ArticleYonago acta medica2018
Utility of CD64 on Neutrophils in Orthopedic Infection.
Article in Yonago acta medica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Serum CD64 as a Marker for Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection.Arthroplasty today · 2023Article
- Point-of-care neutrophil CD64 as a rule in diagnostic test for bacterial infections in the emergency department.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMusculoskeletal infections are often seen in the daily practice of orthopedics. Several markers [white blood cell (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), procalcitonin (PCT)] have been used for diagnosing these infections. However, these markers may be elevated due to surgery or trauma, and may not be infection-related. These markers also show drug-dependent dynamics during infection that differ from its usual dynamics. Such situations make diagnosis of infections difficult, and Cluster of Differentiation 64 (CD64) has been brought to attention. This study aimed to clarify the utility of CD64 on neutrophils by comparing it with conventional infection markers (CRP, PCT) in musculoskeletal infection.
methodsForty-four patients who were suspected of having musculoskeletal infection between May 2010 and November 2013 in our hospital were enrolled in this study. Patients were divided into subgroups according to their culture results, antibiotics administration, measurement timing, and if they were immunocompromised. The measurements of the infection markers were compared between each group. In addition, the positive rates of each infection marker were compared between groups.
resultsThere was no difference in the infection marker measurements between several groups. There was no statistically significant difference between groups for the positive rates of CD64, CRP, and PCT.
conclusionWe evaluated the utility of CD64 on neutrophils in musculoskeletal infection. CD64 showed the utility that was equivalent to conventional infection markers in diagnoses of various musculoskeletal infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30636919PMC6308103What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.