Wu, Bechien U.

Abstract Background Persistent organ failure (POF) is the strongest determinant of mortality in acute pancreatitis (AP). There is a paucity of data regarding the impact of different POF attributes on mortality and the role of different characteristics of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in the risk of developing POF. Objective We aimed to assess the association of POF dynamic features with mortality and SIRS characteristics with POF. Methods We studied 1544 AP subjects prospectively enrolled at 22 international centers (APPRENTICE consortium). First, we estimated the association of onset, duration, and maximal score of SIRS with POF. Then, we evaluated the risk of mortality based on POF onset, duration, number, type, and sequence of organs affected. Analyses were adjusted for potential confounders. Results 58% had SIRS, 11% developed POF, and 2.5% died. Early SIRS, persistent SIRS, and maximal SIRS score ≥ 3 were independently associated with higher risk of POF ( p < 0.05). Mortality risk in POF was higher with two (33%, odds ratio [OR] = 10.8, 3.3–34.9) and three (48%, OR = 20.2, 5.9–68.6) organs failing, in comparison to single POF (4%). In subjects with multiple POF, mortality was higher when the cardiovascular and respiratory systems failed first or concurrently as compared to when the renal system failed first or concurrently with other organ ( p < 0.05). In multivariate regression model, the number and sequence of organs affected in POF were associated with mortality ( p < 0.05). Onset and duration of POF had no impact mortality. Conclusion In AP patients with POF, the risk of mortality is influenced by the number, type, and sequence of organs affected. These results are useful for future revisions of AP severity classification systems.

AbstractBackground and AimThe primary aim was to validate the Pancreatitis Activity Scoring System (PASS) in a multicenter prospectively ascertained acute pancreatitis (AP) cohort. Second, we investigated the association of early PASS trajectories with disease severity and length of hospital stay (LOS).MethodsData were prospectively collected through the APPRENTICE consortium (2015–2018). AP severity was categorized based on revised Atlanta classification. Delta PASS (ΔPASS) was calculated by subtracting activity score from baseline value. PASS trajectories were compared between severity subsets. Subsequently, the cohort was subdivided into three LOS subgroups as short (S‐LOS): 2–3 days; intermediate (I‐LOS): 3–7 days; and long (L‐LOS): ≥7 days. The generalized estimating equations model was implemented to compare PASS trajectories.ResultsThere were 434 subjects analyzed including 322 (74%) mild, 86 (20%) moderately severe, and 26 (6%) severe AP. Severe AP subjects had the highest activity levels and the slowest rate of decline in activity (P = 0.039). Focusing on mild AP, L‐LOS subjects (34%) had 28 points per day slower decline; whereas, S‐LOS group (13%) showed 34 points per day sharper decrease compared with I‐LOS (53%; P < 0.001). We noticed an outlier subset with a median admission‐PASS of 466 compared with 140 in the rest. Morphine equivalent dose constituted 80% of the total PASS in the outliers (median morphine equivalent dose score = 392), compared with only 25% in normal‐range subjects (score = 33, P value < 0.001).ConclusionsThis study highlighted that PASS can quantify AP activity. Significant differences in PASS trajectories were found both in revised Atlanta classification severity and LOS groups, which can be harnessed in AP monitoring/management (ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT03075618).

INTRODUCTION: Detailed recommendations and guidelines for acute pancreatitis (AP) management currently exist. However, quality indicators (QIs) are required to measure performance in health care. The goal of the Acute Pancreatitis Task Force on Quality was to formally develop QIs for the management of patients with known or suspected AP using a modified version of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Methodology. METHODS: A multidisciplinary expert panel composed of physicians (gastroenterologists, hospitalists, and surgeons) who are acknowledged leaders in their specialties and who represent geographic and practice setting diversity was convened. A literature review was conducted, and a list of proposed QIs was developed. In 3 rounds, panelists reviewed literature, modified QIs, and rated them on the basis of scientific evidence, bias, interpretability, validity, necessity, and proposed performance targets. RESULTS: Supporting literature and a list of 71 proposed QIs across 10 AP domains (Diagnosis, Etiology, Initial Assessment and Risk Stratification, etc.) were sent to the expert panel to review and independently rate in round 1 (95% of panelists participated). Based on a round 2 face-to-face discussion of QIs (75% participation), 41 QIs were classified as valid. During round 3 (90% participation), panelists rated the 41 valid QIs for necessity and proposed performance thresholds. The final classification determined that 40 QIs were both valid and necessary. DISCUSSION: Hospitals and providers managing patients with known or suspected AP should ensure that patients receive high-quality care and desired outcomes according to current evidence-based best practices. This physician-led initiative formally developed 40 QIs and performance threshold targets for AP management. Validated QIs provide a dependable quantitative framework for health systems to monitor the quality of care provided to patients with known or suspected AP.