| Literature DB >> 23505476 |
Krishna Rao1, Seth T Walk, Dejan Micic, Elizabeth Chenoweth, Lili Deng, Andrzej T Galecki, Ruchika Jain, Itishree Trivedi, Marie Yu, Kavitha Santhosh, Cathrin Ring, Vincent B Young, Gary B Huffnagle, David M Aronoff.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a major cause of morbidity and biomarkers that predict severity of illness are needed. Procalcitonin (PCT), a serum biomarker with specificity for bacterial infections, has been little studied in CDI. We hypothesized that PCT associated with CDI severity.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23505476 PMCID: PMC3591407 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058265
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Illustration of Clostridium difficile isolates by ribotype.
This chart shows a diverse population of Clostridium difficile isolates in our cohort. Twenty-two different ribotypes were identified. The prefix “UM” is used for ribotypes that were different from known reference isolates and were identified at the University of Michigan Health System (UMHS) more than once. The “Unique” grouping is for isolates that were identified only once at UMHS. Labels: Ribotype (number of patients).
Figure 2Procalcitonin (PCT) levels and presence of severity markers.
This graph shows that patients with elevated PCT levels have an abundance of severity markers, while those with low or undetectable PCT levels have few. Patients are ordered by decreasing log10 PCT value. (WBC: white blood cell; AOD: acute organ dysfunction; ICU: intensive care unit).
Figure 3Percent of patients with a CDI severity marker.
This bar graph illustrates that having ≥seven stools per day had a much higher prevalence than other severity markers in our cohort. (WBC: white blood cell; AOD: acute organ dysfunction; ICU: intensive care unit).
Odds ratios for predictors of CDI severity scores based on univariate logistic regression.
|
|
| |||||||||||
| Variable | OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95%CI |
| ||||||
| log10 PCT | 3.12 | 1.69–5.81 | <.001 | 3.33 | 1.77–6.23 | <.001 | ||||||
| Positive Toxin A/B EIA | 5.33 | 1.67–17.0 | .005 | 5.71 | 1.95–16.7 | .002 | ||||||
| 027 Ribotype | 7.19 | 1.27–40.8 | .026 | 11.7 | 1.32–104 | .027 | ||||||
| Age | 1.02 | 1.00–1.05 | .109 | 1.03 | 1.00–1.06 | .045 | ||||||
| Male Gender | 0.82 | 0.29–2.29 | .698 | 1.12 | 0.43–2.96 | .813 | ||||||
| ADL Score | 0.99 | 0.77–1.23 | .904 | 0.98 | 0.78–1.22 | .870 | ||||||
| ECF Resident | 3.50 | 1.01–12.1 | .049 | 4.75 | 1.29–17.5 | .019 | ||||||
| Charlson-Deyo Score | 1.02 | 0.82–1.27 | .869 | 0.99 | 0.80–1.22 | .920 | ||||||
| Modified ARC Score | 1.13 | 0.87–1.48 | .367 | 1.23 | 0.95–1.60 | .112 | ||||||
| Immunosuppression | 1.14 | 0.41–3.24 | .799 | 1.01 | 0.38–2.71 | .983 | ||||||
| Renal Disease | 0.62 | 0.12–3.25 | .569 | 0.75 | 0.17–3.29 | .703 | ||||||
| Treatment >48 hrs | 0.55 | 0.06–5.24 | .603 | 0.37 | 0.04–3.46 | .380 | ||||||
| Concurrent ABI | 1.20 | 0.38–3.79 | .756 | 1.35 | 0.45–4.01 | .591 | ||||||
| CA | 0.98 | 0.19–3.96 | .974 | 1.04 | 0.24–4.06 | .951 | ||||||
| COHA | 0.47 | 0.12–1.53 | .234 | 0.41 | 0.12–1.24 | .130 | ||||||
| HOHA | 1.30 | 0.46–3.68 | .617 | 1.67 | 0.63–4.49 | .304 | ||||||
ng/mL,
true/false,
years,
range 0–6 for increasing functional impairment,
weighted comorbidity index.
Odds ratios for predictors of CDI severity scores based on multiple logistic regression.
|
|
| ||||||||||||
| Variable | OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95%CI |
| |||||||
| log10 PCT | 3.09 | 1.50–6.35 | .002 | 3.06 | 1.49–6.26 | .002 | |||||||
| Positive Toxin A/B EIA | 3.11 | 0.73–13.4 | .127 | 3.56 | 0.91–14.0 | .068 | |||||||
| 027 Ribotype | 2.66 | 0.28–25.3 | .395 | 4.71 | 0.29–77.7 | .279 | |||||||
| Age | 1.02 | 0.98–1.06 | .441 | 1.02 | 0.98–1.06 | .316 | |||||||
| Charlson-Deyo Score | 0.64 | 0.38–1.09 | .102 | 0.63 | 0.37–1.08 | .093 | |||||||
| Concurrent ABI | 1.34 | 0.28–6.29 | .715 | 1.41 | 0.31–6.41 | .654 | |||||||
| ECF Resident | 1.31 | 0.23–7.49 | .765 | 1.79 | 0.28–11.5 | .541 | |||||||
ng/mL,
true/false,
years,
weighted comorbidity score.
Figure 4ROC curves of PCT vs. the Clinical Score and the Expanded Score.
The area under the curve for both is 0.8.
Figure 5Kaplan-Meier Curve for Recurrence by PCT group.
This curve shows a higher recurrence rate for those with PCT >0.2 ng/mL but the hazard rate was not significant (HR 1.57, 95% CI 0.7–3.4, P = .246).