4.6 Article

Can procalcitonin help identify associated bacterial infection in patients with severe influenza pneumonia? A multicentre study

Journal

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
Volume 37, Issue 5, Pages 796-800

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-011-2189-1

Keywords

Procalcitonin; Pneumonia; A/H1N1v influenza; Bacterial infection

Funding

  1. Societe de Reanimation de Langue Francaise (SRLF)
  2. French Research Agency (ANRS)
  3. French Ministry of Health

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To determine whether procalcitonin (PCT) levels could help discriminate isolated viral from mixed (bacterial and viral) pneumonia in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) during the A/H1N1v2009 influenza pandemic. A retrospective observational study was performed in 23 French ICUs during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. Levels of PCT at admission were compared between patients with confirmed influenzae A pneumonia associated or not associated with a bacterial co-infection. Of 103 patients with confirmed A/H1N1 infection and not having received prior antibiotics, 48 (46.6%; 95% CI 37-56%) had a documented bacterial co-infection, mostly caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae (54%) or Staphylococcus aureus (31%). Fifty-two patients had PCT measured on admission, including 19 (37%) having bacterial co-infection. Median (range 25-75%) values of PCT were significantly higher in patients with bacterial co-infection: 29.5 (3.9-45.3) versus 0.5 (0.12-2) mu g/l (P < 0.01). For a cut-off of 0.8 mu g/l or more, the sensitivity and specificity of PCT for distinguishing isolated viral from mixed pneumonia were 91 and 68%, respectively. Alveolar condensation combined with a PCT level of 0.8 mu g/l or more was strongly associated with bacterial co-infection (OR 12.9, 95% CI 3.2-51.5; P < 0.001). PCT may help discriminate viral from mixed pneumonia during the influenza season. Levels of PCT less than 0.8 mu g/l combined with clinical judgment suggest that bacterial infection is unlikely.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available