4.7 Article

Neutrophil CD64 expression as a diagnostic marker for sepsis in adult patients: a meta-analysis

期刊

CRITICAL CARE
卷 19, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-015-0972-z

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Key Technology RD Program [2012BAI11B01]
  2. Key Research Project of the Twelfth Five-Year Plan of the People's Liberation Army [CWS12J092]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81272076]
  4. State Key Laboratory of Trauma, Burns and Combined Injury, Third Military Medical University [SKLZZ201002]
  5. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University [IRT 13050]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Neutrophil CD64 (nCD64) expression appears to be a promising marker of bacterial infections. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the accuracy of nCD64 expression for the diagnosis of sepsis in critically ill adult patients. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, ISI Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Library for literature published between database inception and 19 May 2014, as well as reference lists of identified primary studies. Studies were included if they included assessment of the accuracy of nCD64 expression for sepsis diagnosis in adult patients and provided sufficient information to construct a 2x2 contingency table. Results: A total of 8 studies comprising 1986 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria for the final analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.76 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.78) and 0.85 (95 % CI, 0.82-0.87), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and diagnostic odds ratio were 8.15 (95 % CI, 3.82-17.36), 0.16 (95 % CI, 0.09-0.30), and 60.41 (95 % CI, 15.87-229.90), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve of nCD64 expression with Q* value were 0.95 (Q* = 0.89). Conclusions: On the basis of our meta-analysis, nCD64 expression is a helpful marker for early diagnosis of sepsis in critically ill patients. The results of the test should not be used alone to diagnose sepsis, but instead should be interpreted in combination with medical history, physical examination, and other test results.

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

4.7
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