Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34049579›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2021

Accuracy of pancreatic stone protein for the diagnosis of infection in hospitalized adults: a systematic review and individual patient level meta-analysis.

Josef Prazak, Irina Irincheeva, Martin J Llewelyn, Daiana Stolz, Luis García de Guadiana Romualdo, Rolf Graf, Theresia Reding, Holger J Klein, Philippe Eggimann, Yok-Ai Que

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Josef PrazakDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, INO E-403, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-4515-3399
Irina IrincheevaCTU Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Martin J LlewelynBrighton and Sussex Medical School, Falmer, BN1 9PS, UK.
Daiana StolzClinic of Pulmonary Medicine and Respiratory Cell Research, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Luis García de Guadiana RomualdoBiochemistry Department, Santa Lucia University Hospital, Cartagena, Spain.
Rolf GrafDepartment of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Universitätsspital Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Theresia RedingDepartment of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Universitätsspital Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Holger J KleinDepartment of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery, Burn Center Zurich, Universitässpital Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Philippe Eggimann *Department of Locomotor Apparatus, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Yok-Ai Que *Department of Intensive Care Medicine, INO E-403, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010, Bern, Switzerland. Yok-Ai.Que@insel.ch.
University of Bern · CHUniversity Hospital of Zurich · CHBrighton and Sussex Medical School · GBSanta Lucía University General Hospital · ESUniversity Hospital of Basel · CHUniversity of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate biomarkers to diagnose infection are lacking. Studies reported good performance of pancreatic stone protein (PSP) to detect infection. The objective of the study was to determine the performance of PSP in diagnosing infection across hospitalized patients and calculate a threshold value for that purpose.

methodsA systematic search across Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and MEDLINE databases (1966-March 2019) for studies on PSP published in English using 'pancreatic stone protein', 'PSP', 'regenerative protein', 'lithostatin' combined with 'infection' and 'sepsis' found 44 records. The search was restricted to the five trials that evaluated PSP for the initial detection of infection in hospitalized adults. Individual patient data were obtained from the investigators of all eligible trials. Data quality and validity was assessed according to PRISMA guidelines. We choose a fixed-effect model to calculate the PSP cut-off value that best discriminates infected from non-infected patients.

resultsInfection was confirmed in 371 of 631 patients. The median (IQR) PSP value of infected versus uninfected patients was 81.5 (30.0-237.5) versus 19.2 (12.6-33.57) ng/ml, compared to 150 (82.70-229.55) versus 58.25 (15.85-120) mg/l for C-reactive protein (CRP) and 0.9 (0.29-4.4) versus 0.15 (0.08-0.5) ng/ml for procalcitonin (PCT). Using a PSP cut-off of 44.18 ng/ml, the ROC AUC to detect infection was 0.81 (0.78-0.85) with a sensitivity of 0.66 (0.61-0.71), specificity of 0.83 (0.78-0.88), PPV of 0.85 (0.81-0.89) and NPV of 0.63 (0.58-0.68). When a model combining PSP and CRP was used, the ROC AUC improved to 0.90 (0.87-0.92) with higher sensitivity 0.81 (0.77-0.85) and specificity 0.84 (0.79-0.90) for discriminating infection from non-infection. Adding PCT did not improve the performance further.

conclusionsPSP is a promising biomarker to diagnose infections in hospitalized patients. Using a cut-off value of 44.18 ng/ml, PSP performs better than CRP or PCT across the considered studies. The combination of PSP with CRP further enhances its accuracy.

Indexed as

BiomarkersHumansInfectionsLithostathineBiomarkersLithostathineREG1A protein, humanBiomarkerInfectionPancreatic stone proteinPSP

Identifiers

PMID34049579
PMCPMC8164316
OpenAlexW3165545382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.