Cited by 7,187Pancreatitis Pathology and TreatmentGallbladder and Bile Duct DisordersPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 75 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

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

Open access

Abstract

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.

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 · 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302779

Cites

75 of 75 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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 77 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Sakorafas GH, Tsiotos GG, Sarr MG. Extrapancreatic necrotizing pancreatitis with viable pancreas: a previously under- appreciated entity. J Am Coll Surg 1999;188:643-8. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  2. Bradley EL III.. Atlanta redux. Pancreas 2003;26:105-6. [CrossRef] [Medline]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 1,002

Metadata

Authors
Banks, P. A., Bollen, T. L., Dervenis, C., Gooszen, H. G., Johnson, C. D., Sarr, M. G., Tsiotos, G. G., & Vege, S. S.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • St. Antonius Ziekenhuis (NL)
  • Agia Olga Hospital (GR)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Metropolitan Hospital (GR)
Corresponding author
Sarr, Michael G
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2012-10-25
Volume
62
Issue
1
Pages
102-111
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2145758369
Cited by
7,187
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 666 · 2025: 732 · 2024: 720 · 2023: 738 · 2022: 699 · 2021: 675 · 2020: 612 · 2019: 481 · 2018: 458 · 2017: 402 · 2016: 349 · 2015: 305 · 2014: 232 · 2013: 91 · 2012: 9
FWCI
209.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Gut (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
  • CONICET Digital (CONICET) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
  • University of Pittsburgh
  • American Gastroenterological Association
  • Cancer Research UK (15957)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0510-10126)
  • Ministry of Urban Development
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Keywords
acute pancreatitis, Atlanta classification, disease severity classification, organ failure, local complications, pancreatic necrosis, peripancreatic fluid collections, pseudocyst, walled-off necrosis, international consensus
MeSH terms
Acute Disease, Humans, Pancreatitis, Severity of Illness Index, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Disease Progression

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