降钙素原在识别接受体外膜氧合的流感或 COVID-19 患者继发感染中的作用。

IF 3.8 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease Pub Date : 2024-06-13 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20499361241255873
Kajal D Patel, James K Aden, Michal J Sobieszczyk, Joseph E Marcus
{"title":"降钙素原在识别接受体外膜氧合的流感或 COVID-19 患者继发感染中的作用。","authors":"Kajal D Patel, James K Aden, Michal J Sobieszczyk, Joseph E Marcus","doi":"10.1177/20499361241255873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Identifying secondary infections in patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) presents challenges due to the ECMO circuit's influence on traditional signs of infection.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study evaluates procalcitonin as a diagnostic marker for secondary infections in patients receiving ECMO with influenza or COVID-19 infection.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Single-center retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All adult patients receiving veno-venous ECMO with underlying influenza or COVID-19 from November 2017 to October 2021 were included. Patient demographics, time receiving ECMO, culture data, and procalcitonin levels were examined. The first procalcitonin within 3 days of infection was compared to negative workups that were collected at least 10 days from the last positive culture. Furthermore, we compared procalcitonin levels by the type of pathogen and site of infection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this study, 84 patients with influenza or COVID-19 who received ECMO were included. A total of 276 procalcitonin labs were ordered in this cohort, with 33/92 (36%) of the secondary infections having an associated procalcitonin value. When comparing procalcitonin levels, there was no significant difference between the infection and negative workup groups [1 ng/mL (interquartile ranges, IQR: 0.4-1.2) <i>versus</i> 1.3 (0.5-4.3), <i>p</i> = 0.19]. Using 0.5 ng/mL as the cut-off, the sensitivity of procalcitonin was 67% and the specificity was 30%. In our cohort, the positive predictive value of procalcitonin was 14.5% and the negative predictive value was 84%. There was no difference in procalcitonin by type of organism or site of infection. Procalcitonin levels did not routinely decline even after an infection was identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While procalcitonin is a proposed potential diagnostic marker for secondary infections in patients receiving ECMO, this single-center study demonstrated low sensitivity and specificity of procalcitonin in identifying secondary infections. Furthermore, there was no association of procalcitonin levels with etiology of infection when one was present. Procalcitonin should be used cautiously in identifying infections in veno-venous ECMO.</p>","PeriodicalId":46154,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease","volume":"11 ","pages":"20499361241255873"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11177733/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The utility of procalcitonin for identifying secondary infections in patients with influenza or COVID-19 receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.\",\"authors\":\"Kajal D Patel, James K Aden, Michal J Sobieszczyk, Joseph E Marcus\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20499361241255873\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Identifying secondary infections in patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) presents challenges due to the ECMO circuit's influence on traditional signs of infection.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study evaluates procalcitonin as a diagnostic marker for secondary infections in patients receiving ECMO with influenza or COVID-19 infection.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Single-center retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All adult patients receiving veno-venous ECMO with underlying influenza or COVID-19 from November 2017 to October 2021 were included. Patient demographics, time receiving ECMO, culture data, and procalcitonin levels were examined. The first procalcitonin within 3 days of infection was compared to negative workups that were collected at least 10 days from the last positive culture. Furthermore, we compared procalcitonin levels by the type of pathogen and site of infection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this study, 84 patients with influenza or COVID-19 who received ECMO were included. A total of 276 procalcitonin labs were ordered in this cohort, with 33/92 (36%) of the secondary infections having an associated procalcitonin value. When comparing procalcitonin levels, there was no significant difference between the infection and negative workup groups [1 ng/mL (interquartile ranges, IQR: 0.4-1.2) <i>versus</i> 1.3 (0.5-4.3), <i>p</i> = 0.19]. Using 0.5 ng/mL as the cut-off, the sensitivity of procalcitonin was 67% and the specificity was 30%. In our cohort, the positive predictive value of procalcitonin was 14.5% and the negative predictive value was 84%. There was no difference in procalcitonin by type of organism or site of infection. Procalcitonin levels did not routinely decline even after an infection was identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While procalcitonin is a proposed potential diagnostic marker for secondary infections in patients receiving ECMO, this single-center study demonstrated low sensitivity and specificity of procalcitonin in identifying secondary infections. Furthermore, there was no association of procalcitonin levels with etiology of infection when one was present. Procalcitonin should be used cautiously in identifying infections in veno-venous ECMO.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46154,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease\",\"volume\":\"11 \",\"pages\":\"20499361241255873\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11177733/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20499361241255873\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20499361241255873","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在接受体外膜氧合(ECMO)的患者中识别继发性感染是一项挑战,因为 ECMO 电路会影响传统的感染迹象:本研究评估了降钙素原作为接受 ECMO 的流感或 COVID-19 感染患者继发感染的诊断标志物:单中心回顾性队列研究:纳入2017年11月至2021年10月期间所有接受静脉-静脉ECMO并伴有基础流感或COVID-19的成人患者。研究考察了患者的人口统计学特征、接受 ECMO 的时间、培养数据和降钙素原水平。我们将感染后 3 天内的首次降钙素原与上次培养阳性后至少 10 天收集的阴性培养结果进行了比较。此外,我们还根据病原体类型和感染部位对降钙素原水平进行了比较:本研究共纳入 84 名接受 ECMO 的流感或 COVID-19 患者。该组患者共接受了 276 次降钙素原检测,其中 33/92 例(36%)继发感染的患者有相关的降钙素原值。在比较降钙素原水平时,感染组和阴性检查组之间没有显著差异[1 纳克/毫升(四分位数间距,IQR:0.4-1.2)对 1.3(0.5-4.3),P = 0.19]。以 0.5 纳克/毫升为临界值,降钙素原的敏感性为 67%,特异性为 30%。在我们的队列中,降钙素原的阳性预测值为 14.5%,阴性预测值为 84%。不同病原体类型或感染部位的降钙素原无差异。即使在确定感染后,降钙素原水平也不会常规下降:尽管降钙素原是接受 ECMO 患者继发感染的潜在诊断指标,但这项单中心研究表明,降钙素原在识别继发感染方面的敏感性和特异性较低。此外,即使存在感染,降钙素原水平与感染病因也没有关联。在识别静脉-静脉 ECMO 感染时应谨慎使用降钙素原。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The utility of procalcitonin for identifying secondary infections in patients with influenza or COVID-19 receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Background: Identifying secondary infections in patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) presents challenges due to the ECMO circuit's influence on traditional signs of infection.

Objectives: This study evaluates procalcitonin as a diagnostic marker for secondary infections in patients receiving ECMO with influenza or COVID-19 infection.

Design: Single-center retrospective cohort study.

Methods: All adult patients receiving veno-venous ECMO with underlying influenza or COVID-19 from November 2017 to October 2021 were included. Patient demographics, time receiving ECMO, culture data, and procalcitonin levels were examined. The first procalcitonin within 3 days of infection was compared to negative workups that were collected at least 10 days from the last positive culture. Furthermore, we compared procalcitonin levels by the type of pathogen and site of infection.

Results: In this study, 84 patients with influenza or COVID-19 who received ECMO were included. A total of 276 procalcitonin labs were ordered in this cohort, with 33/92 (36%) of the secondary infections having an associated procalcitonin value. When comparing procalcitonin levels, there was no significant difference between the infection and negative workup groups [1 ng/mL (interquartile ranges, IQR: 0.4-1.2) versus 1.3 (0.5-4.3), p = 0.19]. Using 0.5 ng/mL as the cut-off, the sensitivity of procalcitonin was 67% and the specificity was 30%. In our cohort, the positive predictive value of procalcitonin was 14.5% and the negative predictive value was 84%. There was no difference in procalcitonin by type of organism or site of infection. Procalcitonin levels did not routinely decline even after an infection was identified.

Conclusion: While procalcitonin is a proposed potential diagnostic marker for secondary infections in patients receiving ECMO, this single-center study demonstrated low sensitivity and specificity of procalcitonin in identifying secondary infections. Furthermore, there was no association of procalcitonin levels with etiology of infection when one was present. Procalcitonin should be used cautiously in identifying infections in veno-venous ECMO.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
8.80%
发文量
64
审稿时长
9 weeks
×
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