Accuracy of conventional and novel scoring systems in predicting severity and outcomes of acute pancreatitis: a retrospective study.

BackgroundRecently, several novel scoring systems have been developed to evaluate the severity and outcomes of acute pancreatitis. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of novel and conventional scoring systems in predicting the severity and outcomes of acute pancreatitis.MethodsPatients treated between January 2003 and August 2020 were reviewed. The Ranson score (RS), Glasgow score (GS), bedside index of severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP), pancreatic activity scoring system (PASS), and Chinese simple scoring system (CSSS) were determined within 48 h after admission. Multivariate logistic regression was used for severity, mortality, and organ failure prediction. Optimum cutoffs were identified using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.ResultsA total of 1848 patients were included. The areas under the curve (AUCs) of RS, GS, BISAP, PASS, and CSSS for severity prediction were 0.861, 0.865, 0.829, 0.778, and 0.816, respectively. The corresponding AUCs for mortality prediction were 0.693, 0.736, 0.789, 0.858, and 0.759. The corresponding AUCs for acute respiratory distress syndrome prediction were 0.745, 0.784, 0.834, 0.936, and 0.820. Finally, the corresponding AUCs for acute renal failure prediction were 0.707, 0.734, 0.781, 0.868, and 0.816.ConclusionsRS and GS predicted severity better than they predicted mortality and organ failure, while PASS predicted mortality and organ failure better. BISAP and CSSS performed equally well in severity and outcome predictions.