Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2006;10(2):R53.
doi: 10.1186/cc4866.

Procalcitonin, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein, interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein in community-acquired infections and sepsis: a prospective study

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Procalcitonin, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein, interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein in community-acquired infections and sepsis: a prospective study

Shahin Gaïni et al. Crit Care. 2006.

Abstract

Introduction: Clinicians are in need of better diagnostic markers in diagnosing infections and sepsis. We studied the ability of procalcitonin, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein, IL-6 and C-reactive protein to identify patients with infection and sepsis.

Methods: Plasma and serum samples were obtained on admission from patients with suspected community-acquired infections and sepsis. Procalcitonin was measured with a time-resolved amplified cryptate emission technology assay. Lipopolysaccharide-binding protein and IL-6 were measured with a chemiluminescent immunometric assay.

Results: Of 194 included patients, 106 had either infection without systemic inflammatory response syndrome or sepsis. Infected patients had significantly elevated levels of procalcitonin, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein, C-reactive protein and IL-6 compared with noninfected patients (P < 0.001). In a receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis, C-reactive protein and IL-6 performed best in distinguishing between noninfected and infected patients, with an area under the curve larger than 0.82 (P < 0.05). IL-6, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein and C-reactive protein performed best in distinguishing between systemic inflammatory response syndrome and sepsis, with an area under the curve larger than 0.84 (P < 0.01). Procalcitonin performed best in distinguishing between sepsis and severe sepsis, with an area under the curve of 0.74 (P < 0.01).

Conclusion: C-reactive protein, IL-6 and lipopolysaccharide-binding protein appear to be superior to procalcitonin as diagnostic markers for infection and sepsis in patients admitted to a Department of Internal Medicine. Procalcitonin appears to be superior as a severity marker.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
ROC curves comparing inflammatory markers discriminating abilities between noninfected patients and all infected patients (P < 0.05). Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves comparing procalcitonin (pct), lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (lbp), C-reactive protein (crp), IL-6 (il6), white blood cell (wbc) and neutrophil (neutro) discriminating abilities between noninfected patients and all infected patients (P < 0.05).
Figure 2
Figure 2
ROC curves comparing inflammatory markers discriminating abilities between systemic inflammatory response syndrome and sepsis(P 2 0.01). Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves comparing procalcitonin (pct), lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (lbp), C-reactive protein (crp), IL-6 (il6), white blood cell (wbc) and neutrophil (neutro) discriminating abilities between systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) (noninfected with SIRS) and sepsis (sepsis and severe sepsis) (P < 0.01).
Figure 3
Figure 3
ROC curves comparing inflammatory markers discriminating abilities between sepsis and severe sepsis (P 2 0.01). Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves comparing procalcitonin (pct), lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (lbp), C-reactive protein (crp), IL-6 (il6), white blood cell (wbc) and neutrophil (neutro) discriminating abilities between sepsis and severe sepsis (P < 0.01).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Wheeler AP, Bernard GR. Treating patients with severe sepsis. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:207–214. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199901213400307. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Angus DC, Wax RS. Epidemiology of sepsis: an update. Crit Care Med. 2001;29:S109–S116. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200107001-00035. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bone RC, Sibbald WJ, Sprung CL. The ACCP-SCCM consensus conference on sepsis and organ failure. Chest. 1992;101:1481–1483. - PubMed
    1. Rangel-Frausto MS, Pittet D, Costigan M, Hwang T, Davis CS, Wenzel RP. The natural history of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). A prospective study. JAMA. 1995;273:117–123. doi: 10.1001/jama.273.2.117. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ballou SP, Kushner I. C-reactive protein and the acute phase response. Adv Intern Med. 1992;37:313–336. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms