胰酶升高和急诊情况:胰腺炎还是非胰腺炎?这就是问题所在

M. Barone
{"title":"胰酶升高和急诊情况:胰腺炎还是非胰腺炎?这就是问题所在","authors":"M. Barone","doi":"10.14744/ejmo.2023.75981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dear Editor, Notwithstanding often no clinically evident acute pancreatitis findings are found, a serum pancreatic enzyme elevation is found in up to 80% of critically ill patients.[1] In an emergency setting, in fact, the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis can be misleading due to various reasons, hence concomitant patients’ clinical conditions (e.g. hemodynamic instability, mechanical ventilation) and the establishment of rapidly evolving physiopathological mechanisms. Does an enzyme increase justify the diagnosis of pancreatitis? Actually no. Although a three-time greater titer than upper limits represents one of the recognized diagnostic criteria, findings of hyperamylasemia and/or hyperlipasemia could lead to several interpretations, such as the evolution of severe acute pancreatitis, as defined by the Atlanta criteria, pancreatic complications in patients admitted for other pathologies or a mere biochemical increase in the absence of clinical-radiological signs attributable to pancreatic inflammation. Furthermore, the enzymatic titer does not represent a prognostic factor or an index of progression to a necrotic or haemorrhagic state. Although, a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis at onset can established on the basis of an enzymatic increase supported by suggestive clinical findings, the enzymatic dosage cannot be considered predictive of progression, as in case of the C-reactive protein. Furthermore, in the early stages of the disease, the extensive use of diagnostic radiologic investigations (<96 hours) has no role.[2] As reported by Weaver et al.,[3] in a retrospective analysis including 192 emergency patients, 36.45% had hyperamylasemia but none met clinical or radiological criteria for acute pancreatitis. Furthermore, only 9.4% in this cohort was attributable to an increase in the pancreatic serum isoform. The authors therefore concluded by recommending caution in the dosage and interpretation of the titers of serum amylase in critically ill patients. If on the one hand these evidences represent an explicit recommendation for a prompt and exhaustive nosological classification of hyperamylasemia that could mislead to an erroneous diagnosis, on the other they suggest the need for a critical review of the diagnostic criteria of acute pancreatitis where laboratory findings as far as clinical and radiological findings could lead to a reduced diagnostic power in critically ill patients. Mirko Barone,1 Massimo Ippoliti,1 Felice Mucilli1,2","PeriodicalId":11831,"journal":{"name":"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pancreatic Enzymes Elevation and Emergency Setting: Pancreatitis or Not Pancreatitis? That is the Question\",\"authors\":\"M. Barone\",\"doi\":\"10.14744/ejmo.2023.75981\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dear Editor, Notwithstanding often no clinically evident acute pancreatitis findings are found, a serum pancreatic enzyme elevation is found in up to 80% of critically ill patients.[1] In an emergency setting, in fact, the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis can be misleading due to various reasons, hence concomitant patients’ clinical conditions (e.g. hemodynamic instability, mechanical ventilation) and the establishment of rapidly evolving physiopathological mechanisms. Does an enzyme increase justify the diagnosis of pancreatitis? Actually no. Although a three-time greater titer than upper limits represents one of the recognized diagnostic criteria, findings of hyperamylasemia and/or hyperlipasemia could lead to several interpretations, such as the evolution of severe acute pancreatitis, as defined by the Atlanta criteria, pancreatic complications in patients admitted for other pathologies or a mere biochemical increase in the absence of clinical-radiological signs attributable to pancreatic inflammation. Furthermore, the enzymatic titer does not represent a prognostic factor or an index of progression to a necrotic or haemorrhagic state. Although, a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis at onset can established on the basis of an enzymatic increase supported by suggestive clinical findings, the enzymatic dosage cannot be considered predictive of progression, as in case of the C-reactive protein. Furthermore, in the early stages of the disease, the extensive use of diagnostic radiologic investigations (<96 hours) has no role.[2] As reported by Weaver et al.,[3] in a retrospective analysis including 192 emergency patients, 36.45% had hyperamylasemia but none met clinical or radiological criteria for acute pancreatitis. Furthermore, only 9.4% in this cohort was attributable to an increase in the pancreatic serum isoform. The authors therefore concluded by recommending caution in the dosage and interpretation of the titers of serum amylase in critically ill patients. If on the one hand these evidences represent an explicit recommendation for a prompt and exhaustive nosological classification of hyperamylasemia that could mislead to an erroneous diagnosis, on the other they suggest the need for a critical review of the diagnostic criteria of acute pancreatitis where laboratory findings as far as clinical and radiological findings could lead to a reduced diagnostic power in critically ill patients. Mirko Barone,1 Massimo Ippoliti,1 Felice Mucilli1,2\",\"PeriodicalId\":11831,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14744/ejmo.2023.75981\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/ejmo.2023.75981","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

亲爱的编辑,尽管通常没有临床明显的急性胰腺炎发现,但高达80%的危重患者发现血清胰酶升高。[1]事实上,在急诊情况下,由于各种原因,急性胰腺炎的诊断可能会产生误导,从而导致患者伴随的临床状况(如血流动力学不稳定、机械通气)和快速发展的生理病理机制的建立。酶升高是否可以作为胰腺炎的诊断依据?实际上没有。虽然三倍以上的滴度是公认的诊断标准之一,但高淀粉酶血症和/或高脂血症的发现可能导致几种解释,例如根据亚特兰大标准定义的严重急性胰腺炎的发展,因其他病理入院的患者的胰腺并发症或仅仅是生化增加而没有可归因于胰腺炎症的临床放射学征象。此外,酶滴度并不代表预后因素或进展到坏死或出血状态的指标。虽然急性胰腺炎发病时的诊断可以建立在酶促增加的基础上,并得到临床表现的支持,但酶促剂量不能像c反应蛋白那样被认为是病情进展的预测因素。此外,在疾病的早期阶段,广泛使用诊断性放射学检查(<96小时)没有作用。[2]Weaver等[3]报道,在192例急诊患者的回顾性分析中,36.45%的患者患有高淀粉酶血症,但没有人符合急性胰腺炎的临床或放射学标准。此外,该队列中只有9.4%归因于胰腺血清亚型的增加。因此,作者建议在危重患者中谨慎使用血清淀粉酶的剂量和滴度。一方面,这些证据明确建议对可能导致错误诊断的高淀粉酶血症进行迅速而详尽的分类学分类,另一方面,它们表明需要对急性胰腺炎的诊断标准进行严格审查,因为实验室结果以及临床和放射学结果可能导致对危重患者的诊断能力降低。Mirko Barone,1 Massimo Ippoliti,1 Felice mucilli1,2
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pancreatic Enzymes Elevation and Emergency Setting: Pancreatitis or Not Pancreatitis? That is the Question
Dear Editor, Notwithstanding often no clinically evident acute pancreatitis findings are found, a serum pancreatic enzyme elevation is found in up to 80% of critically ill patients.[1] In an emergency setting, in fact, the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis can be misleading due to various reasons, hence concomitant patients’ clinical conditions (e.g. hemodynamic instability, mechanical ventilation) and the establishment of rapidly evolving physiopathological mechanisms. Does an enzyme increase justify the diagnosis of pancreatitis? Actually no. Although a three-time greater titer than upper limits represents one of the recognized diagnostic criteria, findings of hyperamylasemia and/or hyperlipasemia could lead to several interpretations, such as the evolution of severe acute pancreatitis, as defined by the Atlanta criteria, pancreatic complications in patients admitted for other pathologies or a mere biochemical increase in the absence of clinical-radiological signs attributable to pancreatic inflammation. Furthermore, the enzymatic titer does not represent a prognostic factor or an index of progression to a necrotic or haemorrhagic state. Although, a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis at onset can established on the basis of an enzymatic increase supported by suggestive clinical findings, the enzymatic dosage cannot be considered predictive of progression, as in case of the C-reactive protein. Furthermore, in the early stages of the disease, the extensive use of diagnostic radiologic investigations (<96 hours) has no role.[2] As reported by Weaver et al.,[3] in a retrospective analysis including 192 emergency patients, 36.45% had hyperamylasemia but none met clinical or radiological criteria for acute pancreatitis. Furthermore, only 9.4% in this cohort was attributable to an increase in the pancreatic serum isoform. The authors therefore concluded by recommending caution in the dosage and interpretation of the titers of serum amylase in critically ill patients. If on the one hand these evidences represent an explicit recommendation for a prompt and exhaustive nosological classification of hyperamylasemia that could mislead to an erroneous diagnosis, on the other they suggest the need for a critical review of the diagnostic criteria of acute pancreatitis where laboratory findings as far as clinical and radiological findings could lead to a reduced diagnostic power in critically ill patients. Mirko Barone,1 Massimo Ippoliti,1 Felice Mucilli1,2
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信