| Literature DB >> 28438138 |
Giuseppe Pontrelli1, Franco De Crescenzo2,3, Roberto Buzzetti2, Alessandro Jenkner2,4, Sara Balduzzi5, Francesca Calò Carducci4, Donato Amodio4, Maia De Luca4, Sara Chiurchiù4, Elin Haf Davies6, Giorgia Copponi2, Alessandra Simonetti2,4, Elena Ferretti2, Valeria Di Franco2,7, Virginia Rasi2, Martina Della Corte2, Luca Gramatica2, Marco Ciabattini8, Susanna Livadiotti2, Paolo Rossi2,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A number of biomarkers have been studied for the diagnosis of sepsis in paediatrics, but no gold standard has been identified. Procalcitonin (PCT) was demonstrated to be an accurate biomarker for the diagnosis of sepsis in adults and showed to be promising in paediatrics. Our study reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of PCT as an early biomarker of sepsis in neonates and children with suspected sepsis.Entities:
Keywords: Biological markers; Child; Infant; Meta-analysis; Procalcitonin; Sepsis; Systemic inflammatory response syndrome
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28438138 PMCID: PMC5404674 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-017-2396-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Fig. 1Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) flow chart. Literature search and selection. *One study assessed both neonates and children over 44 weeks of gestational age
Table of included neonatal studies
| Study | Design | Age | Early or Late Onset | Setting | n | Prevalence of sepsis (%) | Procalcitonin lab assay | Timing of test | PCT | Inclusion Criteria | Sepsis Diagnosis | Sensitivity | Specificity | AUC ROC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adib 2012 [ | Cross-sectional | 0 to 28 days | Early and Late | NICU | 69 | 29 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 1.15 | Suspected sepsis | MC | 70 | 40 | - |
| Bender 2008 [ | Prospective | 0-72 h | Early | NICU | 123 | 24 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 5.75 | Suspected sepsis | MC or CR | 68 | 67 | - |
| 25 | 21 | 92 | - | |||||||||||
| Bonac 2000 [ | Prospective | 2.5 days | Early | NICU | 58 | 15 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 9,98 | Suspected sepsis | MC or CR | 59 | 82 | 0.61 |
| 24 h | 13.03 | 50 | 100 | 0.73 | ||||||||||
| 48 h | 3.07 | 52 | 91 | - | ||||||||||
| Boo 2008 [ | Prospective | Preterm- | Early and Late | NICU | 87 | 21 | Semi-quantitative | 0 h | 0,5 | Suspected Sepsis | MC | 89 | 41 | - |
| 12-24 h | 2 | 89 | 65 | - | ||||||||||
| 36-48 h | 10 | 72 | 75 | - | ||||||||||
| Groselj-Grenc 2009 [ | Prospective | 1-18 days | Early and Late | NICU | 46 | 63 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 2.28 | SIRS | MC or CR | 82 | 48 | 0.67 |
| 24 h | 5.55 | 31 | 100 | 0.64 | ||||||||||
| Guibourdenche 2002 [ | Prospective | 1 day | Early | NICU | 120 | 18 | PCT-LIA | 0-72 h | 2.5 | Suspected sepsis | MC or CR | 87 | 90 | - |
| Koskenvuo 2003 [ | Prospective | 0-72 h | Early | Medical | 22 | 22 | PCT-LIA | 12 h | 2 | SIRS | MC or CR | 86.4 | 47.2 | - |
| Lopez Sastre 2006 [ | Prospective | 4 - 28 days of life | Late | NICU | 100 | 61 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 0.59 | Suspected sepsis | MC | 82 | 81 | 0.78 |
| 12-24 h | 1.34 | 74 | 81 | 0.81 | ||||||||||
| 36-48 h | 0.69 | 87 | 73 | 0.80 | ||||||||||
| Naher 2011 [ | Cross sectional | 37wks gestational age | Early and Late | NICU | 50 | 80 | Semi-quantitative | 0 h | 0.5 | Suspected Sepsis | MC or CR | 70 | 90 | 0.77 |
| Resch 2003 [ | Prospective | 35.5 weeks Gestational age | Early | NICU | 68 | 61 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 2 | Suspected Sepsis | MC or CR | 83 | 61 | - |
| 6 | 77 | 91 | - | |||||||||||
| 14 | 63 | 100 | - | |||||||||||
| Sakha 2008 [ | Cross-sectional | 0 to 28 days | Early and Late | Neonatal Ward | 117 | 23 | PCT-LIA | - | 2.5 | Suspected sepsis | MC | 67 | 50 | 0.61 |
| Schlapbach 2013 [ | Prospective | 0-72 h of life, gestational age > 34 weeks | Early | NICU | 137 | 24.1 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 2 | Suspected sepsis | MC or CR | 87,9 | 51 | - |
| Vazzalwar 2005 [ | Prospective | ≥ 7 days | Late | NICU | 51 | 35.3 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 0.5 | Suspected sepsis | MC or CR | 94.4 | 36.4 | - |
| 1 | 77.8 | 63.6 | - | |||||||||||
| Zahedpasha 2009 [ | Prospective | 0 to 28 days | Early and Late | NICU | 38 | 28.9 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 0,5 | Suspected sepsis | MC or CR | 100 | 25.9 | - |
| 2 | 100 | 33.3 | - | |||||||||||
| 10 | 90.9 | 85.2 | - |
AUC Area Under the Curve, CR Chart Review, MC Microbiologically Confirmed, NICU Neonatal Intensive-Care Unit, PCT Procalcitonin, PCT LIA Procalcitonin Manual Assay, PCT-Q Procalcitonin Rapid Assay, ROC Receiver Operating Characteristic, SIRS Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
Table of included paediatric studies
| Study | Design | Age | Setting | n | Prevalence of sepsis | Procalcitonin lab assay | Timing of test | PCT Cut-off(ng/ml) | Inclusion Criteria | Outcome Diagnosis | Sensitivity % | Specificity % | AUC ROC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calò Carducci 2014 [ | Prospective | 2 months | Hospital Ward | 64 | 64 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 0.55 | SIRS | MC or CR | 88 | 74 | - |
| Groselj-Grenc 2009 [ | Prospective | 1 month-12 years | PICU | 36 | 67 | PCT-LIA | 0 h | 0.28 | SIRS | CR | 83 | 75 | 0.83 |
| 24 h | 0.65 | 81 | 88 | 0.86 | |||||||||
| Pourakbari 2010 [ | Prospective | 42.8 +/− 3,5 months | Hospital ward + Emergency Dept | 158 | 79 | PCT-Q | 0 h | 0.5 | SIRS | MC | 65 | 47 | - |
| 2 | 44 | 80 | - | ||||||||||
| 10 | 30 | 89 | - | ||||||||||
| Simon 2008 [ | Prospective | 80 months +/− 71 | PICU | 64 | 39 | PCT-LIA | 24 h | 0.5 | SIRS | CR | 82 | 36 | 0.71 |
| 2.5 | 68 | 74 | |||||||||||
| 5 | 50 | 82 |
AUC Area Under the Curve, CR Chart Review, MC Microbiologically Confirmed, NICU Neonatal Intensive-Care Unit, PCT Procalcitonin, PCT LIA Procalcitonin Manual Assay, PCT-Q Procalcitonin Rapid Assay, ROC Receiver Operating Characteristic, SIRS Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
Summary statistics of Procalcitonin for diagnosis of sepsis in neonatal age according the age of onset, and cut-off used in the studies
| Onset | Summary statistics | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cut-off | Early | Early/Late | Late | |
| <2 | Boo 2008 (0.5) | Lopez Sastre 2006 (0.59) | SE = 0.84 (0.75; 0.90) | |
| 2-2.5 | Resch 2003 (2) | Boo 2008 (2) | SE = 0.85 (0.76; 0.90) | |
| >2.5 | Bender 2008 (5.75) | Boo 2008 (10) | SE = 0.68 (0.52; 0.80) |
SE Sensitivity, SP Specificity, Actual cut-off reported in the brackets
Fig. 2Representation in the ROC space of neonatal studies. Representation in the ROC space of studies on PCT for diagnosis of sepsis in neonatal age, divided by cut-off subgroup, and summary sensitivity and specificity points along with their 95% confidence and prediction regions. (ROC, receiver operating characteristic). Legend: PCT neon – cut-off <2 PCT neon – cut-off > 2.5 PCT neon – cut-off =2/2.5
Fig. 3Galbraith plot. Heterogeneity of selected neonatal studies. Galbraith plot for neonatal studies. The standardised lnDOR = lnDOR/se was plotted (y-axis) against the inverse of the se (1/se) (x-axis). A regression line going through the origin was calculated, together with 95% boundaries (starting at +2 and −2 on the y-axis). (DOR, diagnostic odds ratio)
Fig. 4Representation in the ROC space of paediatric studies. Representation in the ROC space of the studies of PCT for diagnosis of sepsis in paediatric age, divided by cut-off subgroup, and summary sensitivity and specificity points along with their 95% confidence and prediction regions. (ROC, receiver operating characteristic). Legend: PCT paed – cut-off <2 PCT paed – cut-off > 2.5 PCT paed – cut-off =2/2.5
Fig. 5Galbraith plot. Heterogeneity of selected paediatric studies. Galbraith plot for paediatric studies. The standardised lnDOR = lnDOR/se was plotted (y-axis) against the inverse of the se (1/se) (x-axis). A regression line going through the origin was calculated, together with 95% boundaries (starting at +2 and −2 on the y-axis). (DOR, diagnostic odds ratio)