ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2022
Is There a Role of Presepsin as a Novel Biomarker in Pediatric Sepsis?
Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Presepsin as a diagnostic biomarker for sepsis across neonates, children, and adults: A meta-analysis.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2025Pooled it
- Early recognition and bundle-based management of pediatric sepsis in the emergency department: a narrative review.Translational pediatrics · 2026Review
- Presepsin as a diagnostic marker of sepsis in children and adolescents: a short critical update.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2023Review
- Presepsin: Hope in the Quest for the Holy Grail.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sepsis in children is a conundrum of diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. There is an exigent need for a novel biomarker that can serve as a clear distinguisher of sepsis from other non-septic inflammatory conditions. The role of presepsin as a biomarker of sepsis in children is still a matter of scientific inquiry. Aim and objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of presepsin for the prediction of septic shock, in children aged 1 month to 18 years. Materials and methods: This prospective cohort study was conducted in the pediatric emergency, ward, and intensive care unit of a tertiary care hospital. We enrolled all consecutive admissions aged 1 month to 18 years with a diagnosis of sepsis and compared the presepsin, procalcitonin, and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels on admission (day 1) and 72 hours later (day 4) with the clinical outcomes. Results: The mean (±SD) presepsin values in blood culture-proven sepsis patients at admission and 72 hours later were 609.77 ± 417.30 and 839 ± 748.07, respectively. The procalcitonin and presepsin levels at 72 hours in sepsis patients with shock were significantly elevated (38.2 ± 45.55 and 1129.1 ± 1133.80, respectively) as compared to those without shock (10.7 ± 25.42 and 472.5 ± 507.81, respectively), Conclusion: Elevated presepsin levels may indicate greater severity of sepsis, particularly in those with shock. However, it lacks diagnostic ability early in the disease and has limited prognostic potential in predicting mortality. How to cite this article: Khera D, Toteja N, Singh S, Singh S, Kumar P, Sharma P,
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.