4.2 Article

Prognostic value of CD4+CD25+ Tregs as a valuable biomarker for patients with sepsis in ICU

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Volume 6, Issue 1, Pages 40-43

Publisher

ZHEJIANG UNIV SCH MEDICINE
DOI: 10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2015.01.007

Keywords

CD4(+)CD25(+) regulatory T cells; Sepsis; Prognosis; Biomarker; APACHE; SOFA; Procalcitonin

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a common complication of infections, burns, traumas, surgeries, poisonings, and post-cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The present study aimed to investigate prognostic value of CD4(+)CD25(+) regulatory T cells (Treg) in peripheral blood of patients with sepsis. METHODS: Periphery blood from 28 patients diagnosed with sepsis was collected on day 1 and 7 after hospitalization in the ICU of Shanghai Changzheng Hospital between December 2013 to April 2014. The blood was used for analyses of Treg ratio using flow cytometry and for analyses of blood routine test, C-reactive protein (CRP), bilirubin, procalcitonin (PCT), and coagulation. APACHE II and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores were also investigated. The results were compared between two outcome groups of survival or death to evaluate prognostic value for sepsis. RESULTS: The patients had an average age of 60.36 +/- 15.03 years, APACHE II score 16.68 +/- 7.00, and SOFA score 7.18 +/- 3.78. Among the 28 patients, 12 had severe trauma (42.9%), 10 had septic shock (35.7%), and 9 (32.2%) died. The median ratio of Tregs was 2.10% (0.80%, 3.10%) in the survival group vs. 1.80% (1.15%, 3.65%) in the death group (Z=-0.148, P=0.883) on day 1; however it was significantly changed to 0.90% (0.30%, 2.80%) vs. 5.70% (2.60%, 8.30%) (Z=-2.905, P=0.004). CONCLUSION: With better prospects for clinical application, dynamic monitoring of Tregs ratio in peripheral blood has potential value in predicting prognosis of sepsis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available