Abstract
Accurate diagnosis and description of the various findings in acute pancreatitis is important for treatment. The original Atlanta classification for acute pancreatitis sought to create a uniform system for classifying the severity of acute pancreatitis as well as common language to describe the various events that can occur in acute pancreatitis. The goal was to allow accurate communication between physicians using standardized language so correct treatment options could be used. Since that time, advances in the understanding of acute pancreatitis as well as improvements in both interventions and imaging have led to criticisms of the system and its abandonment by physicians. A 2007 revision of the Atlanta classifications sought to address many of these issues. This article will explain the changes to the Atlanta classification system and provide pictorial examples of the findings in acute pancreatitis as described by the Atlanta classification system.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Besselink MG et al (2006) Describing computed tomography findings in acute necrotizing pancreatitis with the Atlanta classification: an interobserver agreement study. Pancreas 33(4):331–335
Bollen TL et al (2007) Toward an update of the atlanta classification on acute pancreatitis: review of new and abandoned terms. Pancreas 35(2):107–113
Acute Pancreatitis Classification Working Group, Revision of the Atlanta classification of acute pancreatitis. 2007
Koo BC, Chinogureyi A, Shaw AS (2010) Imaging acute pancreatitis. Br J Radiol 83(986):104–112
Morgan DE (2008) Imaging of acute pancreatitis and its complications. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 6(10):1077–1085
Balthazar EJ et al (1990) Acute pancreatitis: value of CT in establishing prognosis. Radiology 174(2):331–336
De Waele JJ et al (2007) Extrapancreatic inflammation on abdominal computed tomography as an early predictor of disease severity in acute pancreatitis: evaluation of a new scoring system. Pancreas 34(2):185–190
Hill MC et al (1982) Acute pancreatitis: clinical vs. CT findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 139(2):263–269
Knoepfli AS et al (2007) Prospective study of 310 patients: can early CT predict the severity of acute pancreatitis? Abdom Imaging 32(1):111–115
Thomas S. et al. Diffusion MRI of acute pancreatitis and comparison with normal individuals using ADC values. Emerg Radiol
Werner J et al (2005) Management of acute pancreatitis: from surgery to interventional intensive care. Gut 54(3):426–436
Valek V, Kala Z, Dite P (2010) Role of imaging methods in diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. Dig Dis 28(2):317–323
Sakorafas GH, Tsiotos GG, Sarr MG (1999) Extrapancreatic necrotizing pancreatitis with viable pancreas: a previously under-appreciated entity. J Am Coll Surg 188(6):643–648
Harrison S et al (2010) Characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing debridement of pancreatic necrosis. J Gastrointest Surg 14(2):245–251
Trout AT et al (2010) Imaging of acute pancreatitis: prognostic value of computed tomographic findings. J Comput Assist Tomogr 34(4):485–495
Morgan DE et al (1997) Pancreatic fluid collections prior to intervention: evaluation with MR imaging compared with CT and US. Radiology 203(3):773–778
Lenhart DK, Balthazar EJ (2008) MDCT of acute mild (nonnecrotizing) pancreatitis: abdominal complications and fate of fluid collections. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190(3):643–649
Mortele KJ et al (2001) Splenic and perisplenic involvement in acute pancreatitis: determination of prevalence and morphologic helical CT features. J Comput Assist Tomogr 25(1):50–54
Bollen TL et al (2007) Intense adrenal enhancement in patients with acute pancreatitis and early organ failure. Emerg Radiol 14(5):317–322
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sheu, Y., Furlan, A., Almusa, O. et al. The revised Atlanta classification for acute pancreatitis: a CT imaging guide for radiologists. Emerg Radiol 19, 237–243 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-011-1001-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-011-1001-4