Trial reportIrish journal of medical science2021
A randomized trial to compare procalcitonin and C-reactive protein in assessing severity of sepsis and in guiding antibacterial therapy in Egyptian critically ill patients.
Trial report in Irish journal of medical science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and representation of comorbidities and multimorbidity in randomised controlled trials in sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy may shorten length of treatment and may improve survival-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Biomarkers to guide sepsis management.Annals of intensive care · 2025Review
- The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2024.Journal of intensive care · 2025Article
- Construction and efficacy evaluation of a model for early diagnosis of pediatric sepsis based on LASSO-logistic regression.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Role of biomarkers in antimicrobial stewardship: physicians' perspectives.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2024Article
- Procalcitonin Guided Antibiotic Stewardship.Biomarker insights · 2024Review
- Machine Learning Models for Prediction of SevereDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Predictive Value of Procalcitonin and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Variations for Bloodstream Infection with Septic Shock.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2022Article
- The diagnostic utility of IL-10, IL-17, and PCT in patients with sepsis infection.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2024.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProcalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP) are the main used biomarkers for sepsis and in guiding antibiotic therapy, although PCT high cost limits its use in developing countries.
objectiveComparing between PCT and CRP in assessing severity of sepsis and in guiding antibacterial therapy in critically ill patients.
methodsIn a prospective randomized study, 60 patients were included from an Egyptian Intensive Care Unit. Patients were divided into CRP and PCT groups. CRP and PCT were measured at baseline and on days 4 and 7. Validity, sensitivity, and specificity of both biomarkers and their correlation with sepsis scores (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) and Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA)) were evaluated. Antibacterial continuation at days 4 and 7 was assessed.
resultsThe diagnostic accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity of PCT were higher than CRP (80.79% vs 69.45%, 36% vs 28.7%, 87.6% vs 72.4%, respectively). PCT levels were significantly correlated with APACHE II score (P ≤ 0.0001) and SOFA score (P = 0.005), while CRP levels were not correlated with APACHEII and SOFA scores,(P > 0.05). PCT was associated with less antibacterial exposure (33% stopped their antibiotics on day 4 versus 6% in CRP, P = 0.009). Only 33% continued their antibacterial regimen in PCT group after 7 days versus 83% in CRP group (*P ≤ 0.0001).
conclusionPCT is a more accurate diagnostic and prognostic biomarker than CRP in patients with sepsis. PCT significantly shortened patients' exposure to antibacterial therapy and hospital length of stay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.