↓ Skip to main content

Predicting gallstone pancreatitis in HIV infected patients.

Overview of attention for article published in South African Journal of Surgery, June 2024
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 106)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Predicting gallstone pancreatitis in HIV infected patients.
Published in
South African Journal of Surgery, June 2024
DOI 10.36303/sajs.00193
Pubmed ID
Authors

F Anderson, TE Madiba, SR Thomson

Abstract

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, low cluster of differentiation (CD)4 counts and antiretroviral therapy can cause cholestasis and raised transaminases. In acute pancreatitis, this may render biochemical predictors of a gallstone aetiology inaccurate. In a prospective observational study, acute pancreatitis was diagnosed by standard criteria. Cholecystolithiasis and bile duct diameter were diagnosed by ultrasound. Cholestasis was defined as two of the following: bilirubin ≥ 21 umol/l, γ glutamyl transferase ≥ 78 U/l, alkaline phosphatase ≥ 121 U/l. Cholangitis was defined as cholestasis and any two sepsis criteria: (temperature > 38˚C, WCC > 12.6 ×109/L, pulse > 90 beats/min). Cholangitis, cholestasis, and bile duct diameter greater that 1 cm were indications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). These parameters' ability to predict gallstone pancreatitis (GSP) and choledocholithiasis were compared in HIV+ve and HIV-ve patients. Sixty-two (26%) of 216 patients had GSP. Twenty four were HIV+ve patients. More HIV+ve patients had cholestasis (p = 0.059) and ERCP (p = 0.004). In HIV+ve patients alanine aminotransferase (ALT) > 100 U/L, gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT) > 2 upper limit of normal and cholestasis had a negative predictive value of 92%, 96.7% and 95.2% respectively. In HIV-ve patients, negative predictive value (NPV) was 84%, 83.8% and 84.6% respectively. Bile duct stones were demonstrated at ERCP in 6 (25%) and 3 (8%) of HIV+ve and HIV-ve patients respectively (p = 0.077). Five of 14 ERCP patients had no bile duct stones. HIV+ve and HIV-ve groups had two deaths each. Absence at presentation of the abnormal parameters analysed were good predictors of a non-gallstone aetiology particularly in HIV+ve patients. Prior, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) would reduce the number of non-therapeutic ERCPs.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 June 2024.
All research outputs
#17,825,542
of 26,106,397 outputs
Outputs from South African Journal of Surgery
#27
of 106 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,882
of 177,219 outputs
Outputs of similar age from South African Journal of Surgery
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,106,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 106 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 177,219 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them