ArticleCureus2025
Understanding Etiopathogenesis and Clinical Outcomes in Acute Pancreatitis: An Experience From a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in Andhra Pradesh.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a potentially life-threatening inflammatory disorder of the pancreas with a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations. Early identification of disease severity is critical for guiding management and improving outcomes. Prognostic scoring systems such as the Bedside Index for Severity in Acute Pancreatitis (BISAP) and the CT severity index (CTSI) are commonly used to predict disease progression and complications. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical profile of patients with AP and assess the utility of BISAP and CTSI scores in predicting clinical outcomes. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of General Medicine from April 2025 to May 2025 (two months). Patients diagnosed with AP were enrolled based on clinical, biochemical, and radiological criteria. Detailed clinical histories, physical examinations, and laboratory investigations were recorded. BISAP scores were calculated at admission, and contrast-enhanced CT scans were performed on day four or five of illness to determine CTSI scores. Patients were monitored throughout their hospital stay, and outcomes were assessed at discharge. Results Fifty patients with AP were enrolled. The most common etiology was alcohol consumption (74%). A BISAP score ≥3 was observed in 6% of patients and was significantly associated with mortality (p=0.039). The CTSI indicated severe AP in 12% of patients and was significantly associated with both mortality (p=0.002) and complications (p=0.002). The BISAP score demonstrated excellent predictive ability for mortality [area under the curve (AUC)=0.934], while CTSI provided superior sensitivity and predictive accuracy for complications (AUC=0.658). A moderate positive correlation was observed between BISAP and CTSI (r=0.45, p=0.019). Conclusions Both BISAP and CTSI are effective predictors of outcomes in AP. BISAP is a valuable bedside tool for early mortality risk stratification, particularly in resource-limited settings, while CTSI remains indispensable for assessing complications and guiding interventional strategies. The combined use of both scoring systems can enhance clinical decision-making and optimize patient management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.