Acute Surgical Presentations — MCQs
On this page
What is the most common cause of large bowel obstruction in adults in the United Kingdom?
A 71-year-old man with atrial fibrillation presents with sudden onset severe periumbilical pain for 2 hours. The pain is out of proportion to examination findings. His abdomen is soft with minimal tenderness. Blood tests show: WCC 18.2 × 10⁹/L, lactate 4.8 mmol/L, pH 7.32, base excess -6. CT angiography shows superior mesenteric artery occlusion. What is the most appropriate management?
A 44-year-old woman presents with a 6-hour history of right upper quadrant pain. Examination reveals Murphy's sign is positive. Her blood pressure is 118/76 mmHg, pulse 92 bpm, temperature 37.8°C. Blood tests show: WCC 12.8 × 10⁹/L, CRP 45 mg/L, bilirubin 18 µmol/L, ALP 156 U/L, ALT 68 U/L. Ultrasound shows gallstones, gallbladder wall thickening 5mm, and pericholecystic fluid. What is the most appropriate initial management?
A 52-year-old woman presents with a 4-day history of severe colicky central abdominal pain, vomiting, and absolute constipation. She had a hysterectomy 15 years ago. Examination reveals a distended abdomen with high-pitched tinkling bowel sounds. CT shows multiple dilated small bowel loops measuring 4.2 cm with collapsed large bowel and a transition point in the pelvis with a 'whirl sign'. After initial resuscitation with IV fluids and NG decompression, what is the most appropriate definitive management?
A 58-year-old man with alcoholic cirrhosis and large volume ascites develops sudden severe abdominal pain and fever. Diagnostic paracentesis shows neutrophil count 320 cells/µL. He is started on IV cefotaxime. After 48 hours of antibiotics, he remains febrile and a repeat paracentesis shows neutrophil count 380 cells/µL. What is the most important next step?
A 29-year-old man presents with sudden onset severe generalized abdominal pain following blunt trauma to the abdomen during a football match 3 hours ago. On examination, he has generalized tenderness and guarding with absent bowel sounds. HR 118 bpm, BP 105/68 mmHg. FAST scan is negative. CT with IV contrast shows free fluid, bowel wall thickening in the jejunum, and subtle discontinuity of the bowel wall. What is the most appropriate management?
A 73-year-old man with atrial fibrillation on warfarin presents with sudden onset severe left-sided abdominal pain and rectal bleeding for 6 hours. His INR is 3.2. On examination, he has left-sided abdominal tenderness without peritonism. CT shows segmental wall thickening of the descending colon with pericolic fat stranding but no pneumatosis or portal venous gas. Lactate is 1.8 mmol/L. What is the most appropriate management?
A 41-year-old woman presents with right iliac fossa pain and fever for 48 hours. She has had similar episodes in the past. CT abdomen shows an inflamed appendix with a well-defined 4 cm pericaecal collection and surrounding fat stranding. She is haemodynamically stable with temperature 38.2°C and WCC 14.8×10⁹/L. What is the most appropriate management strategy?
A 67-year-old woman taking long-term NSAIDs for osteoarthritis presents with sudden onset severe generalized abdominal pain for 4 hours. On examination, she has a rigid, board-like abdomen with absent bowel sounds and rebound tenderness. HR 105 bpm, BP 110/70 mmHg. Erect CXR shows free air under the diaphragm. After resuscitation, what is the most appropriate definitive management?
A 34-year-old woman presents with sudden onset severe epigastric pain radiating to the back, nausea and vomiting for 8 hours. She drinks 40 units of alcohol weekly. BP 100/65 mmHg, HR 115 bpm, temperature 37.9°C. Examination reveals epigastric tenderness with guarding. Serum amylase is 1850 U/L. CT shows pancreatic oedema and peripancreatic fluid stranding. What is her modified Glasgow score?
Acute Surgical Presentations UK Medical PG Practice Questions and MCQs
Question 221: What is the most common cause of large bowel obstruction in adults in the United Kingdom?
- A. Sigmoid volvulus
- B. Colorectal carcinoma (Correct Answer)
- C. Diverticular stricture
- D. Adhesions
- E. Hernia
Explanation: ***Colorectal carcinoma*** - **Colorectal carcinoma** is the most common cause of **large bowel obstruction** in the UK, accounting for approximately **60%** of all cases. - Obstruction is most frequently seen with **left-sided tumors** in the sigmoid colon or rectosigmoid junction due to a narrower lumen and more **solid stool**. *Sigmoid volvulus* - This is the **second most common** cause of large bowel obstruction, representing roughly **15-20%** of cases in Western populations. - It is more common in **elderly, institutionalized** patients or those with chronic constipation leading to a redundant sigmoid colon. *Diverticular stricture* - **Diverticular disease** can cause large bowel obstruction via **chronic inflammation** and fibrosis leading to **stricture formation**, occurring in about 10-15% of cases. - Differentiation from malignancy often requires **CT imaging** or endoscopy once the acute phase of obstruction is resolved. *Adhesions* - While **adhesions** are the leading cause of **small bowel obstruction**, they are an **extremely rare** cause of large bowel obstruction. - This is because the large bowel is relatively **fixed retroperitoneally** and has a larger diameter compared to the small intestine. *Hernia* - Incarcerated **hernias** are a frequent cause of small bowel obstruction but represent an **uncommon** etiology for large bowel obstruction. - Only certain segments like the **sigmoid colon** or **cecum** inside an inguinal or femoral sac can lead to a large bowel blockage.
Question 222: A 71-year-old man with atrial fibrillation presents with sudden onset severe periumbilical pain for 2 hours. The pain is out of proportion to examination findings. His abdomen is soft with minimal tenderness. Blood tests show: WCC 18.2 × 10⁹/L, lactate 4.8 mmol/L, pH 7.32, base excess -6. CT angiography shows superior mesenteric artery occlusion. What is the most appropriate management?
- A. Conservative management with IV fluids and anticoagulation
- B. Urgent endovascular thrombectomy and anticoagulation
- C. Emergency exploratory laparotomy and bowel resection
- D. Thrombolysis followed by delayed surgical assessment
- E. Emergency laparotomy with embolectomy and assessment of bowel viability (Correct Answer)
Explanation: ***Emergency laparotomy with embolectomy and assessment of bowel viability***- The patient presents with **acute mesenteric ischemia** likely due to an **embolic event** from **atrial fibrillation**, necessitating immediate surgical intervention to restore blood flow and assess for **bowel necrosis**.- Elevated **lactate (4.8 mmol/L)** and **metabolic acidosis** indicate established ischemia/infarction, making direct surgical inspection and **embolectomy** the gold standard to prevent fatal peritonitis.*Conservative management with IV fluids and anticoagulation*- This approach is insufficient for **acute arterial occlusion** and will lead to total bowel infarction and death.- Anticoagulation prevents further clot formation but does not address the **mechanical obstruction** in the **superior mesenteric artery**.*Urgent endovascular thrombectomy and anticoagulation*- While endovascular options exist, they are generally reserved for very early presentations without signs of **metabolic derangement** or bowel death.- In this case, the **high lactate** and significant pain suggest the urgent need for surgical visualization to ensure **non-viable bowel** segments are resected.*Emergency exploratory laparotomy and bowel resection*- Resection alone is incomplete management; the primary goal is to **revascularize** the territory via embolectomy before deciding what must be removed.- Focus solely on resection without restoring flow to the rest of the **SMA territory** will result in progressive ischemia of the remaining bowel.*Thrombolysis followed by delayed surgical assessment*- **Thrombolysis** carries a significant risk of bleeding and is too slow to reverse the life-threatening **ischemic insult** seen in this clinical picture.- **Delayed surgical assessment** is inappropriate when the patient already shows signs of **systemic toxicity** and advanced ischemia.
Question 223: A 44-year-old woman presents with a 6-hour history of right upper quadrant pain. Examination reveals Murphy's sign is positive. Her blood pressure is 118/76 mmHg, pulse 92 bpm, temperature 37.8°C. Blood tests show: WCC 12.8 × 10⁹/L, CRP 45 mg/L, bilirubin 18 µmol/L, ALP 156 U/L, ALT 68 U/L. Ultrasound shows gallstones, gallbladder wall thickening 5mm, and pericholecystic fluid. What is the most appropriate initial management?
- A. Emergency cholecystectomy within 24 hours
- B. IV antibiotics and elective cholecystectomy in 6-8 weeks
- C. IV antibiotics and early cholecystectomy within 72 hours (Correct Answer)
- D. Percutaneous cholecystostomy
- E. ERCP with sphincterotomy
Explanation: ***IV antibiotics and early cholecystectomy within 72 hours***- The patient presents with **acute cholecystitis**, confirmed by a **positive Murphy’s sign**, inflammatory markers (**WCC** and **CRP**), and ultrasound findings of **gallstones**, **gallbladder wall thickening**, and **pericholecystic fluid**.- Current clinical guidelines recommend **early laparoscopic cholecystectomy** (ideally within **72 hours** of symptom onset) following initial stabilization with **IV antibiotics** to reduce hospital stay and prevent recurrent biliary events without increasing surgical risks.*Emergency cholecystectomy within 24 hours*- While surgery is indicated, "emergency" status within 24 hours is typically reserved for patients with severe complications like **gallbladder perforation**, **gangrene**, or **emphysematous cholecystitis**.- Most patients, like this one, are stabilized first with **intravenous fluids** and **antibiotics** to reduce localized inflammation before proceeding to definitive surgery.*IV antibiotics and elective cholecystectomy in 6-8 weeks*- This "delayed" approach is no longer preferred as it carries a high risk of **recurrent symptoms**, **emergency readmissions**, and potentially increased difficulty of surgery due to **chronic scarring**.- Randomized controlled trials have shown **early surgery** is superior to elective delayed surgery in terms of patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness.*Percutaneous cholecystostomy*- This procedure is a drainage technique reserved for **critically ill** or **septic** patients who are considered **unfit for surgery** and general anesthesia due to comorbidities.- As this 44-year-old patient is **hemodynamically stable** (BP 118/76 mmHg) and only mildly febrile, she is a suitable candidate for definitive surgical management.*ERCP with sphincterotomy*- **ERCP** is primarily indicated for the management of **choledocholithiasis** (common bile duct stones) or **ascending cholangitis**, not for isolated cholecystitis.- The patient's **bilirubin** is within the near-normal range (18 µmol/L) and there is no evidence of **common bile duct dilatation** on ultrasound, making ERCP inappropriate as initial management.
Question 224: A 52-year-old woman presents with a 4-day history of severe colicky central abdominal pain, vomiting, and absolute constipation. She had a hysterectomy 15 years ago. Examination reveals a distended abdomen with high-pitched tinkling bowel sounds. CT shows multiple dilated small bowel loops measuring 4.2 cm with collapsed large bowel and a transition point in the pelvis with a 'whirl sign'. After initial resuscitation with IV fluids and NG decompression, what is the most appropriate definitive management?
- A. Continue conservative management for 72 hours before considering surgery
- B. Water-soluble contrast study to assess for resolution
- C. Emergency laparotomy within 6 hours (Correct Answer)
- D. Laparoscopic adhesiolysis within 24 hours
- E. Exploratory laparotomy only if signs of strangulation develop
Explanation: ***Emergency laparotomy within 6 hours*** - The presence of the **whirl sign** on CT, in a patient with severe symptoms and dilated small bowel, is highly indicative of a **closed-loop obstruction** or **volvulus**, which carries a high risk of **bowel ischemia** and **strangulation**. - This finding mandates immediate surgical intervention within hours to prevent irreversible bowel necrosis and reduce morbidity and mortality. *Continue conservative management for 72 hours before considering surgery* - **Conservative management** with IV fluids and NG decompression is suitable for uncomplicated, **partial small bowel obstruction**, especially if adhesive and without signs of strangulation. - However, the **whirl sign** denotes a high-risk situation of impending strangulation, making prolonged conservative management dangerous and likely to lead to **bowel infarction**. *Water-soluble contrast study to assess for resolution* - A **water-soluble contrast study** (e.g., Gastrografin) can be helpful in predicting resolution or unblocking simple **adhesive small bowel obstruction**. - It is not indicated for **closed-loop obstructions** or **volvulus** where the mechanism is mechanical torsion leading to rapid ischemia, and urgent surgical relief is necessary. *Laparoscopic adhesiolysis within 24 hours* - While **laparoscopic adhesiolysis** is an option for some adhesive bowel obstructions, a **24-hour delay** is too long when a **whirl sign** is present, indicating a high risk of acute ischemia. - Moreover, significant bowel distension (4.2 cm) often makes laparoscopic access and manipulation challenging and risky, potentially favoring an **open laparotomy**. *Exploratory laparotomy only if signs of strangulation develop* - Waiting for overt **signs of strangulation** (e.g., peritonitis, sepsis, fever, acidosis) implies that **irreversible bowel damage** has likely already occurred, increasing the risk of **bowel resection** and poor outcomes. - The **whirl sign** is a critical indicator of a high likelihood of strangulation, prompting proactive immediate surgery rather than a watchful waiting approach.
Question 225: A 58-year-old man with alcoholic cirrhosis and large volume ascites develops sudden severe abdominal pain and fever. Diagnostic paracentesis shows neutrophil count 320 cells/µL. He is started on IV cefotaxime. After 48 hours of antibiotics, he remains febrile and a repeat paracentesis shows neutrophil count 380 cells/µL. What is the most important next step?
- A. Change antibiotics to meropenem
- B. Add metronidazole to current antibiotic regimen
- C. Arrange urgent CT abdomen to exclude secondary peritonitis (Correct Answer)
- D. Perform therapeutic large volume paracentesis
- E. Start antifungal therapy with fluconazole
Explanation: ***Arrange urgent CT abdomen to exclude secondary peritonitis***- Failure of ascitic fluid **polymorphonuclear (PMN) count** to decrease (in fact, it increased from 320 to 380 cells/µL) after 48 hours of appropriate antibiotic therapy strongly suggests **secondary bacterial peritonitis**.- An urgent **CT abdomen** is critical to identify a surgical source, such as **bowel perforation** or an intra-abdominal abscess, which requires definitive intervention beyond antibiotics alone.*Change antibiotics to meropenem*- While antibiotic resistance is a consideration, a **rising PMN count** despite adequate broad-spectrum antibiotics for SBP is a red flag for a **surgical cause** of peritonitis.- Escalating antibiotics without identifying the source would delay crucial diagnostic imaging and potentially life-saving surgical intervention.*Add metronidazole to current antibiotic regimen*- Adding **metronidazole** would provide coverage for **anaerobes**, which are more common in **secondary peritonitis** originating from the gut.- However, the primary concern with treatment failure and rising PMN count is identifying the **source of infection** through imaging, as source control is paramount before further antibiotic adjustments.*Perform therapeutic large volume paracentesis*- **Therapeutic large volume paracentesis** aims to relieve symptoms of tense ascites, but it does not address the underlying infection or its source.- In the context of worsening infection and suspected secondary peritonitis, focusing on **source identification and control** takes precedence over symptomatic fluid removal.*Start antifungal therapy with fluconazole*- **Fungal peritonitis** can occur in cirrhotic patients, especially those with prolonged antibiotic use or immunosuppression, but it's less common than bacterial peritonitis as an initial cause of treatment failure.- The acute onset of severe pain and a rising PMN count are more characteristic of a bacterial process, particularly **secondary bacterial peritonitis**, which should be ruled out first.
Question 226: A 29-year-old man presents with sudden onset severe generalized abdominal pain following blunt trauma to the abdomen during a football match 3 hours ago. On examination, he has generalized tenderness and guarding with absent bowel sounds. HR 118 bpm, BP 105/68 mmHg. FAST scan is negative. CT with IV contrast shows free fluid, bowel wall thickening in the jejunum, and subtle discontinuity of the bowel wall. What is the most appropriate management?
- A. Observation with serial abdominal examinations
- B. Diagnostic peritoneal lavage
- C. Emergency laparotomy (Correct Answer)
- D. Repeat CT in 6 hours
- E. Laparoscopic exploration
Explanation: ***Emergency laparotomy*** - The patient presents with **peritonitis** (guarding, generalized tenderness, absent bowel sounds) and CT evidence of **hollow viscus injury**, which are absolute indications for immediate surgical exploration. - Findings of **bowel wall discontinuity**, unexplained free fluid, and thickening of the jejunum after blunt trauma signify a high risk of **bowel perforation** or ischemia. *Observation with serial abdominal examinations* - This approach is only appropriate for hemodynamically stable patients with **mild symptoms** and reassuring imaging studies. - Delaying surgery in the presence of **clinical peritonitis** and CT findings of bowel injury significantly increases the risk of **sepsis** and mortality. *Diagnostic peritoneal lavage* - This procedure has largely been replaced by **FAST** and CT; it is non-specific and cannot confirm the need for surgery better than the already performed CT. - A **negative FAST** scan often occurs in hollow viscus injury because it is designed to detect large volumes of **hemoperitoneum**, not small amounts of enteric fluid. *Repeat CT in 6 hours* - Repeating imaging causes an unnecessary delay in management for a patient who already has a **surgical abdomen**. - Substantial clinical deterioration from **peritonitis** would likely occur during the waiting period, leading to worse surgical outcomes. *Laparoscopic exploration* - While minimally invasive, **emergency laparotomy** remains the gold standard for definitive repair and thorough inspection of the entire bowel in **blunt trauma**. - Hemodynamic instability (tachycardia) and the potential for **mesenteric injuries** often necessitate the better visualization and access provided by an open approach.
Question 227: A 73-year-old man with atrial fibrillation on warfarin presents with sudden onset severe left-sided abdominal pain and rectal bleeding for 6 hours. His INR is 3.2. On examination, he has left-sided abdominal tenderness without peritonism. CT shows segmental wall thickening of the descending colon with pericolic fat stranding but no pneumatosis or portal venous gas. Lactate is 1.8 mmol/L. What is the most appropriate management?
- A. Emergency laparotomy with colonic resection
- B. Supportive care with bowel rest, IV fluids, and monitoring (Correct Answer)
- C. Immediate angiography with consideration for vasopressin infusion
- D. Urgent colonoscopy for mucosal assessment
- E. Emergency Hartmann's procedure
Explanation: ***Supportive care with bowel rest, IV fluids, and monitoring*** - The patient's presentation with acute abdominal pain and rectal bleeding, especially with **atrial fibrillation** and **anticoagulation**, is highly suggestive of **ischaemic colitis**. - The absence of **peritonism**, a normal **lactate** level, and CT findings without **pneumatosis** or **portal venous gas** indicate a non-transmural, reversible form of ischaemic colitis, which usually responds well to conservative management. *Emergency laparotomy with colonic resection* - Surgical intervention like a laparotomy with colonic resection is reserved for patients with signs of **transmural infarction**, **perforation**, **peritonitis**, or rapidly worsening clinical status. - This patient currently lacks these severe features, making immediate surgery unnecessary and potentially harmful. *Immediate angiography with consideration for vasopressin infusion* - **Angiography** is primarily indicated for **acute mesenteric ischemia** involving the small bowel from arterial occlusion, which is distinct from ischaemic colitis. - **Vasopressin infusion** can induce further **vasoconstriction** and is generally contraindicated in ischaemic colitis as it can worsen the underlying low-flow state. *Urgent colonoscopy for mucosal assessment* - While colonoscopy can definitively diagnose ischaemic colitis, an urgent procedure in the acute phase carries a significant risk of **perforation** due to a friable, inflamed bowel wall. - Air insufflation during colonoscopy can also increase **intraluminal pressure** and potentially exacerbate the ischaemic injury. *Emergency Hartmann's procedure* - A **Hartmann's procedure** is a specific type of surgical resection (distal colon resection with end colostomy), indicated for severe, complicated colonic pathologies like perforated diverticulitis or fulminant colitis not responsive to conservative care. - This procedure is a major surgery and is not indicated for the current stable presentation of what appears to be reversible ischaemic colitis.
Question 228: A 41-year-old woman presents with right iliac fossa pain and fever for 48 hours. She has had similar episodes in the past. CT abdomen shows an inflamed appendix with a well-defined 4 cm pericaecal collection and surrounding fat stranding. She is haemodynamically stable with temperature 38.2°C and WCC 14.8×10⁹/L. What is the most appropriate management strategy?
- A. Immediate appendicectomy
- B. Percutaneous drainage of collection followed by interval appendicectomy (Correct Answer)
- C. Conservative management with IV antibiotics alone
- D. CT-guided aspiration of collection with IV antibiotics but no interval appendicectomy
- E. Laparoscopic washout and drainage without appendicectomy
Explanation: ***Percutaneous drainage of collection followed by interval appendicectomy*** - For an **appendiceal abscess** of 4 cm in a haemodynamically stable patient, **percutaneous drainage** is the initial management of choice to achieve source control and reduce inflammation. - The patient's history of **recurrent episodes** makes **interval appendicectomy** (typically 6-12 weeks later) crucial to prevent future attacks and associated complications. *Immediate appendicectomy* - Performing an immediate appendicectomy in the presence of a well-formed **pericaecal abscess** is technically challenging due to distorted anatomy and friable tissues, significantly increasing the risk of **bowel injury** and postoperative complications. - This approach is generally reserved for patients who are **unstable**, have diffuse peritonitis, or in whom percutaneous drainage is not feasible. *Conservative management with IV antibiotics alone* - While small appendiceal phlegmons or collections might resolve with antibiotics, a **4 cm abscess** typically requires **mechanical drainage** for effective source control due to its size and potential for persistent infection. - Relying solely on antibiotics for a large collection has a higher failure rate and increased risk of prolonged hospitalization or the need for subsequent intervention. *CT-guided aspiration of collection with IV antibiotics but no interval appendicectomy* - Simple **aspiration** without leaving a drain is often insufficient for a 4 cm abscess as it frequently leads to **re-accumulation** of fluid, necessitating repeat procedures or further intervention. - Omitting an **interval appendicectomy** in a patient with a history of **recurrent episodes** carries a high risk of future acute appendicitis attacks, which can be life-threatening. *Laparoscopic washout and drainage without appendicectomy* - **Laparoscopic exploration** in the acute phase of a contained abscess is associated with a high risk of **conversion to open surgery** and potential injury to inflamed, adherent bowel loops. - Performing a washout and drainage without removing the **inflamed appendix** does not address the underlying pathology, particularly in a patient with a history of recurrent symptoms, making percutaneous drainage a safer alternative for source control.
Question 229: A 67-year-old woman taking long-term NSAIDs for osteoarthritis presents with sudden onset severe generalized abdominal pain for 4 hours. On examination, she has a rigid, board-like abdomen with absent bowel sounds and rebound tenderness. HR 105 bpm, BP 110/70 mmHg. Erect CXR shows free air under the diaphragm. After resuscitation, what is the most appropriate definitive management?
- A. Urgent upper GI endoscopy
- B. Conservative management with IV proton pump inhibitors and antibiotics
- C. Emergency laparotomy (Correct Answer)
- D. Laparoscopic repair within 24 hours
- E. CT abdomen to confirm diagnosis before surgery
Explanation: ***Emergency laparotomy*** - The patient presents with **pneumoperitoneum** (free air under the diaphragm) and **generalized peritonitis** (rigid, board-like abdomen), necessitating immediate surgical intervention to source-control the perforation. - An **omental patch repair** (Graham patch) is the standard procedure used during laparotomy to seal a **perforated peptic ulcer**, typically caused by chronic **NSAID use** in this demographic. *Urgent upper GI endoscopy* - This procedure is strictly **contraindicated** in suspected perforation as **insufflation of air** can worsen the pneumoperitoneum and tension in the peritoneal cavity. - Endoscopy is used to manage **bleeding ulcers**, but not perforated ones where surgical closure is required. *Conservative management with IV proton pump inhibitors and antibiotics* - Known as **Taylor’s approach**, this is reserved only for clinically stable patients with **sealed-off perforations** and no signs of peritonitis. - This patient has **peritonitis and tachycardia**, indicating an active surgical emergency that cannot be managed with medication alone. *Laparoscopic repair within 24 hours* - While laparoscopy is a valid surgical technique, the phrase "within 24 hours" implies an unnecessary delay for a patient with **acute peritonitis**. - **Emergency intervention** is required immediately after resuscitation to minimize the risk of developing **septic shock**. *CT abdomen to confirm diagnosis before surgery* - A **CT scan** is unnecessary and results in a **delay of care** because the diagnosis of perforation is already confirmed by the **Erect CXR** showing free gas. - Clinical signs of a **rigid abdomen** and radiologic evidence of free air provide sufficient indication for immediate surgery.
Question 230: A 34-year-old woman presents with sudden onset severe epigastric pain radiating to the back, nausea and vomiting for 8 hours. She drinks 40 units of alcohol weekly. BP 100/65 mmHg, HR 115 bpm, temperature 37.9°C. Examination reveals epigastric tenderness with guarding. Serum amylase is 1850 U/L. CT shows pancreatic oedema and peripancreatic fluid stranding. What is her modified Glasgow score?
- A. Cannot be calculated without complete laboratory parameters (Correct Answer)
- B. 2 points
- C. 3 points
- D. 4 points
- E. 5 points
Explanation: ***Cannot be calculated without complete laboratory parameters*** - The **modified Glasgow (Imrie) score** requires evaluation of 8 specific parameters (PANCREAS mnemonic) including **PaO2, white cell count, calcium, urea, LDH, albumin, and glucose**. - While the patient's age (34 years) contributes 0 points, the absence of these other crucial **laboratory parameters** prevents calculation of a complete score. *2 points* - The patient's **tachycardia** (HR 115 bpm) and **hypotension** (BP 100/65 mmHg) are signs of systemic response to pancreatitis but are **not direct criteria** in the modified Glasgow score. - The scoring system prioritizes **biochemical markers** and **arterial blood gas results**, not vital signs alone, for prognosis. *3 points* - A score of 3 points or more indicates **severe acute pancreatitis**, but this classification requires at least three positive biochemical or age-related parameters. - We lack essential data such as **hypocalcaemia** or **hyperglycaemia** to determine if 3 points are met. *4 points* - This score implies a more severe disease, necessitating four positive criteria from the **PANCREAS** mnemonic, such as **Urea >16 mmol/L** or **Albumin <32 g/L**, which are not provided. - Higher scores are associated with increased risk of **pancreatic necrosis** and systemic complications, requiring more aggressive management. *5 points* - A score of 5 represents a very high risk of **mortality** and **multi-organ failure**, which cannot be assigned solely based on clinical presentation. - While **serum amylase** (1850 U/L) confirms the diagnosis of pancreatitis, its level is **not included** in the modified Glasgow prognostic scoring criteria.
Practice by Chapter
Want unlimited practice?
Get full access to all questions, explanations, and performance tracking.
Start For Free