4.6 Review

ROLE OF BIOMARKERS IN SEPSIS CARE

期刊

SHOCK
卷 40, 期 5, 页码 358-365

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SHK.0b013e3182a66bd6

关键词

Central venous oxygen saturation; CD64; C-reactive protein; erythrocyte sedimentation rate; interleukin 6; interleukin 8; interleukin 27; lactate; lipopolysaccharide-binding protein; procalcitonin; triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 1

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 GM-067202, R01 AG-027990, R01 GM-099773, R01 GM-096994]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sepsis is one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity, even with the current availability of extended-spectrum antibiotics and advanced medical care. Biomarkers offer a tool in facilitating early diagnosis, in identifying patient populations at high risk of complications, and in monitoring progression of the disease, which are critical assessments for appropriate therapy and improvement in patient outcomes. Several biomarkers are already available for clinical use in sepsis; however, their effectiveness in many instances is limited by the lack of specificity and sensitivity to characterize the presence of an infection and the complexity of the inflammatory and immune processes and to stratify patients into homogenous groups for specific treatments. Current advances in molecular techniques have provided new tools facilitating the discovery of novel biomarkers, which can vary from metabolites and chemical products present in body fluids to genes and proteins in circulating blood cells. The purpose of this review was to examine the current status of sepsis biomarkers, with special emphasis on emerging markers, which are undergoing validation and may transition into clinical practice for their informative value in diagnosis, prognosis, or response to therapy. We will also discuss the new concept of combination biomarkers and biomarker risk models, their existing challenges, and their potential use in the daily management of patients with sepsis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据