Extensive Investigation of Patients with Mild Elevations of Serum Amylase and/or Lipase Is ‘Low Yield’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Serum amylase and lipase levels are widely used as markers of pancreatic inflammation. However, it would seem that mild elevations of amylase and lipase rarely predict significant pancreatic pathology. Pancreatic imaging tests are expensive. The gold standard, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, carries risk of morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether extensive investigation of patients with mild, nonspecific abdominal symptoms and mild elevations of amylase and/or lipase results in a significant diagnostic yield. METHODS: Outpatient evaluations were retrospectively analyzed over 12 months. Inclusion criteria were nonspecific abdominal pain, and mild elevations (less than three times the upper limit of normal) of serum amylase or lipase, or both. Exclusion criteria included a history of chronic pancreatitis, elevation of liver tests and acute pain syndromes. RESULTS: Nineteen patients over the study period met the criteria. Of the nineteen patients, 58% had elevation of lipase alone, 21% amylase alone and 21% had elevations of both. In addition, 89.5% of the patients had nonspecific abdominal pain. After imaging with one or more of ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, small bowel follow through or hepatobiliary scanning, 78.9% patients were thought to have a normal pancreas. Of the remaining patients, 15.8% had mild or equivocal changes of chronic pancreatitis, and one patient was found to have a pancreatic tail pseudocyst. The average cost of investigation was US$2,255, taking only direct procedural costs into account. No patient was found to have malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with nonspecific abdominal pain and isolated elevations of amylase and/or lipase (less than three times the upper limit of normal) had no identifiable pancreatic pathology. The diagnostic yield in patients with mild elevations of lipase alone was particularly poor. The cost effectiveness and risk-benefit ratio of extensive investigation of this group of patients warrants further study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".