4.4 Article

Analysis of Risk Factors Predictive of Early Mortality and Urgent ERCP in Acute Cholangitis

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 43, Issue 2, Pages 171-175

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e318157c62c

Keywords

acute cholangitis; mortality; logistic regression; endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Multifactor prognostic scoring systems have been developed for acute pancreatitis to identify those patients with a potentially poor prognosis. A similar system for patients with acute cholangitis is still lacking. Goals: To identify common clinical, biochemical, and etiologic variables that can be used to predict mortality and the need for early endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with acute cholangitis. Study: A retrospective study of 108 patients with acute cholangitis was performed at a single center. Univariate analysis and logistic regression were used to identify variables that were significantly associated and predictive of mortality and need for early ERCP. Results: Univariate analysis identified 18 variables significantly associated with mortality and 15 variables that predicted the need for early ERCP. Through logistic regression total bilirubin (P < 0.01), partial prothrombin time (P < 0.0 1), and presence of a liver abscess (P < 0.0 1) were found to be significant in predicting mortality. Alanine aminotransferase (P < 0.01) and white blood cell count (P < 0.01) were determined to be predictive of a need for early ERCP. The scoring systems for predicting mortality (93.9%, 80.7%) and early ERCP (98%, 91%) were both highly sensitive and specific, respectively. Conclusions: Acute cholarigitis is a disease that presents with varying severity. We report a scoring system that can be used to identify patients at high risk of early mortality and those that may benefit from earlier ERCP.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available