C 反应蛋白和降钙素原在 COVID-19 患者的抗菌药物管理中是否安全有用?范围界定综述。

Anita Williams, Ernestina Repetto, Ishmael Lebbie, Mohamad Khalife, Tomas Oestergaard Jensen
{"title":"C 反应蛋白和降钙素原在 COVID-19 患者的抗菌药物管理中是否安全有用?范围界定综述。","authors":"Anita Williams, Ernestina Repetto, Ishmael Lebbie, Mohamad Khalife, Tomas Oestergaard Jensen","doi":"10.1017/ash.2024.372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary objectives of this study were to assess the usefulness of C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) in the diagnosis of bacterial co-infections in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and if their incorporation in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs is safe and useful, stratified by severity of disease as level of care, intensive care unit (ICU) or non-ICU. Our secondary objectives were to identify cut-off values for antibiotic decision-making and identify reported results from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A scoping review of published literature, adhering to the PRISMA statement for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The last search was performed in January 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-nine studies were included in this scoping review: 20 studies reporting predictive values and/or sensitivity/specificity results for PCT, 8 reporting clear objectives on AMS, and 3 studies from LMICs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the context of non-ICU hospitalized COVID-19 patients in high-income countries, a PCT value below 0.25 mg/L can be a useful tool to rule out bacterial co-infection. The wide range of reported negative predictive values suggests that PCT should be interpreted in the context of other clinical findings. Our results do not support the use of CRP in the same manner as PCT. There is a clear need for more studies in LMICs.</p>","PeriodicalId":72246,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11406566/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are C-reactive protein and procalcitonin safe and useful for antimicrobial stewardship purposes in patients with COVID-19? A scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Anita Williams, Ernestina Repetto, Ishmael Lebbie, Mohamad Khalife, Tomas Oestergaard Jensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ash.2024.372\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary objectives of this study were to assess the usefulness of C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) in the diagnosis of bacterial co-infections in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and if their incorporation in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs is safe and useful, stratified by severity of disease as level of care, intensive care unit (ICU) or non-ICU. Our secondary objectives were to identify cut-off values for antibiotic decision-making and identify reported results from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A scoping review of published literature, adhering to the PRISMA statement for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The last search was performed in January 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-nine studies were included in this scoping review: 20 studies reporting predictive values and/or sensitivity/specificity results for PCT, 8 reporting clear objectives on AMS, and 3 studies from LMICs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the context of non-ICU hospitalized COVID-19 patients in high-income countries, a PCT value below 0.25 mg/L can be a useful tool to rule out bacterial co-infection. The wide range of reported negative predictive values suggests that PCT should be interpreted in the context of other clinical findings. Our results do not support the use of CRP in the same manner as PCT. There is a clear need for more studies in LMICs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11406566/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2024.372\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2024.372","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究的主要目的是评估C反应蛋白(CRP)和降钙素原(PCT)在诊断2019年冠状病毒疾病(COVID-19)中的细菌合并感染中的作用,以及将其纳入抗菌药物管理(AMS)计划是否安全和有用。我们的次要目标是确定抗生素决策的临界值,并确定中低收入国家(LMIC)的报告结果:设计:对已发表的文献进行范围界定综述,遵守《系统综述和荟萃分析扩展范围界定综述指南》(PRISMA)声明。最后一次检索于 2024 年 1 月进行:本次范围界定审查共纳入 59 项研究:20项研究报告了PCT的预测值和/或灵敏度/特异性结果,8项研究报告了AMS的明确目标,3项研究来自低收入国家:结论:对于高收入国家非重症监护病房住院的 COVID-19 患者,PCT 值低于 0.25 mg/L 可以作为排除细菌合并感染的有用工具。所报告的阴性预测值范围很广,这表明在解释 PCT 时应结合其他临床结果。我们的研究结果不支持以与 PCT 相同的方式使用 CRP。显然需要在低收入国家开展更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are C-reactive protein and procalcitonin safe and useful for antimicrobial stewardship purposes in patients with COVID-19? A scoping review.

Objective: The primary objectives of this study were to assess the usefulness of C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) in the diagnosis of bacterial co-infections in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and if their incorporation in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs is safe and useful, stratified by severity of disease as level of care, intensive care unit (ICU) or non-ICU. Our secondary objectives were to identify cut-off values for antibiotic decision-making and identify reported results from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Design: A scoping review of published literature, adhering to the PRISMA statement for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The last search was performed in January 2024.

Results: Fifty-nine studies were included in this scoping review: 20 studies reporting predictive values and/or sensitivity/specificity results for PCT, 8 reporting clear objectives on AMS, and 3 studies from LMICs.

Conclusion: In the context of non-ICU hospitalized COVID-19 patients in high-income countries, a PCT value below 0.25 mg/L can be a useful tool to rule out bacterial co-infection. The wide range of reported negative predictive values suggests that PCT should be interpreted in the context of other clinical findings. Our results do not support the use of CRP in the same manner as PCT. There is a clear need for more studies in LMICs.

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
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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