We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Accuracy of C - Reactive protein as a bacterial infection marker in critically immunosuppressed patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Journal of Critical Care 2017 December
BACKGROUND: There is a need for a better understanding of the role of C-reactive protein (CRP) as a valid marker for the detection of bacterial infections in critically immunosuppressed patients. A high negative predictive value of CRP is also needed to rule out sepsis and bacterial infections in immunocompetent patients. However, few studies have evaluated the performance of CRP in immunocompromised hosts. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the performance of CRP as a marker of infection in critically immunosuppressed patients.
METHODS: The inclusion criterion was immunosuppression for which CRP was used as a bacterial infection marker. Searches were performed in the Cochrane Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web OF Science, LILACS and CINAHL databases. We applied the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool 2 (QUADAS 2) to evaluate the quality of the articles and evaluated the test accuracy parameters using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curves and bivariate random effect models.
RESULTS: Only 13 of 21 studies produced quantitative results. We analyzed all studies using the random effects method (restricted maximum likelihood) and obtained a joint diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 3.04 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.71-5.40) with heterogeneity (I2 =91%, Q=181.48, p<0.001). Therefore, a bivariate model was applied. Analyzing the tuberculosis carrier, steroid user, or presence of opportunistic infection subgroups, as described in the proposal, was not possible due to the lack of information on these topics included in the articles.
CONCLUSIONS: CRP appears to be a good screening tool for sepsis in critically immunosuppressed patients. Submitted PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015019329.
METHODS: The inclusion criterion was immunosuppression for which CRP was used as a bacterial infection marker. Searches were performed in the Cochrane Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web OF Science, LILACS and CINAHL databases. We applied the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool 2 (QUADAS 2) to evaluate the quality of the articles and evaluated the test accuracy parameters using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curves and bivariate random effect models.
RESULTS: Only 13 of 21 studies produced quantitative results. We analyzed all studies using the random effects method (restricted maximum likelihood) and obtained a joint diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 3.04 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.71-5.40) with heterogeneity (I2 =91%, Q=181.48, p<0.001). Therefore, a bivariate model was applied. Analyzing the tuberculosis carrier, steroid user, or presence of opportunistic infection subgroups, as described in the proposal, was not possible due to the lack of information on these topics included in the articles.
CONCLUSIONS: CRP appears to be a good screening tool for sepsis in critically immunosuppressed patients. Submitted PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015019329.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app