Conventional scoring systems are based on either the biochemical and clinical criteria, or imaging features

     Ranson’s score comprises 11 indicators that must be evaluated at admission and 48hours after admission, respectively. However, some of these indicators are not collected routinely in the early stage of AP, making early prediction difficult

      BISAP score comprises 5 indicators to predict the mortality of AP within 24hours of admission. It is easy to use but has low sensitivity for prediction of SAP.

      MCTSI was proposed based on the CT severity index and does not takes in to consideration the clinical and biochemical parameters

    The new scoring system uses biochemical markers, heart rate and imaging features.

      Earlier studies were conducted in Chinese population and now we want to assess the accuracy of the new scoring system in Indian population

description 

After obtaining permission from the institutional ethics committee, patients will be selected based on the above inclusion and exclusion criteria and recruited into the study after taking informed written consent, strict confidentiality will be maintained

 All patients will be evaluated using detailed history, clinical examination and  necessary laboratory investigations including complete blood count, CRP, LDH, renal function and liver function tests including serum albumin levels, and the same will be documented.

 The collected data, also including imaging features, will be tabulated based on the respective criteria used in the different scoring systems used previously, i.e., RANSON, BISAP, MCTSI and the new Chinese Simple Scoring system. The quantitative data will be summarized in an Excel sheet and analysed.

 The correlation of the different scoring systems with the clinical outcome of the patient will be done, including parameters like duration of hospital stay and mortality.

 Scores included in the study are

1.        Chinese Simple Scoring System

2.      BISAP score

3.      Ranson’s Score

4.      MTCSI