Evaluation of sequential serum amyloid A measurements for the prediction of sepsis and survival in critically ill neonatal foals.

IF 2.2 2区 农林科学
Eva de Bruijn, Mathilde Laetitia Pas, Donatienne Castelain, Alexander Dufourni, Ellen Paulussen, Bart Pardon
{"title":"Evaluation of sequential serum amyloid A measurements for the prediction of sepsis and survival in critically ill neonatal foals.","authors":"Eva de Bruijn, Mathilde Laetitia Pas, Donatienne Castelain, Alexander Dufourni, Ellen Paulussen, Bart Pardon","doi":"10.1093/jvimsj/aalag155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Single measurements of serum amyloid A (SAA) concentration at hospital admission has limited sensitivity for predicting sepsis and death.</p><p><strong>Hypothesis/objectives: </strong>To determine whether differences in SAA during the first 2 days of hospitalization could predict sepsis and death in critically ill foals.</p><p><strong>Animals: </strong>One hundred twenty-seven critically ill neonatal foals, <14 days of age.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospective cohort study. SAA was measured at hospital admission and on day 2 of hospitalization using a validated point-of-care test. Logistic regression was conducted to evaluate the predictive value of individual SAA measurements for diagnosing sepsis and assess whether change in SAA during 48 h could predict sepsis or death. Cox survival analysis assessed the association between SAA concentration and death.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Serum amyloid A (SAA) concentrations were measured on day 0 (n = 127) and day 2 (n = 97) of hospitalization. On admission and day 2, SAA was not significantly associated with death (P = .20 and P = .08), but was significantly associated with neutropenia (OR 1.001; 95% CI, 1.001-1.1002; P ≤ .001), blood culture positivity (OR 1.001; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1001; P = .002), or both (OR 1.002; 95% CI, 1.001-1.1003; P ≤ .001), with optimal cut-offs of 419 μg/mL on day 0, with moderate sensitivity and specificity (80% and 81%, respectively). Changes between day 0 and day 2 were not predictive for death (P = .49), neutropenia (P = .36), blood culture positivity (P = .41) or both (P = .17).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical importance: </strong>In this cohort, SAA only had moderate ability to rule in or rule out sepsis or predict death. Repeated measurements after 48 h did not improve accuracy, suggesting that SAA should not be used as a standalone test.</p>","PeriodicalId":17462,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine","volume":"40 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13446502/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jvimsj/aalag155","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Single measurements of serum amyloid A (SAA) concentration at hospital admission has limited sensitivity for predicting sepsis and death.

Hypothesis/objectives: To determine whether differences in SAA during the first 2 days of hospitalization could predict sepsis and death in critically ill foals.

Animals: One hundred twenty-seven critically ill neonatal foals, <14 days of age.

Methods: Prospective cohort study. SAA was measured at hospital admission and on day 2 of hospitalization using a validated point-of-care test. Logistic regression was conducted to evaluate the predictive value of individual SAA measurements for diagnosing sepsis and assess whether change in SAA during 48 h could predict sepsis or death. Cox survival analysis assessed the association between SAA concentration and death.

Results: Serum amyloid A (SAA) concentrations were measured on day 0 (n = 127) and day 2 (n = 97) of hospitalization. On admission and day 2, SAA was not significantly associated with death (P = .20 and P = .08), but was significantly associated with neutropenia (OR 1.001; 95% CI, 1.001-1.1002; P ≤ .001), blood culture positivity (OR 1.001; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1001; P = .002), or both (OR 1.002; 95% CI, 1.001-1.1003; P ≤ .001), with optimal cut-offs of 419 μg/mL on day 0, with moderate sensitivity and specificity (80% and 81%, respectively). Changes between day 0 and day 2 were not predictive for death (P = .49), neutropenia (P = .36), blood culture positivity (P = .41) or both (P = .17).

Conclusions and clinical importance: In this cohort, SAA only had moderate ability to rule in or rule out sepsis or predict death. Repeated measurements after 48 h did not improve accuracy, suggesting that SAA should not be used as a standalone test.

评估顺序血清淀粉样蛋白A测量预测败血症和危重新生马驹的生存。
背景:入院时单次测定血清淀粉样蛋白A (SAA)浓度对预测败血症和死亡的敏感性有限。假设/目的:确定住院前2天SAA的差异是否可以预测危重马驹的败血症和死亡。动物:127头危重新生马驹,方法:前瞻性队列研究。在入院时和住院第2天使用经过验证的护理点测试测量SAA。通过Logistic回归评估个体SAA测量对诊断脓毒症的预测价值,并评估48 h内SAA的变化是否可以预测脓毒症或死亡。Cox生存分析评估了SAA浓度与死亡之间的关系。结果:分别于住院第0天(n = 127)和第2天(n = 97)测定血清淀粉样蛋白A (SAA)浓度。入院和第2天,SAA与死亡无显著相关性(P = 0.20和P = 0.08),但与中性粒细胞减少(OR 1.001; 95% CI, 1.001 ~ 1.1002; P≤0.001)、血培养阳性(OR 1.001; 95% CI, 1.0 ~ 1.1001; P = 0.002)或两者均有显著相关性(OR 1.002; 95% CI, 1.001 ~ 1.1003; P≤0.001),第0天最佳临界值为419 μg/mL,敏感性和特异性均为中等(分别为80%和81%)。第0天至第2天的变化不能预测死亡(P = 0.49)、中性粒细胞减少(P = 0.36)、血培养阳性(P = 0.41)或两者兼有(P = 0.17)。结论及临床意义:在该队列中,SAA仅具有中等程度的排除或排除败血症或预测死亡的能力。48小时后重复测量并不能提高准确性,这表明SAA不应作为单独的测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine
Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine Veterinary-General Veterinary
自引率
11.50%
发文量
243
期刊介绍: The mission of the Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine is to advance veterinary medical knowledge and improve the lives of animals by publication of authoritative scientific articles of animal diseases.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书