Eosinopenia and Adverse Outcomes After <i>Clostridium difficile</i> Infections

Wei, Shuyan; Kao, Lillian S.

doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2018.3200

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because of the internal heterogeneity and small number of including studies, our results show only moderate association between eosinopenia and sepsis. However, the reasons why eosinopenia could not be neglected in sepsis at least include: (1) the tight correlation between eosinopenia and acute inflammation or severe infection which is still a popular and cutting-edge research area in recent years [9][10][11][12][13][14][27][28][29][30], 2) the central role of Fig. 4 Summary receiver operator characteristic plots with 95% CI of sensitivity against specificity of eosinopenia for diagnosing sepsis eosinopenia in the regulation of immune network and homeostasis which have been proved as pivotal parts in the pathophysiology of sepsis [35].…”

Section: Implications For Future Researchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The reduction of circulating eosinophil count (namely eosinopenia) in response to acute infection was firstly described in 1893 by Zappert et al [6], and is now acknowledged as a signal of acute infection [7,8]. There are many emerging studies focusing on the correlation between eosinopenia and bloodstream infection or severe infection in intensive care unit recent years, which actively explored the potential diagnostic and prognostic value of eosinopenia [9][10][11][12][13], or the capacity to guide antimicrobial therapy [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Silent existence of eosinopenia in sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Sepsis is a life-threatening and time-critical medical emergency; therefore, the early diagnosis of sepsis is essential to timely treatment and favorable outcomes for patients susceptible to sepsis. Eosinopenia has been identified as a potential biomarker of sepsis in the past decade. However, its clinical application progress is slow and its recognition is low. Recent studies have again focused on the potential association between Eosinopenia and severe infections. This study analyzed the efficacy of Eosinopenia as a biomarker for diagnosis of sepsis and its correlation with pathophysiology of sepsis. Method The protocol for this meta-analysis is available in PROSPERO (CRD42020197664). We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL databases to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria. Two authors performed data extraction independently. The pooled outcomes were calculated by TP (true positive), FP (false positive), FN (false negative), TN (true negative) by using bivariate meta-analysis model in STATA 14.0 software. Meanwhile, possible mechanisms of sepsis induced Eosinopenia was also analyzed. Results Seven studies were included in the present study with a total number of 3842 subjects. The incidence of Eosinopenia based on the enrolled studies varied from 23.2 to 92.7%. For diagnosis of sepsis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and diagnostic odds ratio of Eosinopenia were 0.66 (95%CI [0.53–0.77]), 0.68 (95%CI [0.56–0.79]), 2.09 (95%CI [1.44–3.02]), 0.49 (95%CI [0.34–0.71]) and 4.23 (95%CI [2.15–8.31]), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operator characteristic curve (SROC) was 0.73 (95%CI [0.68–0.76]). Meta-regression analysis revealed that no single parameter accounted for the heterogeneity of pooled outcomes. For each subgroup of different eosinopenia cutoff values (50, 40, ≤25, 100), the sensitivity was 0.61, 0.79, 0.57, 0.54, and the specificity was 0.61, 0.75, 0.83, 0.51, respectively. Conclusions Our findings suggested that Eosinopenia has a high incidence in sepsis but has no superiority in comparison with conventional biomarkers for diagnosis of sepsis. However, eosinopenia can still be used in clinical diagnosis for sepsis as a simple, convenient, fast and inexpensive biomarker. Therefore, further large clinical trials are still needed to re-evaluate eosinopenia as a biomarker of sepsis.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Future Researchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Silent existence of eosinopenia in sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the reasons why eosinopenia could not be neglected in sepsis at least include: (1) the tight correlation between eosinopenia and acute in ammation or severe infection which is still a popular and cutting-edge research area in recent years [9][10][11][12][13][14][27][28][29][30];…”

Section: Implications For Future Researchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The reduction of circulating eosinophil count (namely eosinopenia) in response to acute infection was rstly described in 1893 by Zappert et al [6], and is now acknowledged as a signal of acute infection [7,8]. There are many emerging studies focusing on the correlation between eosinopenia and bloodstream infection or severe infection in intensive care units recent years, which actively explored the potential diagnostic and prognostic value of eosinopenia [9][10][11][12][13], or the capacity to guide antimicrobial therapy [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Silent Existence of Eosinopenia in Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lin

Rong

Zhang

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSepsis is a life-threatening and time-critical medical emergency; therefore, the early diagnosis of sepsis is essential to timely treatment and favorable outcomes for patients susceptible to sepsis. Eosinopenia has been identified as a potential biomarker of sepsis in the past decade. However, its clinical application progress is slow and its recognition is low. Recent studies have again focused on the potential association between Eosinopenia and severe infections. This study analyzed the efficacy of Eosinopenia as a biomarker for diagnosis of sepsis and its correlation with pathophysiology of sepsis.MethodWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL databases to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria. Two authors performed data extraction independently. The pooled outcomes were calculated by TP (true positive), FP (false positive), FN (false negative), TN (true negative) by using bivariate meta-analysis model in STATA 14.0 software. Meanwhile, possible mechanisms of sepsis induced Eosinopenia was also analyzed.ResultsSeven studies were included in the present study with a total number of 3842 subjects. The incidence of Eosinopenia based on the enrolled studies varied from 23.2% to 92.7%. For diagnosis of sepsis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and diagnostic odds ratio of Eosinopenia were 0.66 (95%CI [0.53-0.77]), 0.68 (95%CI [0.56-0.79]), 2.09 (95%CI [1.44-3.02]), 0.49 (95%CI [0.34-0.71]) and 4.23 (95%CI [2.15-8.31]), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operator characteristic curve (SROC) was 0.73 (95%CI [0.68-0.76]). Meta-regression analysis revealed that no single parameter accounted for the heterogeneity of pooled outcomes. For each subgroup of different eosinopenia cutoff values (50, 40, ≤25, 100), the sensitivity was 0.61, 0.79, 0.57, 0.54, and the specificity was 0.61, 0.75, 0.83, 0.51, respectively. ConclusionsOur findings suggested that Eosinopenia has a high incidence in sepsis but has no superiority in comparison with conventional biomarkers for diagnosis of sepsis. However, eosinopenia can still be used in clinical diagnosis for sepsis as a simple, convenient, fast and inexpensive biomarker. Therefore, further large clinical trials are still needed to re-evaluate eosinopenia as a biomarker of sepsis.

show abstract

Eosinopenia and Adverse Outcomes After Clostridium difficile Infections

Cited by 2 publications

References 7 publications

Silent existence of eosinopenia in sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Silent existence of eosinopenia in sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Silent Existence of Eosinopenia in Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Eosinopenia and Adverse Outcomes After Clostridium difficile Infections

Cited by 2 publications

References 7 publications

Silent existence of eosinopenia in sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Silent existence of eosinopenia in sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

­Silent Existence of Eosinopenia in Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Silent Existence of Eosinopenia in Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis