4.7 Article

Incidence and Clinical Associations of Childhood Acute Pancreatitis

期刊

PEDIATRICS
卷 138, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2016-1198

关键词

-

资金

  1. Libyan Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research
  2. National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre
  3. Great Ormond Street Hospital Childrens Charity [W1083] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES: To establish the UK incidence and clinical associations of acute pancreatitis (AP) in children aged 0 to 14 years. METHODS: Monthly surveillance of new cases of AP in children under 15 years of age through the British Pediatric Surveillance Unit conducted from April 2013 to April 2014 (inclusive) followed by 1-year administrative follow-up for all valid cases. RESULTS: Ninety-four cases (48 boys) fulfilled the diagnostic criteria. The median age at diagnosis was 11.2 years (range 1.3-14.9). White children accounted for 61% of the cases compared with 28% from Asian and 5% from African ethnicities. Pakistani children accounted for 18 of 26 (69%) Asian patients and 19% of the total cohort. The incidence of AP in children in the United Kingdom was 0.78 per 100 000/year (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.96). The incidence in Pakistani children (4.55; 95% CI 2.60-7.39) was sevenfold greater than white children (0.63; 95% CI 0.47-0.83). Of the 94 cases, 35 (37%) were idiopathic; other associations were: drug therapy, 18 (19%); gallstones, 12 (13%); hereditary, 7 (7%); organic acidemias, 7 (7%); anatomic anomalies, 5 (5%); viral infections, 3 (3%); systemic diseases, 2 (2%); and trauma 1 (1%). The most common drug associations were asparaginase (28%), azathioprine (17%), and sodium valproate (17%). CONCLUSIONS: Although still relatively uncommon in the United Kingdom, on average there is >1 case of childhood AP diagnosed every week. The associations of AP have changed significantly since the 1970-80s. Overrepresentation of Pakistani children is worthy of further investigation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据