Background and objective The Atlanta classification of acute pancreatitis enabled standardised reporting of research and aided communication between clinicians. Deficiencies identified and improved understanding of the disease make a revision necessary. Methods A web-based consultation was undertaken in 2007 to ensure wide participation of pancreatologists. After an initial meeting, the Working Group sent a draft document to 11 national and international pancreatic associations. This working draft was forwarded to all members. Revisions were made in response to comments, and the web-based consultation was repeated three times. The final consensus was reviewed, and only statements based on published evidence were retained. Results The revised classification of acute pancreatitis identified two phases of the disease: early and late. Severity is classified as mild, moderate or severe. Mild acute pancreatitis, the most common form, has no organ failure, local or systemic complications and usually resolves in the first week. Moderately severe acute pancreatitis is defined by the presence of transient organ failure, local complications or exacerbation of co-morbid disease. Severe acute pancreatitis is defined by persistent organ failure, that is, organ failure >48 h. Local complications are peripancreatic fluid collections, pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis (sterile or infected), pseudocyst and walled-off necrosis (sterile or infected). We present a standardised template for reporting CT images. Conclusions This international, web-based consensus provides clear definitions to classify acute pancreatitis using easily identified clinical and radiologic criteria. The wide consultation among pancreatologists to reach this consensus should encourage widespread adoption.

/pdf/classification-of-acute-pancreatitis-2012-revision-of-the-608d2rjeud.pdf

Classification of acute pancreatitis—2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus

• Acute pancreatitis is a protean disease capable of wide clinical variation, ranging from mild discomfort to apocalyptic prostration. Moreover, the inflammatory process may remain localized in the pancreas, spread to regional tissues, or even involve remote organ systems. This variability in presentation and clinical course has plagued the study and management of acute pancreatitis since its original clinical description. In the absence of accepted definitions for acute pancreatitis and its complications, it has not been possible to devise a clinical classification system useful for case management. Following 3 days of group meetings and open discussions, unanimous consensus on a series of definitions and a clinically based classification system for acute pancreatitis was achieved by a diverse group of 40 international authorities from six medical disciplines and 15 countries. The proposed classification system will be of value to practicing clinicians in the care of individual patients and to academicians seeking to compare interinstitutional data. (Arch Surg.1993;128:586-590)

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/SURG/articlepdf/595684/archsurg_128_5_019.pdf

A Clinically Based Classification System for Acute Pancreatitis: Summary of the International Symposium on Acute Pancreatitis, Atlanta, Ga, September 11 Through 13, 1992

Practice guidelines in acute pancreatitis.

https://www.spg.pt/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/2013-ACG_Guideline_AcutePancreatitis_September_2013.pdf

American College of Gastroenterology guideline: management of acute pancreatitis.

Crohn's disease is a lifelong disease arising from an interaction between genetic and environmental factors, but observed predominantly in developed countries of the world. The precise aetiology is unknown and therefore a causal therapy is not yet available. Within Europe there is a distinct North–South gradient, but the incidence appears to have increased in Southern countries in recent years.1 Many patients live with a considerable symptom burden despite medical treatment in the hope that the aetiology of the disease will shortly be revealed and curative therapies emerge. Since it is uncertain that the precise pathogenesis of Crohn's disease will be revealed anytime soon, clinicians have to advise patients on the basis of information available today rather than an unknown future. Despite a multiplicity of randomised trials there will always be many questions that can only be answered by the exercise of judgement and opinion. This leads to differences in practice between clinicians, which may be brought into sharp relief by differences in emphasis between countries.

The Consensus endeavours to address these differences. The Consensus is not meant to supersede the guidelines of different countries (such as those from the UK,2 Germany,3 or France), which reach broadly the same conclusions since they are, after all, based on the same evidence. Rather, the aim of the Consensus is to promote a European perspective on the management of Crohn's disease and its dilemmas. Since the development of guidelines is an expensive and time-consuming process, it may help to avoid duplication of effort in the future. A Consensus is also considered important because an increasing number of therapeutic trials are based in Europe, especially in eastern European countries where practice guidelines have yet to be published.

This document is based on the European consensus on the diagnosis and management of Crohn's …

https://gut.bmj.com/content/gutjnl/55/suppl_1/i1.full.pdf

The second European evidence-based Consensus on the diagnosis and management of Crohn's disease: Definitions and diagnosis

The presence and degree of pancreatic necrosis (30%, 50%, or greater than 50%) was evaluated by means of bolus injection of contrast material and dynamic sequential computed tomography (CT) in 88 patients with acute pancreatitis at initial and follow-up examinations. Pancreatic necrosis was defined as lack of enhancement of all or a portion of the gland. Length of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality in patients with early or late necrosis (22 patients) were evaluated and compared with the same criteria in the rest of the group. Patients with necrosis had a 23% mortality and an 82% complication rate; patients without necrosis had 0% mortality and 6% morbidity. When only the initial assessment was considered, patients with peripancreatic phlegmons and necrosis had 80% morbidity, compared with 36% morbidity in those with phlegmons and no necrosis. Serious complications occurred in patients who initially had or developed more than 30% necrosis. A CT severity index, based on a combination of peripancreatic inflammation, phlegmon, and degree of pancreatic necrosis as seen at initial CT study, was developed. Patients with a high CT severity index had 92% morbidity and 17% mortality; patients with a low CT severity index had 2% morbidity, and none died.

Acute pancreatitis: value of CT in establishing prognosis.

Treatment of patients with acute pancreatitis is based on the initial assessment of disease severity. Severe pancreatitis occurs in 20%-30% of all patients with acute pancreatitis and is characterized by a protracted clinical course, multiorgan failure, and pancreatic necrosis. Early staging is based on the presence and degree of systemic failure (cardiovascular, pulmonary, renal) and on the presence and extent of pancreatic necrosis. Individual laboratory indexes (markers of pancreatic injury, markers of inflammatory response), while promising, have not yet gained clinical acceptance. Numeric grading systems with sensitivities of about 70% are commonly used today as indicators of organ failure and disease severity. Contrast material-enhanced computed tomography is used in addition to help evaluate local pancreatic morphology and the presence and extent of pancreatic necrosis. Advantages and limitations of the clinical, laboratory, and imaging prognostic indexes are analyzed and discussed.

Acute Pancreatitis: Assessment of Severity with Clinical and CT Evaluation

In 83 patients with acute pancreatitis, the initial computed tomographic (CT) examinations were classified by degree of disease severity (grades A-E) and were correlated with the clinical follow-up, objective prognostic signs, and complications and death. The length of hospitalization correlated well with the severity of the initial CT findings. Abscesses occurred in 21.6% of the entire group, compared with 60.0% of grade E patients. Pleural effusions were also more common in grade E patients. Grades A and B patients did not have abscesses, and none died, regardless of the number of prognostic signs. Abscesses were seen in 80.0% of patients with six to eight prognostic signs, compared with 12.5% of those with zero to two. The use of prognostic signs with initial CT findings results in improved prognostic accuracy. Early CT examination of patients with acute pancreatitis is a useful prognostic indicator of morbidity and mortality.

Acute pancreatitis: prognostic value of CT.

An International Symposium was held in Atlanta in 1992 to present the state of the art of diagnostic evaluation and management of acute pancreatitis and to agree on an acceptable series of clinical definitions for classifying the disease and its complications. The symposium was composed of 40 internationally recognized experts in pancreatic disease from 15 countries representing six disciplines (anatomy, gastroenterology, internal medicine, pathology, radiology, and surgery). The purpose of this article is to present the radiologically relevant aspects of the symposium; to define the state of the art of imaging and intervention in acute pancreatitis, particularly how and when to use computed tomography and how and when to perform percutaneous therapy versus surgery; and to encourage radiologists to use precise and proper nomenclature when describing the morphologic manifestations of acute pancreatitis as depicted by various imaging modalities.

Imaging and intervention in acute pancreatitis.

PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients were examined with US and CT, and the results, independently reported, were correlated with surgical and histopathologic findings (69 patients) and data from other laboratory and clinical follow-up (31 patients). RESULTS: Fifty-four patients had acute appendicitis; 46 patients did not. Analysis of the data for CT and US, respectively, revealed sensitivity, 96% versus 76%; specificity, 89% versus 91%; accuracy, 94% versus 83%; positive predictive value, 96% versus 95%; and negative predictive value, 95% versus 76%. In the 46 patients without appendicitis, an alternative diagnosis was made with CT in 22 patients and with US in 15. CT scans showed abscesses and/or phlegmons in 28% of patients with appendicitis versus 17% at US. Results of CT and US were discordant in 20 patients; CT findings were correct in 17 and US findings in ...

Emil J. Balthazar

Papers

Acute pancreatitis: value of CT in establishing prognosis.

Acute Pancreatitis: Assessment of Severity with Clinical and CT Evaluation

Acute pancreatitis: prognostic value of CT.

Imaging and intervention in acute pancreatitis.

Acute appendicitis: CT and US correlation in 100 patients