Literature DB >> 29742588

Derivation and Validation of a Biomarker-Based Clinical Algorithm to Rule Out Sepsis From Noninfectious Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome at Emergency Department Admission: A Multicenter Prospective Study.

Filippo Mearelli1, Nicola Fiotti1, Carlo Giansante1, Chiara Casarsa1, Daniele Orso1, Marco De Helmersen1, Nicola Altamura1, Maurizio Ruscio2, Luigi Mario Castello3, Efrem Colonetti4, Rossella Marino5, Giulia Barbati1, Andrea Bregnocchi6, Claudio Ronco7, Enrico Lupia8, Giuseppe Montrucchio8, Maria Lorenza Muiesan4, Salvatore Di Somma5, Gian Carlo Avanzi3, Gianni Biolo1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To derive and validate a predictive algorithm integrating a nomogram-based prediction of the pretest probability of infection with a panel of serum biomarkers, which could robustly differentiate sepsis/septic shock from noninfectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome.
DESIGN: Multicenter prospective study.
SETTING: At emergency department admission in five University hospitals. PATIENTS: Nine-hundred forty-seven adults in inception cohort and 185 adults in validation cohort.
INTERVENTIONS: None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A nomogram, including age, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, recent antimicrobial therapy, hyperthermia, leukocytosis, and high C-reactive protein values, was built in order to take data from 716 infected patients and 120 patients with noninfectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome to predict pretest probability of infection. Then, the best combination of procalcitonin, soluble phospholipase A2 group IIA, presepsin, soluble interleukin-2 receptor α, and soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cell-1 was applied in order to categorize patients as "likely" or "unlikely" to be infected. The predictive algorithm required only procalcitonin backed up with soluble phospholipase A2 group IIA determined in 29% of the patients to rule out sepsis/septic shock with a negative predictive value of 93%. In a validation cohort of 158 patients, predictive algorithm reached 100% of negative predictive value requiring biomarker measurements in 18% of the population.
CONCLUSIONS: We have developed and validated a high-performing, reproducible, and parsimonious algorithm to assist emergency department physicians in distinguishing sepsis/septic shock from noninfectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29742588     DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003206

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  17 in total

Review 1.  Rationalizing antimicrobial therapy in the ICU: a narrative review.

Authors:  Jean-François Timsit; Matteo Bassetti; Olaf Cremer; George Daikos; Jan de Waele; Andre Kallil; Eric Kipnis; Marin Kollef; Kevin Laupland; Jose-Artur Paiva; Jesús Rodríguez-Baño; Étienne Ruppé; Jorge Salluh; Fabio Silvio Taccone; Emmanuel Weiss; François Barbier
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 2.  Biomarkers of sepsis: time for a reappraisal.

Authors:  Charalampos Pierrakos; Dimitrios Velissaris; Max Bisdorff; John C Marshall; Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 9.097

3.  The Role of Osteopontin as a Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarker in Sepsis and Septic Shock.

Authors:  Luigi Mario Castello; Marco Baldrighi; Luca Molinari; Livia Salmi; Vincenzo Cantaluppi; Rosanna Vaschetto; Greta Zunino; Marco Quaglia; Mattia Bellan; Francesco Gavelli; Paolo Navalesi; Gian Carlo Avanzi; Annalisa Chiocchetti
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2019-02-18       Impact factor: 6.600

Review 4.  Gas6/TAM Axis in Sepsis: Time to Consider Its Potential Role as a Therapeutic Target.

Authors:  Livia Salmi; Francesco Gavelli; Filippo Patrucco; Marina Caputo; Gian Carlo Avanzi; Luigi Mario Castello
Journal:  Dis Markers       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 3.434

Review 5.  Management of sepsis and septic shock in the emergency department.

Authors:  Francesco Gavelli; Luigi Mario Castello; Gian Carlo Avanzi
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 3.397

Review 6.  Human Group IIA Phospholipase A2-Three Decades on from Its Discovery.

Authors:  Kieran F Scott; Timothy J Mann; Shadma Fatima; Mila Sajinovic; Anshuli Razdan; Ryung Rae Kim; Adam Cooper; Aflah Roohullah; Katherine J Bryant; Kasuni K Gamage; David G Harman; Fatemeh Vafaee; Garry G Graham; W Bret Church; Pamela J Russell; Qihan Dong; Paul de Souza
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 4.411

7.  The Integration of qSOFA with Clinical Variables and Serum Biomarkers Improves the Prognostic Value of qSOFA Alone in Patients with Suspected or Confirmed Sepsis at ED Admission.

Authors:  Filippo Mearelli; Giulia Barbati; Chiara Casarsa; Carlo Giansante; Andrea Breglia; Andrea Spica; Cristina Moras; Gaia Olivieri; Alessandro Agostino Occhipinti; Margherita De Nardo; Francesca Spagnol; Nicola Fiotti; Filippo Giorgio Di Girolamo; Maurizio Ruscio; Luigi Mario Castello; Efrem Colonetti; Rossella Marino; Claudio Ronco; Michela Zanetti; Enrico Lupia; Maria Lorenza Muiesan; Salvatore Di Somma; Gian Carlo Avanzi; Gianni Biolo
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-04-22       Impact factor: 4.241

8.  New markers for sepsis caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa during burn infection.

Authors:  Moamen M Elmassry; Nithya S Mudaliar; Jane A Colmer-Hamood; Michael J San Francisco; John A Griswold; Sharmila Dissanaike; Abdul N Hamood
Journal:  Metabolomics       Date:  2020-03-13       Impact factor: 4.290

Review 9.  Host Diagnostic Biomarkers of Infection in the ICU: Where Are We and Where Are We Going?

Authors:  Aaron J Heffernan; Kerina J Denny
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2021-02-12       Impact factor: 3.725

Review 10.  Diagnostic Challenges in Sepsis.

Authors:  Chris F Duncan; Taryn Youngstein; Marianne D Kirrane; Dagan O Lonsdale
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2021-10-25       Impact factor: 3.725

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.