Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 175

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A systematic review of the epidemiology, pathophysiology and current management of hyperlipidaemic pancreatitis

Adiamah, Alfred, Psaltis, Emmanouil, Crook, Martin, Lobo, Dileep N.·2018·Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS The aims of this systematic review were to define the epidemiology and pathophysiology of hyperlipidaemic pancreatitis, establish its association with clinical outcome and define management strategies. METHODS The Cochrane, Embase and Medline databases were searched, limited to the last decade, for articles on hyperlipidaemic pancreatitis. All randomised controlled trials, observational studies and case series (with a minimum of 10 patients) on hyperlipidaemic pancreatitis were included. RESULTS Thirty-eight studies with 1979 patients were included. The median admission triglyceride concentration was 42.8 mmol/L (range 13.6-108.6 mmol/L) [3785 mg/dL (range 1205-9612 mg/dL)]. Severe hypertriglyceridaemia (>1000 mg/dL, 11.0 mmol/L) was present in 1.7% of the adult population, and about 15-20% of these developed hyperlipidaemic acute pancreatitis. Medical management of severe hyperlipidaemia at onset of acute pancreatitis has not been investigated fully. However, tight regulation of triglyceride concentration after presentation with acute pancreatitis was found to reduce the risk of recurrence. Plasmapheresis reduced concentrations of triglycerides by up to 85%, but this did not impact morbidity or mortality. All studies included defined hyperlipidaemia as a more severe form of pancreatitis. CONCLUSION The available evidence suggests an increasing risk of acute pancreatitis in patients with hyperlipidaemia and a more severe form of pancreatitis. There is some evidence to suggest biochemical benefit of using novel techniques like plasmapheresis without the desired physiological benefit. However, there is a need for an international consensus on the management of hyperlipidaemic pancreatitis. More rigorous and methodologically robust studies are required to inform such consensus guidelines.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clnu.2017.09.028

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 21 references

Cited by

See all 175

Metadata

Authors
Adiamah, A., Psaltis, E., Crook, M., & Lobo, D. N.
Venue
Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-12
Volume
37
Issue
6
Pages
1810-1822
ISSN
0261-5614 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2761787507
Cited by
175
References
21
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A systematic review of the epidemiology, pathophysiology and current management of hyperlipidaemic pancreatitis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.clnu.2017.09.028
The paper
Adiamah, A., Psaltis, E., Crook, M., & Lobo, D. N. (2018). A systematic review of the epidemiology, pathophysiology and current management of hyperlipidaemic pancreatitis. Clinical Nutrition. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2017.09.028

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.