| Literature DB >> 30319777 |
Sibtain Ahmed1, Imran Siddiqui1, Lena Jafri1, Madiha Hashmi1, Aysha Habib Khan1, Farooq Ghani1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sepsis is the leading cause of mortality in critically ill patients. Procalcitonin (PCT) is a promising marker for identification of bacterial sepsis. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of serum PCT concentration in patients with suspected sepsis admitted to mixed medical-surgical Intensive care unit (ICU).Entities:
Keywords: Blood culture; Intensive care unit; Procalcitonin; Sepsis
Year: 2018 PMID: 30319777 PMCID: PMC6180342 DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2018.10.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) ISSN: 2049-0801
Fig. 1Distribution of consort showing critically ill patients included in final analysis with suspected sepsis from medical and surgical ICU.
Fig. 2Showing culture results (n = 64).
Comparison of Biomarkers of Sepsis in Culture Positive and Negative Groups in critically ill patients Admitted in ICU [n = 103].
| Biomarker [Reference Range] | Culture positive group [n = 64] | Culture negative group [n = 39] | p- value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median [IQR] | Median [IQR] | ||
| 2.14 [10.21] | 0.8 [3.76] | 0.001 | |
| 98 [125] | 86 [138] | 0.239 | |
| 14.3 [10.53] | 12.8 [8.2] | 0.314 |
p value < 0.01 = highly significant.
Fig. 3ROC analysis of PCT, CRP and WBC against culture as gold standard. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
Performance of PCT at various cut offs for sepsis diagnosis compared to culture.
| PCT | Sensitivity [%] | Specificity [%] |
|---|---|---|
| 0.5 | 93.8 | 43.5 |
| 1 | 71.9 | 57 |
| 1.5 | 64 | 70 |
| 2 | 51 | 70 |
| 2.5 | 51 | 70 |
Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of PCT for diagnosis of sepsis with other studies at a cut off of 0.5 μg/L and 1.5 μg/L.
| Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of PCT for diagnosis of sepsis with other studies at a cut off of 0.5 μg/L | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Country | n | Sensitivity [%] | Specificity [%] | |
| Aw TC et al. [ | Singapore | 626 | 79.6 | 47.2 |
| Bossink et al. [ | Netherlands | 133 | 65 | 58 |
| Luyt et al. [ | France | 172 | 72 | 24 |
| Sudhir et al. [ | India | 100 | 94 | Not reported |
| Alzahrani et al. [ | Saudi Arabia | 109 | 54.4 | 65.9 |
| Our study | Pakistan | 103 | 93.8 | 43.5 |
| Du et al. [ | China | 51 | 80 | 74 |
| Wanner et al. [ | Switzerland | 133 | 76 | 77 |
| Tugrul et al. [ | Turkey | 85 | 73 | 80 |
| Our study | Pakistan | 103 | 64 | 70 |