OBJECTIVE: To determine the value of procalcitonin (ProCT) as a marker of infection in critically ill patients. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study. SETTING: Medicosurgical department of intensive care (31 beds). PATIENTS: One hundred eleven infected and 79 noninfected patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: ProCT and C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations were monitored daily. The best cutoff values for ProCT and CRP were 0.6 ng/mL and 7.9 mg/dL, respectively. Compared with CRP, ProCT had a lower sensitivity (67.6 vs. 71.8), specificity (61.3 vs. 66.6), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.66 vs. 0.78, p < .05). The combination of ProCT and CRP increased the specificity for infection to 82.3%. In the infected patients, plasma ProCT, but not CRP, values were higher in nonsurvivors than in survivors. Infected patients with bacteremia had higher ProCT concentrations than those without bacteremia, but similar CRP concentrations. ProCT levels were particularly high in septic shock patients. CONCLUSIONS: ProCT is not a better marker of infection than CRP in critically ill patients, but it can represent a useful adjunctive parameter to identify infection and is a useful marker of the severity of infection.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the value of procalcitonin (ProCT) as a marker of infection in critically illpatients. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study. SETTING: Medicosurgical department of intensive care (31 beds). PATIENTS: One hundred eleven infected and 79 noninfected patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: ProCT and C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations were monitored daily. The best cutoff values for ProCT and CRP were 0.6 ng/mL and 7.9 mg/dL, respectively. Compared with CRP, ProCT had a lower sensitivity (67.6 vs. 71.8), specificity (61.3 vs. 66.6), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.66 vs. 0.78, p < .05). The combination of ProCT and CRP increased the specificity for infection to 82.3%. In the infectedpatients, plasma ProCT, but not CRP, values were higher in nonsurvivors than in survivors. Infectedpatients with bacteremia had higher ProCT concentrations than those without bacteremia, but similar CRP concentrations. ProCT levels were particularly high in septic shockpatients. CONCLUSIONS: ProCT is not a better marker of infection than CRP in critically ill patients, but it can represent a useful adjunctive parameter to identify infection and is a useful marker of the severity of infection.
Authors: R K Gupta; K Nath; A Prasad; K N Prasad; M Husain; R K S Rathore; N Husain; C Srivastava; P Khetan; R Trivedi; P A Narayana Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-11-07 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Y Heper; E H Akalin; R Mistik; S Akgöz; O Töre; G Göral; B Oral; F Budak; S Helvaci Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Oleksa Rewa; John Muscedere; Steve Reynolds; Xuran Jiang; Daren K Heyland Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2012 Impact factor: 2.471