Diagnostic accuracy of complete blood cell count and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte, lymphocyte-to-monocyte, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios for neonatal infection.

IF 0.4 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Abdullah Kurt, Merve Sezen Tosun, Nilgün Altuntaş
{"title":"Diagnostic accuracy of complete blood cell count and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte, lymphocyte-to-monocyte, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios for neonatal infection.","authors":"Abdullah Kurt,&nbsp;Merve Sezen Tosun,&nbsp;Nilgün Altuntaş","doi":"10.2478/abm-2022-0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Complete blood cell (CBC) counts and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte (NLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte (LMR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios (PLR) are simple measurements that are conducted as part of routine diagnostic procedures.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the diagnostic importance, specificity, and sensitivity of these measurements for the diagnosis of neonatal infections and in discriminating between neonatal sepsis and various other infections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective study of data from a consecutive series of 232 neonatal patients admitted to Yildirim Beyazit University Yenimahalle Training and Research Hospital in Ankara for 2 years from 2016 to 2018. We included patients with a diagnosis of or clinically suspected infection, and healthy neonates were included as controls. Data included CBC counts, and bacterial culture results, considered the criterion standard for the diagnosis of neonatal sepsis. NLR, LMR, and PLR were calculated. We compared data using independent Student <i>t</i> and Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> tests and determined the sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio (LHOR) of the characteristics for neonatal sepsis using receiver operating characteristic curve analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included data from 155 neonatal patients with a diagnosis or suspicion of infection and 77 healthy neonates. NLR was significantly higher in neonates with sepsis or fever due to dehydration (<i>P</i> < 0.001) than in neonates with other infections or healthy neonates. LMR was significantly higher in neonates with sepsis or viral infection than in those with other infections or healthy controls (<i>P</i> = 0.003). In neonates with early-onset sepsis (EOS), we found cut-off values of ≥4.79 [area under curve (AUC) 0.845, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.93, LHOR 11.6, specificity 98.7%, sensitivity 15%] for NLR, ≥1.24 (AUC 0.295; CI 0.18-0.41, LHOR 1.02, specificity 2.6%, sensitivity 100%) for LMR, and ≥37.72 (AUC 0.268; CI 0.15-0.39, LHOR 0.86, specificity 7.8%, sensitivity 80%) for PLR. We found cut-off values of ≥4.94 (AUC 0.667; CI 0.56-0.77, LHOR 4.16, specificity 98.7%, sensitivity 5.4%) for NLR and ≥10.92 (AUC 0.384; CI 0.26-0.51, LHOR 6.24, specificity 98.7%, sensitivity 8.1%) for LMR in those with late-onset sepsis (LOS).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CBCs, NLR, LMR, and PLR may be useful for the differential diagnosis of EOS and LOS, and neonates with sepsis from those with other infection. NLR may be a useful diagnostic test to identify neonatal patients with septicemia more quickly than other commonly used diagnostic tests such as blood cultures. NLR has high specificity and LHOR, but low sensitivity.</p>","PeriodicalId":8501,"journal":{"name":"Asian Biomedicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10321158/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Biomedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/abm-2022-0006","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background: Complete blood cell (CBC) counts and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte (NLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte (LMR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios (PLR) are simple measurements that are conducted as part of routine diagnostic procedures.

Objective: To determine the diagnostic importance, specificity, and sensitivity of these measurements for the diagnosis of neonatal infections and in discriminating between neonatal sepsis and various other infections.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of data from a consecutive series of 232 neonatal patients admitted to Yildirim Beyazit University Yenimahalle Training and Research Hospital in Ankara for 2 years from 2016 to 2018. We included patients with a diagnosis of or clinically suspected infection, and healthy neonates were included as controls. Data included CBC counts, and bacterial culture results, considered the criterion standard for the diagnosis of neonatal sepsis. NLR, LMR, and PLR were calculated. We compared data using independent Student t and Mann-Whitney U tests and determined the sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio (LHOR) of the characteristics for neonatal sepsis using receiver operating characteristic curve analyses.

Results: We included data from 155 neonatal patients with a diagnosis or suspicion of infection and 77 healthy neonates. NLR was significantly higher in neonates with sepsis or fever due to dehydration (P < 0.001) than in neonates with other infections or healthy neonates. LMR was significantly higher in neonates with sepsis or viral infection than in those with other infections or healthy controls (P = 0.003). In neonates with early-onset sepsis (EOS), we found cut-off values of ≥4.79 [area under curve (AUC) 0.845, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.93, LHOR 11.6, specificity 98.7%, sensitivity 15%] for NLR, ≥1.24 (AUC 0.295; CI 0.18-0.41, LHOR 1.02, specificity 2.6%, sensitivity 100%) for LMR, and ≥37.72 (AUC 0.268; CI 0.15-0.39, LHOR 0.86, specificity 7.8%, sensitivity 80%) for PLR. We found cut-off values of ≥4.94 (AUC 0.667; CI 0.56-0.77, LHOR 4.16, specificity 98.7%, sensitivity 5.4%) for NLR and ≥10.92 (AUC 0.384; CI 0.26-0.51, LHOR 6.24, specificity 98.7%, sensitivity 8.1%) for LMR in those with late-onset sepsis (LOS).

Conclusions: CBCs, NLR, LMR, and PLR may be useful for the differential diagnosis of EOS and LOS, and neonates with sepsis from those with other infection. NLR may be a useful diagnostic test to identify neonatal patients with septicemia more quickly than other commonly used diagnostic tests such as blood cultures. NLR has high specificity and LHOR, but low sensitivity.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

全血细胞计数、中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞、淋巴细胞与单核细胞、血小板与淋巴细胞比值对新生儿感染的诊断准确性。
背景:全血细胞(CBC)计数、中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞(NLR)、淋巴细胞与单核细胞(LMR)和血小板与淋巴细胞比率(PLR)是常规诊断程序中进行的简单测量。目的:确定这些指标在诊断新生儿感染和区分新生儿败血症和其他各种感染中的诊断重要性、特异性和敏感性。方法:对2016年至2018年在安卡拉Yildirim Beyazit大学Yenimahalle培训研究医院连续住院的232例新生儿患者的数据进行回顾性研究。我们纳入诊断为感染或临床怀疑感染的患者,并纳入健康新生儿作为对照。数据包括CBC计数和细菌培养结果,被认为是诊断新生儿败血症的标准。计算NLR、LMR、PLR。我们比较了独立的Student t检验和Mann-Whitney U检验的数据,并通过受试者工作特征曲线分析确定了新生儿脓毒症特征的敏感性、特异性和似然比(LHOR)。结果:我们纳入了155例诊断或怀疑感染的新生儿患者和77例健康新生儿的数据。脓毒症或脱水引起的发热新生儿的NLR明显高于其他感染或健康新生儿(P < 0.001)。脓毒症或病毒感染新生儿的LMR明显高于其他感染或健康对照组(P = 0.003)。在早发性脓毒症(EOS)新生儿中,我们发现NLR的临界值≥4.79[曲线下面积(AUC) 0.845, 95%可信区间(CI) 0.76-0.93, LHOR 11.6,特异性98.7%,敏感性15%],≥1.24 (AUC 0.295;LMR的CI 0.18-0.41, LHOR 1.02,特异性2.6%,敏感性100%),且≥37.72 (AUC 0.268;CI 0.15-0.39, LHOR 0.86,特异性7.8%,敏感性80%)。我们发现临界值≥4.94 (AUC 0.667;CI 0.56 ~ 0.77, LHOR 4.16,特异性98.7%,敏感性5.4%),且≥10.92 (AUC 0.384;CI为0.26-0.51,LHOR为6.24,特异性为98.7%,敏感性为8.1%)。结论:CBCs、NLR、LMR和PLR可能有助于鉴别EOS和LOS,以及新生儿败血症与其他感染的区别。NLR可能是一种有用的诊断试验,比其他常用的诊断试验(如血培养)更快地识别新生儿败血症患者。NLR具有较高的特异性和LHOR,但敏感性较低。
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
Asian Biomedicine
Asian Biomedicine 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Asian Biomedicine: Research, Reviews and News (ISSN 1905-7415 print; 1875-855X online) is published in one volume (of 6 bimonthly issues) a year since 2007. [...]Asian Biomedicine is an international, general medical and biomedical journal that aims to publish original peer-reviewed contributions dealing with various topics in the biomedical and health sciences from basic experimental to clinical aspects. The work and authorship must be strongly affiliated with a country in Asia, or with specific importance and relevance to the Asian region. The Journal will publish reviews, original experimental studies, observational studies, technical and clinical (case) reports, practice guidelines, historical perspectives of Asian biomedicine, clinicopathological conferences, and commentaries Asian biomedicine is intended for a broad and international audience, primarily those in the health professions including researchers, physician practitioners, basic medical scientists, dentists, educators, administrators, those in the assistive professions, such as nurses, and the many types of allied health professionals in research and health care delivery systems including those in training.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信