Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Point-of-care neutrophil CD64 as a rule in diagnostic test for bacterial infections in the emergency department.
van de Ven, N L M; Bongers, S H; Spijkerman, R; Koenderman, L; Leenen, L P H; Hietbrink, F.
  • van de Ven NLM; Department of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Bongers SH; Department of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Spijkerman R; Center for Translational Immunology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Koenderman L; Center for Translational Immunology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Leenen LPH; Department of Respiratory Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Hietbrink F; Center for Translational Immunology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
BMC Emerg Med ; 23(1): 28, 2023 03 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2285110
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Bacterial infections are frequently seen in the emergency department (ED), but can be difficult to distinguish from viral infections and some non-infectious diseases. Common biomarkers such as c-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) counts fail to aid in the differential diagnosis. Neutrophil CD64 (nCD64), an IgG receptor, is suggested to be more specific for bacterial infections. This study investigated if nCD64 can distinguish bacterial infections from other infectious and non-infectious diseases in the ED.

METHODS:

All COVID-19 suspected patients who visited the ED and for which a definitive diagnosis was made, were included. Blood was analyzed using an automated flow cytometer within 2 h after presentation. Patients were divided into a bacterial, viral, and non-infectious disease group. We determined the diagnostic value of nCD64 and compared this to those of CRP and WBC counts.

RESULTS:

Of the 291 patients presented at the ED, 182 patients were included with a definitive diagnosis (bacterial infection n = 78; viral infection n = 64; non-infectious disease n = 40). ROC-curves were plotted, with AUCs of 0.71 [95%CI 0.64-0.79], 0.77 [0.69-0.84] and 0.64 [0.55-0.73] for nCD64, WBC counts and CRP, respectively. In the bacterial group, nCD64 MFI was significantly higher compared to the other groups (p < 0.01). A cut-off of 9.4 AU MFI for nCD64 corresponded with a positive predictive value of 1.00 (sensitivity of 0.27, a specificity of 1.00, and an NPV of 0.64). Furthermore, a diagnostic algorithm was constructed which can serve as an example of what a future biomarker prediction model could look like.

CONCLUSION:

For patients in the ED presenting with a suspected infection, nCD64 measured with automatic flow cytometry, has a high specificity and positive predictive value for diagnosing a bacterial infection. However, a low nCD64 cannot rule out a bacterial infection. For future purposes, nCD64 should be combined with additional tests to form an algorithm that adequately diagnoses infectious diseases.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Bacterial Infections / Noncommunicable Diseases / COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: BMC Emerg Med Journal subject: Emergency Medicine Year: 2023 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: S12873-023-00800-2

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Bacterial Infections / Noncommunicable Diseases / COVID-19 Type of study: Diagnostic study / Experimental Studies / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: BMC Emerg Med Journal subject: Emergency Medicine Year: 2023 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: S12873-023-00800-2