2007
DOI: 10.1186/cc5723
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Use of plasma C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, neutrophils, macrophage migration inhibitory factor, soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor, and soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells-1 in combination to diagnose infections: a prospective study

Abstract: Introduction Accurate and timely diagnosis of communityacquired bacterial infections in patients with systemic inflammation remains challenging both for clinician and laboratory. Combinations of markers, as opposed to single ones, may improve diagnosis and thereby survival. We therefore compared the diagnostic characteristics of novel and routinely used biomarkers of sepsis alone and in combination.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
177
6
10

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 257 publications
(202 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
9
177
6
10
Order By: Relevance
“…An elevated blood CRP concentration is thought to be highly suggestive of bacterial infection (12), and CRP level has been described as a good early marker in many studies (13)(14)(15). These studies found sensitivities between 86% and 94.3% and specificities between 60% and 87.3% (6,13). In our study, CRP and ESR performed better than suPAR in diagnosing infection and did almost the same in discriminating between SIRS and sepsis.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 53%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…An elevated blood CRP concentration is thought to be highly suggestive of bacterial infection (12), and CRP level has been described as a good early marker in many studies (13)(14)(15). These studies found sensitivities between 86% and 94.3% and specificities between 60% and 87.3% (6,13). In our study, CRP and ESR performed better than suPAR in diagnosing infection and did almost the same in discriminating between SIRS and sepsis.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 53%
“…Data obtained through our study were quite similar to this systemic review. Kofoed et al found 35% sensitivity and 67% specificity for suPAR to diagnose sepsis in patients, although he found that CRP performed better than su-PAR (6). CRP, an acute-phase protein, is synthesized in the liver following stimulation by various cytokines including tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin-6 (12).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, suPAR is a non-specific biomarker with no diagnostic value. This was clearly illustrated by Kofoed and co-workers in a study of 156 patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome at Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre [7]. Of these 156 patients, 96 had bacterial infection, and the area under the curve (AUC) values for procalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP) for diagnosis of bacterial sepsis were 0.72 and 0.81, respectively; the AUC for suPAR was 0.50.…”
Section: Diagnosis Versus Prognosismentioning
confidence: 93%
“…La presenza di batteriemia all'emocoltura è stata messa in relazione, con il Mann-Whitney test, ai livelli di OPN, suPAR, PCT e PCR. Per la quantificazione della PCR si è usato un test al lattice (Siemens Healthcare LIASON Diagnostic, Milano, Italia) con una metodica nefelometrica; per testare la PCT si è utilizzato il kit BRAHMS PCT con una metodica in chemiluminescenza (Diasorin, Saluggia, Italia); per il test suPAR si è utilizzato il kit su PARGNOSTIC (Bio Exe, Verona, Italia) con una metodica immunoenzimatica (2,3,4), seguendo le indicazioni delle ditte produttrici.…”
Section: Materiali E Metodiunclassified