Evidence Hub

Triglyceride lowering in patients with different severities of hypertriglyceridaemia-associated acute pancreatitis: secondary analysis of a multicentre, prospective cohort study

Xiang Luo, Xiao-Ling Li, Xiaoyan Lai, Wen-Jian Mao, Lu Ke, Lingyan Fu, Lin Gao, Yao-Lu Liu

BMJ Open Gastroenterology, 2025

413 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

Objective It is controversial whether rapid lowering of triglyceride (TG) levels is associated with clinical benefits in patients with hypertriglyceridaemia-associated acute pancreatitis (HTG-AP). In particular, patients with different severity of disease may respond differently to TG-lowering therapy. In this study, we aimed to explore the association between rapid decline in serum TG levels and organ failure in patients with different severities of HTG-AP. Methods This is a secondary analysis of data from a multicentre, prospective registry recruiting HTG-AP patients admitted within 72 hours from the onset of symptoms. Patients were dichotomised into either target reaching (TG≤5.65 mmol/L on study day 3) or not. The primary outcome was the presence of organ failure at day 14. The association between target-reaching and the primary outcome was modelled. Furthermore, subgroup analyses were conducted based on the disease severity of HTG-AP patients at enrolment. Results Overall, 413 patients were included for analysis, of whom 192 (46.5%) reached the target on day 3. For the overall study cohort, there was no significant difference in presence of organ failure at day 14 between patients reaching the target or not (3.1% vs 6.8%, p=0.091). In the subgroup of HTG-AP patients with organ failure at enrolment, compared with patients with TG>5.65 mmol/L on day 3, patients who reached the target had significantly lower presence of organ failure at day 14 (7.8% vs 22%, p=0.039) and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 413 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free