Serial measurement of pancreatic stone protein for the early detection of sepsis in intensive care unit patients: a prospective multicentric study

Jérôme Pugin, Thomas Daix, Jean-Luc Pagani, Davide Morri, Angelo Giacomucci, Pierre-François Dequin, Christophe Guitton, Yok-Ai Que, Gianluca Zani, David Brealey, Alain Lepape, Ben Creagh-Brown, Duncan Wyncoll, Daniela Silengo, Irina Irincheeva, Laurie Girard, Fabien Rebeaud, Iwan Maerki, Philippe Eggimann, Bruno François, Jérôme Pugin, Thomas Daix, Jean-Luc Pagani, Davide Morri, Angelo Giacomucci, Pierre-François Dequin, Christophe Guitton, Yok-Ai Que, Gianluca Zani, David Brealey, Alain Lepape, Ben Creagh-Brown, Duncan Wyncoll, Daniela Silengo, Irina Irincheeva, Laurie Girard, Fabien Rebeaud, Iwan Maerki, Philippe Eggimann, Bruno François

Abstract

Background: The early recognition and management of sepsis improves outcomes. Biomarkers may help in identifying earlier sub-clinical signs of sepsis. We explored the potential of serial measurements of C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT) and pancreatic stone protein (PSP) for the early recognition of sepsis in patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods: This was a multicentric international prospective observational clinical study conducted in 14 ICUs in France, Switzerland, Italy, and the United Kingdom. Adult ICU patients at risk of nosocomial sepsis were included. A biomarker-blinded adjudication committee identified sepsis events and the days on which they began. The association of clinical sepsis diagnoses with the trajectories of PSP, CRP, and PCT in the 3 days preceding these diagnoses of sepsis were tested for markers of early sepsis detection. The performance of the biomarkers in sepsis diagnosis was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

Results: Of the 243 patients included, 53 developed nosocomial sepsis after a median of 6 days (interquartile range, 3-8 days). Clinical sepsis diagnosis was associated with an increase in biomarkers value over the 3 days preceding this diagnosis [PSP (p = 0.003), PCT (p = 0.025) and CRP (p = 0.009)]. PSP started to increase 5 days before the clinical diagnosis of sepsis, PCT 3 and CRP 2 days, respectively. The area under the ROC curve at the time of clinical sepsis was similar for all markers (PSP, 0.75; CRP, 0.77; PCT, 0.75).

Conclusions: While the diagnostic accuracy of PSP, CRP and PCT for sepsis were similar in this cohort, serial PSP measurement demonstrated an increase of this marker the days preceding the onset of signs necessary to clinical diagnose sepsis. This observation justifies further evaluation of the potential clinical benefit of serial PSP measurement in the management of critically ill patients developing nosocomial sepsis. Trial registration The study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT03474809), on March 16, 2018. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03474809?term=NCT03474809&draw=2&rank=1 .

Keywords: Biomarker; C-reactive protein; Diagnostic; Pancreatic stone protein; Procalcitonin; Sepsis.

Conflict of interest statement

Irina Irincheeva is affiliated with CTU Bern, University of Bern, which has a staff policy of not accepting honoraria or consultancy fees. However, CTU Bern is involved in design, conduct, or analysis of clinical studies funded by not-for-profit and for-profit organizations. In particular, pharmaceutical and medical device companies provide direct funding to some of these studies. For an up-to-date list of CTU Bern’s conflicts of interest see http://www.ctu.unibe.ch/research/declaration_of_interest/index_eng.html. Pierre-François Dequin declares that his institution (Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Tours, Tours, France) received grants for the inclusion of patients in the study. Bruno François declares receiving consultancy fees from Abionic. The other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow of patient enrollment. There were 4 (0.14%) missing values for PSP (0; 0.0% after imputation), 8 (0.35%) for CRP (1; 0.04% after imputation) and 8 (0.28%) for PCT (2; 0.07% after imputation). CRP C-reactive protein, EAC endpoint adjudication committee, ICU intensive care unit, PCT procalcitonin, PSP pancreatic stone protein
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Association of pancreatic stone protein, procalcitonin and C-reactive protein increase with sepsis. Daily mean values ± standard errors of the mean for the sepsis group are from the 6 days preceding the endpoint adjudication committee diagnosis of sepsis. For the no-sepsis group, day 0 was set as intensive care unit day 7 or the day of discharge for intensive care unit stays p values are for the association of clinical sepsis diagnosis with a continuous biomarker increase in the preceding 3 days (pancreatic stone protein, p = 0.003; procalcitonin, p = 0.025; C-reactive protein, p = 0.009). ns are numbers of observations per day and group. PSP pancreatic stone protein, PCT procalcitonin, CRP C-reactive protein, EAC endpoint adjudication committee, ICU intensive care unit

References

    1. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3) JAMA. 2016;315:801.
    1. Seymour CW, Liu VX, Iwashyna TJ, et al. Assessment of clinical criteria for sepsis: for the third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3) JAMA. 2016;315:762–774.
    1. Levy MM, Evans LE, Rhodes A. The surviving sepsis campaign bundle: 2018 update. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44:925–928.
    1. Rudd KE, Johnson SC, Agesa KM, et al. Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990–2017: analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet Lond Engl. 2020;395:200–211.
    1. Husabø G, Nilsen RM, Flaatten H, et al. Early diagnosis of sepsis in emergency departments, time to treatment, and association with mortality: an observational study. PLoS ONE. 2020;15:e0227652.
    1. Vincent J-L, Sakr Y, Sprung CL, et al. Sepsis in European intensive care units: results of the SOAP study. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:10.
    1. Rhee C, Kadri SS, Danner RL, et al. Diagnosing sepsis is subjective and highly variable: a survey of intensivists using case vignettes. Crit Care Lond Engl. 2016;20:89.
    1. Vijayan AL, Vanimaya N, Ravindran S, et al. Procalcitonin: a promising diagnostic marker for sepsis and antibiotic therapy. J Intensive Care. 2017;5:51.
    1. Keel M, Seifert B, Bimmler D, et al. Pancreatic stone protein is highly increased during posttraumatic sepsis and activates neutrophil granulocytes. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:7.
    1. Llewelyn MJ, Berger M, Gregory M, et al. Sepsis biomarkers in unselected patients on admission to intensive or high-dependency care. Crit Care. 2013;17:R60.
    1. Klein HJ, Niggemann P, Buehler PK, et al. Pancreatic stone protein predicts sepsis in severely burned patients irrespective of trauma severity: a monocentric observational study. Ann Surg. 2020
    1. Eggimann P, Que Y-A, Rebeaud F. Measurement of pancreatic stone protein in the identification and management of sepsis. Biomark Med. 2019;13:135–145.
    1. Que Y-A, Delodder F, Guessous I, et al. Pancreatic stone protein as an early biomarker predicting mortality in a prospective cohort of patients with sepsis requiring ICU management. Crit Care. 2012;16:R114.
    1. Que Y-A, Guessous I, Dupuis-Lozeron E, et al. Prognostication of mortality in critically 111 patients with severe infections. Chest. 2015;148:674–682.
    1. García de Guadiana-Romualdo L, Albaladejo-Otón MD, Berger M, et al. Prognostic performance of pancreatic stone protein in critically ill patients with sepsis. Biomark Med. 2019;13:1469–1480.
    1. Putallaz L, Bogaard P van den, Laub P, et al.: Nanofluidics drives point-of-care technology for on the spot protein marker analysis with rapid actionable results. J Nanomed Nanotechnol. 2019; 10[cited 2021 Jan 7] Available from:
    1. SepNet Critical Care Trials Group Incidence of severe sepsis and septic shock in German intensive care units: the prospective, multicentre INSEP study. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42:1980–1989.
    1. Shankar-Hari M, Harrison DA, Rubenfeld GD, et al. Epidemiology of sepsis and septic shock in critical care units: comparison between sepsis-2 and sepsis-3 populations using a national critical care database. Br J Anaesth. 2017;119:626–636.
    1. Artero A, Zaragoza R, Miguel J. Epidemiology of severe sepsis and septic shock. In: Fernandez R, editor. Severe sepsis and septic shock—understanding a serious killer. InTech; 2012.
    1. Lambden S, Laterre PF, Levy MM, et al. The SOFA score-development, utility and challenges of accurate assessment in clinical trials. Crit Care Lond Engl. 2019;23:374.
    1. Van Breukelen GJP. ANCOVA versus change from baseline: more power in randomized studies, more bias in nonrandomized studies [corrected] J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:920–925.
    1. Kahan BC. Accounting for centre-effects in multicentre trials with a binary outcome—when, why, and how? BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14:20.
    1. Klein HJ, Rittirsch D, Buehler PK, et al. Response of routine inflammatory biomarkers and novel Pancreatic Stone Protein to inhalation injury and its interference with sepsis detection in severely burned patients. Burns. 2020; S0305417920303508
    1. Klein Klouwenberg PMC, Ong DSY, Bos LDJ, et al. Interobserver agreement of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for classifying infections in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2013;41:2373–2378.
    1. Lopansri BK, Miller Iii RR, Burke JP, et al. Physician agreement on the diagnosis of sepsis in the intensive care unit: estimation of concordance and analysis of underlying factors in a multicenter cohort. J Intensive Care. 2019;7:13.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅