Article

Risk prediction with procalcitonin and clinical rules in community-acquired pneumonia

Clinical Research, Investigation, and Systems Modeling of Acute Illness Laboratory, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Annals of emergency medicine (Impact Factor: 4.33). 08/2008; 52(1):48-58.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.01.003
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Pneumonia Severity Index and CURB-65 predict outcomes in community-acquired pneumonia but have limitations. Procalcitonin, a biomarker of bacterial infection, may provide prognostic information in community-acquired pneumonia. Our objective is to describe the pattern of procalcitonin in community-acquired pneumonia and determine whether procalcitonin provides prognostic information beyond the Pneumonia Severity Index and CURB-65.
We conducted a multicenter prospective cohort study in 28 community and teaching emergency departments. Patients presenting with a clinical and radiographic diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia were enrolled. We stratified procalcitonin levels a priori into 4 tiers: I: less than 0.1; II: greater than 0.1 to less than 0.25; III: greater than 0.25 to less than 0.5; and IV: greater than 0.5 ng/mL. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality.
One thousand six hundred fifty-one patients formed the study cohort. Procalcitonin levels were broadly spread across tiers: 32.8% (I), 21.6% (II), 10.2% (III), and 35.4% (IV). Used alone, procalcitonin had modest test characteristics: specificity (35%), sensitivity (92%), positive likelihood ratio (1.41), and negative likelihood ratio (0.22). Adding procalcitonin to the Pneumonia Severity Index in all subjects minimally improved performance. Adding procalcitonin to low-risk Pneumonia Severity Index subjects (classes I to III) provided no additional information. However, subjects in procalcitonin tier I had low 30-day mortality, regardless of clinical risk, including those in higher risk classes (1.5% versus 1.6% for those in Pneumonia Severity Index classes I to III versus classes IV/V). Among high-risk Pneumonia Severity Index subjects (classes IV/V), one quarter (126/546) were in procalcitonin tier I, and the negative likelihood ratio of procalcitonin tier I was 0.09. Procalcitonin tier I was also associated with lower burden of other adverse outcomes. Similar results were observed with CURB-65 stratification.
Selective use of procalcitonin as an adjunct to existing rules may offer additional prognostic information in high-risk patients.

Full-text

Available from: Derek C Angus, Nov 13, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
139 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Polymorbid patients, diverse diagnostic and therapeutic options, more complex hospital structures, financial incentives, benchmarking, as well as perceptional and societal changes put pressure on medical doctors, specifically if medical errors surface. This is particularly true for the emergency department setting, where patients face delayed or erroneous initial diagnostic or therapeutic measures and costly hospital stays due to sub-optimal triage. A "biomarker" is any laboratory tool with the potential better to detect and characterise diseases, to simplify complex clinical algorithms and to improve clinical problem solving in routine care. They must be embedded in clinical algorithms to complement and not replace basic medical skills. Unselected ordering of laboratory tests and shortcomings in test performance and interpretation contribute to diagnostic errors. Test results may be ambiguous with false positive or false negative results and generate unnecessary harm and costs. Laboratory tests should only be ordered, if results have clinical consequences. In studies, we must move beyond the observational reporting and meta-analysing of diagnostic accuracies for biomarkers. Instead, specific cut-off ranges should be proposed and intervention studies conducted to prove outcome relevant impacts on patient care. The focus of this review is to exemplify the appropriate use of selected laboratory tests in the emergency setting for which randomised-controlled intervention studies have proven clinical benefit. Herein, we focus on initial patient triage and allocation of treatment opportunities in patients with cardiorespiratory diseases in the emergency department. The following five biomarkers will be discussed: proadrenomedullin for prognostic triage assessment and site-of-care decisions, cardiac troponin for acute myocardial infarction, natriuretic peptides for acute heart failure, D-dimers for venous thromboembolism, C-reactive protein as a marker of inflammation, and procalcitonin for antibiotic stewardship in infections of the respiratory tract and sepsis. For these markers we provide an overview on physiopathology, historical evolution of evidence, strengths and limitations for a rational implementation into clinical algorithms. We critically discuss results from key intervention trials that led to their use in clinical routine and potential future indications. The rational for the use of all these biomarkers, first, tackle diagnostic ambiguity and consecutive defensive medicine, second, delayed and sub-optimal therapeutic decisions, and third, prognostic uncertainty with misguided triage and site-of-care decisions all contributing to the waste of our limited health care resources. A multifaceted approach for a more targeted management of medical patients from emergency admission to discharge including biomarkers, will translate into better resource use, shorter length of hospital stay, reduced overall costs, improved patients satisfaction and outcomes in terms of mortality and re-hospitalisation. Hopefully, the concepts outlined in this review will help the reader to improve their diagnostic skills and become more parsimonious laboratory test requesters.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Whether the inflammatory biomarker procalcitonin provides prognostic information across clinical settings and different acute respiratory tract infections (ARI) is poorly understood. Herein, we investigated the prognostic value of admission procalcitonin levels to predict adverse clinical outcome in a large ARI population. We analysed data from 14 trials and 4211 ARI patients to study associations of admission procalcitonin levels and setting specific treatment failure and mortality alone at 30 days. We used multivariable hierarchical logistic regression and conducted sensitivity analyses stratified by clinical settings and ARI diagnoses to assess the results' consistency. Overall, 864 patients (20.5%) experienced treatment failure and 252 (6.0%) died. The ability of procalcitonin to differentiate patients with and without treatment failure was highest in the emergency department setting (treatment failure; area under the curve (AUC): 0.64 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61, 0.67), adjusted odds ratio (OR): 1.85 (95% CI: 1.61, 2.12), P <0.001 and mortality; AUC: 0.67 (95% CI: 0.63, 0.71), adjusted OR: 1.82 (95% CI: 1.45, 2.29), P <0.001). In lower respiratory tract infections, procalcitonin was a good predictor of identifying patients at risk for mortality (AUC: 0.71 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.74), adjusted OR: 2.13 (95% CI: 1.82, 2.49), P <0.001). In primary care and intensive care unit patients no significant associations of initial procalcitonin levels and outcome was found. Admission procalcitonin levels are associated with setting specific treatment failure and provide most prognostic information in ARI in the emergency department setting.
    Critical Care 12/2015; 19(1). DOI:10.1186/s13054-015-0792-1 · 5.04 Impact Factor
  • Source