.72–0.89), respectively. When applied to fluid resuscitation in AP patients, this model demonstrated potential utility in guiding therapy.
conclusionThe clinical model established based on MAP, ASI, BUN and K+ demonstrates good discriminatory power, calibration, and clinical utility in predicting the mortality rate of AP patients in the ICU. The established hemodynamic scoring system can identify high-risk AP patients and guide clinical intervention, and has potential value in guiding fluid resuscitation for AP patients in the ICU.
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.