Comparison of monocyte distribution width and Procalcitonin as diagnostic markers for sepsis: Meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies

AIM

We aimed to perform a meta-analysis to find out whether PCT and MDW could be used as accurate diagnostic markers for sepsis.

METHODS

We searched PUBMED, WOS, and SCOPUS databases. Inclusion criteria were any observational or clinical trials that compared monocyte Distribution Width [MDW] with Procalcitonin [PCT] as diagnostic markers in a patient with sepsis. Case reports, editorials, conference abstracts, and animal studies were excluded. RevMan software [5.4] was used to perform the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

After the complete screening, 5 observational studies were included in the meta-analysis. The total number of patients included in the meta-analysis in the sepsis group is 565 and 781 in the control group. The pooled analysis between the sepsis group and controls showed a statistically significant association between sepsis and increased levels of MDW and PCT [MD = 3.94, 95% CI = 2.53 to 5.36, p-value < 0.00001] and [MD = 9.29, 95% CI = 0.67 to 17.91, p-value = 0.03] respectively. Moreover, the subgroup analysis showed that the p-value of MDW levels [< 0.00001] is more significant than the p-value of PCT levels = 0.03, the p-value between the two subgroups [< 0.00001]. Additionally, the overall ROC Area for MDW [0.790] > the overall ROC Area for PCT [0.760].

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed a statistically significant association between sepsis and increased MDW and PCT levels compared with controls and the overall ROC Area for MDW is higher than the overall ROC Area for PCT, indicating that the diagnostic accuracy of MDW is higher than PCT.MDW can be used as a diagnostic marker for sepsis patients in the emergency department. More multicenter studies are needed to support our findings.

The harmonization issue in laboratory medicine: the commitment of CCLM

The analytical quality of the clinical laboratory results has shown a significant improvement over the past decades, thanks to the joint efforts of different stakeholders, while the comparability among the results produced by different laboratories and methods still presents some critical issues. During these years, Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) published several papers on the harmonization issue over all steps in the Total Testing Process, training an important number of laboratory professionals in evaluating and monitoring all the criticisms inherent to the pre-analytical, as well as analytical and post analytical phases: from the consensus statement on the most informative testing in emergency setting, to the prevention and detection of hemolysis or to patients identification and tube labeling procedures, as far as to different approaches to harmonize hormones measurements or to describe new reference methods or to harmonize the laboratory report. During these years the commitment of the journal, devoted to the harmonization processes has allowed to improve the awareness on the topic and to provide specific instruments to monitor the rate of errors and to improve patients safety.

Pursuing appropriateness of laboratory tests: a 15-year experience in an academic medical institution

Appropriateness in Laboratory Medicine has been the object of various types of interventions. From published experiences, it is now clear that to effectively manage the laboratory test demand it is recommended to activate evidence-based preventative strategies stopping inappropriate requests before they can reach the laboratory. To guarantee appropriate laboratory test utilization, healthcare institutions should implement and optimize a computerized provider order entry (CPOE), exploiting the potential of electronic requesting as "enabling factor" for reinforcing appropriateness and sustaining its effects over time. In our academic institution, over the last 15 years, our medical laboratory has enforced various interventions to improve test appropriateness, all directly or indirectly based on CPOE use. The following types of intervention were implemented: (1) applying specific recommendations supported by monitoring by CPOE as well as a continuous consultation with clinicians (tumour markers); (2) removing outdated tests and avoiding redundant duplications (cardiac markers, pancreatic enzymes); (3) order restraints to selected wards and gating policy (procalcitonin, B-type natriuretic peptide, homocysteine); (4) reflex testing (bilirubin fractions, free prostate-specific antigen, aminotransferases, magnesium in hypocalcemia); and (5) minimum retesting interval (D-Dimer, vitamin B₁₂, C-reactive protein, γ-glutamyltranspeptidase). In this paper, we reviewed these interventions and summarized their outcomes primarily related to the changes in total test volumes and cost savings, without neglecting patient safety. Our experience confirmed that laboratory professionals have an irreplaceable role as "stewards" in designing, implementing, evaluating, and maintaining interventions focused to improving test appropriateness.

Lipase elevation in serum of COVID-19 patients: frequency, extent of increase and clinical value

OBJECTIVES

Previous studies reported lipase elevations in serum of COVID-19 patients trying to establish a causal link between SARS-CoV-2 infection and pancreatic damage. However, the degree and prevalence of hyperlipasemia was not uniform across studies.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 1,092 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and at least one available lipase result. The number and frequency of patients with lipase above the upper reference limit (URL), >3 URL, and >6 URL were estimated. Correlations between lipase values and other biomarkers of organ or tissue damage were performed to identify possible extra-pancreatic sources of lipase release. The potential prognostic role of lipase to predict death and intensive care unit (ICU) admission during hospitalization was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Lipase was >URL in 344 (31.5%) of COVID-19 patients. Among them, 65 (5.9%) and 25 (2.3%) had a peak lipase >3 URL and >6 URL, respectively. In the latter group, three patients had acute pancreatitis of gallstone or drug-induced etiology. In others, the etiology of lipase elevations appeared multifactorial and could not be directly related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. No correlation was found between lipase and other tested biomarkers of organ and tissue damage. Lipase concentrations were not different between survivors and non-survivors; however, lipase was significantly increased (p<0.001) in patients admitted to the ICU, even if the odds ratio for lipase as predictor of ICU admission was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Lipase was elevated in ∼1/3 of COVID-19 patients, but the clinical significance of this finding is unclear and irrelevant to patient prognosis during hospitalization.

Pancreatic lipase: why laboratory community does not take enough care of this clinically important test?

Although being the recommended laboratory test to diagnose acute pancreatitis, serum pancreatic lipase (LIP) is among the poorly standardized laboratory tests, and laboratory stakeholders often appear to not take enough care of the quality of its measurements. Here we discuss some important issues that, if not correctly managed and solved, make misdiagnosis of acute pancreatitis by using serum LIP a real possibility. First, the current unavailability of a suitable higher-order reference material to be used as common calibrator should be filled up to definitively improve the inter-method bias. Second, knowledge of the analytical characteristics that may explain the defective performance of LIP assays should be deepened. IVD manufacturers should be more explicit in providing this information, including description of their internal protocol for transferring LIP values from internal references to commercial calibrators. Third, recommended models for accurately estimating measurement uncertainty and reliably defining analytical performance specifications for LIP measurements should be applied. Finally, investments considering alternative options for measuring LIP (e.g., targeted to the development of automated LIP immunoassays) should be warranted. All involved stakeholders (standardization bodies, higher-order reference providers, in vitro diagnostics manufacturers, and laboratory professionals) should contribute to fill the existing gap.

Monocyte distribution width (MDW) as a screening tool for sepsis in the Emergency Department

Objectives The diagnosis of sepsis in the Emergency Department (ED) is challenging and a reliable biomarker is needed. The current study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of monocyte distribution width (MDW) for the early identification of sepsis in the ED. Methods We performed a large observational study including consecutive adult patients (≥18 years of age) presenting to the ED between September and November 2019, with an order for complete blood count (CBC) evaluation. A total of 2,215 patients were enrolled and classified based on Sepsis-2 criteria as the control group (1,855), infection group (172), Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) group (100), and sepsis group (88). Results MDW levels were higher in patients with sepsis than in all other groups (p<0.001). ROC curve analysis showed an optimal diagnostic accuracy of MDW for sepsis prediction at a cut-off point of 23.5, with an AUC of 0.964, sensitivity and specificity of 0.920 and 0.929, respectively. Conclusions Our findings encourage further investigation to validate the use of MDW as a screening tool for the early identification of patients at risk of sepsis in the ED.

Effect of emergency department fibrinogen testing on survival of trauma patients receiving blood transfusions

: Fibrinogen is the first clotting factor to reach critically low levels during blood loss and its depletion is associated with coagulopathy, increased blood loss, transfusion requirements and mortality after trauma. However, direct measurements of fibrinogen concentration or function are not included in many Emergency Department (ED) trauma laboratory testing protocols. We hypothesized that including a test of fibrinogen concentration in the ED would be associated with increased survival for trauma patients requiring blood transfusions.To test this hypothesis, we performed a single-centre retrospective study of the effect of a resulted fibrinogen concentration measurement performed in the ED on survival of trauma patients receiving blood transfusions within the first 4 h of their hospital arrival. Multivariate logistic regression was used test the effect of a fibrinogen test on hospital survival after adjusting for the influence of INR, injury severity, lowest recorded blood pressure and blood transfusion intensity defined as the number of red blood cell units transfused in the first 4 h or care.Of 11 404 trauma registry individuals from 2016 to 2017, 843 (7.4%) received any blood transfusions within the first 4 h of ED care, of whom 635 (75.3%) had a documented fibrinogen concentration ordered and resulted. Multivariate logistic regression for hospital survival demonstrated a significant interaction effect between the presence of a fibrinogen test and transfusion intensity (Whole Model P < 0.0001, Interaction P = 0.035). Repeat analysis after stratifying for those individuals receiving more than 4 units of red blood cell units within 4 h of care found that the presence of a fibrinogen test was independently associated with survival only for those receiving more than 4 units [FIB test odds ratio for survival = 3.5 (1.0, 10.8), P = 0.03].Fibrinogen testing in the ED may be a valuable addition to resuscitation of the trauma patient receiving significant blood transfusions.

Two-center comparison of 10 fully-automated commercial procalcitonin (PCT) immunoassays

Background This two-center study was designed to verify comparability of procalcitonin (PCT) values among 10 different commercial immunoassays. Methods A total number of 176 routine lithium-heparin plasma samples were divided in identical aliquots and simultaneously analyzed with 10 different PCT immunoassays, including Kryptor BRAHMS PCT sensitive, Abbott Architect BRAHMS PCT, Beckman Coulter Access PCT (on Access and DXI), BioMérieux Vidas BRAHMS PCT, Diasorin Liaison BRAHMS PCT, Fujirebio Lumipulse G BRAHMS PCT, Roche BRAHMS PCT (on Cobas E801), Diazyme PCT (on Roche Cobas C702) and SNIBE Maglumi PCT. Results Highly significant correlation was always found across multiple comparisons, with correlation coefficients comprised between 0.918 and 0.997 (all p < 0.001). Bland and Altman plots analysis revealed highly variable bias among immunoassays, ranging between ±0.2% and ±38.6%. Diazyme PCT on Roche Cobas C702 and SNIBE Maglumi PCT displayed the larger overestimation, whilst PCT values were underestimated by Cobas BRAHAMS PCT. The agreement was always >80% (all p < 0.001), but varied largely across multiple comparisons, ranging between 90%-99% at 0.1 μg/L, 81%-99% at 0.25 μg/L, 83%-100% at 0.5 μg/L, 94%-100% at 2.0 μg/L and 90%-99% at 10 μg/L, respectively. The larger disagreement was observed comparing Diazyme PCT and Maglumi PCT with the other methods. Conclusions Although we found acceptable correlation among 10 commercial PCT immunoassays, the limited agreement at clinical decision thresholds remains a major issue, especially at lower end of PCT concentration, thus potentially contributing to jeopardize the clinical value of this biomarker.

Impact of total automation consolidating first-line laboratory tests on diagnostic blood loss

Background

Blood loss for laboratory testing may contribute to hospital-acquired anemia. When implementing the core laboratory (core-lab) section, we consolidated first-line tests decreasing the number of tubes previously dispatched to different sites. Here, hypothesized benefits of the amount of blood volume drawn were explored.

Methods

We retrieved, using a laboratory information system (LIS), the number of tubes received by laboratories interested in the change from all clinical wards in a year-based period, i.e. 2013 for pre-core-lab and 2015 for core-lab system, respectively. Data were expressed as the overall number of tubes sent to laboratories, the corresponding blood volume, and the number of laboratory tests performed, normalized for the number of inpatients.

Results

After consolidation, the average number of blood tubes per inpatient significantly decreased (12.6 vs. 10.7, p < 0.001). However, intensive care units (ICUs) did not reduce the number of tubes per patient, according to the needs of daily monitoring of their clinical status. The average blood volume sent to laboratories did not vary significantly because serum tubes for core-lab required higher volumes for testing up to 55 analytes in the same transaction. Finally, the number of requested tests per patient during the new osystem slightly decreased (−2.6%).

Conclusions

Total laboratory automation does not automatically mean reducing iatrogenic blood loss. The new system affected the procedure of blood drawing in clinical wards by significantly reducing the number of handled tubes, producing a benefit in terms of costs, labor and time consumption. Except in ICUs, this also slightly promoted some blood saving. ICUs which engage in phlebotomizing patients daily, did not take advantage from the test consolidation.