Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34440976›Full record

ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2021

Presepsin as Early Marker of Sepsis in Emergency Department: A Narrative Review.

Andrea Piccioni, Michele Cosimo Santoro, Tommaso de Cunzo, Gianluca Tullo, Sara Cicchinelli, Angela Saviano, Federico Valletta, Marco Maria Pascale, Marcello Candelli, Marcello Covino and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. The use of biomarkers testing in Emergency Department.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

11 authors.

Andrea PiccioniEmergency Medicine Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5703-8737
Michele Cosimo SantoroEmergency Medicine Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Tommaso de CunzoFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7649-1115
Gianluca TulloFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Sara CicchinelliEmergency Medicine Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Angela SavianoFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2820-7180
Federico VallettaFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Marco Maria PascaleEmergency Medicine Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1355-0207
Marcello CandelliEmergency Medicine Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8443-7880
Marcello CovinoEmergency Medicine Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Francesco FranceschiEmergency Medicine Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnosis and treatment of sepsis have always been a challenge for the physician, especially in critical care setting such as emergency department (ED), and currently sepsis remains one of the major causes of mortality. Although the traditional definition of sepsis based on systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria changed in 2016, replaced by the new criteria of SEPSIS-3 based on organ failure evaluation, early identification and consequent early appropriated therapy remain the primary goal of sepsis treatment. Unfortunately, currently there is a lack of a foolproof system for making early sepsis diagnosis because conventional diagnostic tools like cultures take a long time and are often burdened with false negatives, while molecular techniques require specific equipment and have high costs. In this context, biomarkers, such as C-Reactive Protein (CRP) and Procalcitonin (PCT), are very useful tools to distinguish between normal and pathological conditions, graduate the disease severity, guide treatment, monitor therapeutic responses and predict prognosis. Among the new emerging biomarkers of sepsis, Presepsin (P-SEP) appears to be the most promising. Several studies have shown that P-SEP plasma levels increase during bacterial sepsis and decline in response to appropriate therapy, with sensitivity and specificity values comparable to those of PCT. In neonatal sepsis, P-SEP compared to PCT has been shown to be more effective in diagnosing and guiding therapy. Since in sepsis the P-SEP plasma levels increase before those of PCT and since the current methods available allow measurement of P-SEP plasma levels within 17 min, P-SEP appears a sepsis biomarker particularly suited to the emergency department and critical care.

Indexed as

Lipopolysaccharide ReceptorsSepsisBiomarkersC-Reactive ProteinEmergency Service, HospitalHumansInfant, NewbornPeptide FragmentsBiomarkersC-Reactive ProteinLipopolysaccharide ReceptorsPeptide Fragmentspresepsin protein, humancritical careemergency departmentICUPresepsinsepsis

Identifiers

PMID34440976
PMCPMC8398764

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.