摘要Background In 2012,the working group on abdominal problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) proposed a definition and also guidelines for the grading system and treatment of acute gastrointestinal injury (AGI).Until now,clinical reports on this topic have not been available,and the practicality of using the AGI grading system requires further validation in the clinic.Therefore,we conducted this study to evaluate the feasibility of utilizing the current AGI grading system in a clinical environment,and to provide evidence for its usefulness in assessing the severity and prognosis of critically ill patients with gastrointestinal dysfunction.Methods A total of 133 patients were examined for the presence or absence of AGI,their scores on the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) Ⅱ and Lausanne Intestinal Failure Estimation (LIFE) test,and 28 days mortality.The presence and severity of AGI was based on guidelines provided by the ESICM.The patients were assigned to a NOAGI group (n=50) or an AGI group (n=83).The AGI group was then further divided into three subgroups,consisting ofAGI Ⅰ (risk group,n=38),AGI Ⅱ (gastrointestinal dysfunction group,n=33) and AGI Ⅲ+AGI Ⅳ (gastrointestinal failure group,n=12).These subgroups were then compared for differences in AGI indicators.Results There were no statistically significant differences between the AGI group and the NO-AGI group in terms of age,gender,APACHE Ⅱ score or LIFE score (P ＞ 0.05); however,the two groups showed a significant difference in their respective rates of 28 days mortality (32.5％ in the AGI group vs.8.0％ in the NO-AGI group (P ＜ 0.05)).Patients in the three AGI subgroups showed significant differences in their 28 d mortality rates,APACHE Ⅱ,and LIFE scores.AGI grading system showed strong positive correlations with APACHE Ⅱ and LIFE scores (P ＜ 0.05).Conclusions The currentAGI grading system can be used to identify and evaluate gastrointestinal dysfunction in critically ill patients,and also to provide a preliminary assessment regarding the prognosis for patients with different grades of AGI.