Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Crit Care Med ; 49(10): 1664-1673, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1452743

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The rapid diagnosis of acute infections and sepsis remains a serious challenge. As a result of limitations in current diagnostics, guidelines recommend early antimicrobials for suspected sepsis patients to improve outcomes at a cost to antimicrobial stewardship. We aimed to develop and prospectively validate a new, 29-messenger RNA blood-based host-response classifier Inflammatix Bacterial Viral Non-Infected version 2 (IMX-BVN-2) to determine the likelihood of bacterial and viral infections. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Emergency Department, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany. PATIENTS: Three hundred twelve adult patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected acute infections or sepsis with at least one vital sign change. INTERVENTIONS: None (observational study only). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Gene expression levels from extracted whole blood RNA was quantified on a NanoString nCounter SPRINT (NanoString Technologies, Seattle, WA). Two predicted probability scores for the presence of bacterial and viral infection were calculated using the IMX-BVN-2 neural network classifier, which was trained on an independent development set. The IMX-BVN-2 bacterial score showed an area under the receiver operating curve for adjudicated bacterial versus ruled out bacterial infection of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85-0.95) compared with 0.89 (95% CI, 0.84-0.94) for procalcitonin with procalcitonin being used in the adjudication. The IMX-BVN-2 viral score area under the receiver operating curve for adjudicated versus ruled out viral infection was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.77-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: IMX-BVN-2 demonstrated accuracy for detecting both viral infections and bacterial infections. This shows the potential of host-response tests as a novel and practical approach for determining the causes of infections, which could improve patient outcomes while upholding antimicrobial stewardship.


Subject(s)
Bacterial Infections/diagnosis , RNA, Messenger/analysis , Virus Diseases/diagnosis , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Area Under Curve , Bacterial Infections/blood , Bacterial Infections/physiopathology , Berlin , Biomarkers/analysis , Biomarkers/blood , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , RNA, Messenger/blood , ROC Curve , Virus Diseases/blood , Virus Diseases/physiopathology
3.
TH Open ; 5(1): e43-e55, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1075296

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) patients often show excessive activation of coagulation, associated with increased risk of thrombosis. However, the diagnostic value of coagulation at initial clinical evaluation is not clear. We present an in-depth analysis of coagulation in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected COVID-19. N = 58 patients with clinically suspected COVID-19 in the ED were enrolled. N = 17 subsequently tested positive using SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) swabs, while in n = 41 COVID-19 was ruled-out. We analyzed both standard and extended coagulation parameters, including thromboplastin time (INR), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), antithrombin, plasminogen, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1), D-dimers, and fibrinogen at admission, as well as α2-antiplasmin, activated protein C -resistance, factor V, lupus anticoagulant, protein C, protein S, and von Willebrand diagnostics. These data, as well as mortality and further laboratory parameters, were compared across groups based on COVID-19 diagnosis and severity of disease. In patients with COVID-19, we detected frequent clotting abnormalities, including D-dimers. The comparison cohort in the ED, however, showed similarly altered coagulation. Furthermore, parameters previously shown to distinguish between severe and moderate COVID-19 courses, such as platelets, plasminogen, fibrinogen, aPTT, INR, and antithrombin, as well as multiple nonroutine coagulation analytes showed no significant differences between patients with and without COVID-19 when presenting to the ED. At admission to the ED the prevalence of coagulopathy in patients with COVID-19 is high, yet comparable to the non-COVID-19 cohort presenting with respiratory symptoms. Nevertheless, coagulopathy might worsen during disease progression with the need of subsequent risk stratification.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...