Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38956252›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Understanding the value of monocyte distribution width (MDW) in acutely ill medical patients presenting to the emergency department: a prospective single center evaluation.

Marcela Kralovcova, Jiri Müller, Zdenka Hajsmanova, Pavla Sigutova, Lenka Bultasova, Jana Palatova, Martin Matejovic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

7 authors.

Marcela Kralovcova *1st Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Teaching Hospital, Charles University, Prague, alej Svobody 80, 323 00, Pilsen, Czech Republic.
Jiri Müller *1st Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Teaching Hospital, Charles University, Prague, alej Svobody 80, 323 00, Pilsen, Czech Republic.
Zdenka HajsmanovaInstitute of Clinical Biochemistry and Hematology, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Teaching Hospital, Charles University, Prague, alej Svobody 80, 323 00, Pilsen, Czech Republic.
Pavla SigutovaInstitute of Clinical Biochemistry and Hematology, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Teaching Hospital, Charles University, Prague, alej Svobody 80, 323 00, Pilsen, Czech Republic.
Lenka BultasovaInstitute of Clinical Biochemistry and Hematology, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Teaching Hospital, Charles University, Prague, alej Svobody 80, 323 00, Pilsen, Czech Republic.
Jana PalatovaInstitute of Clinical Biochemistry and Hematology, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Teaching Hospital, Charles University, Prague, alej Svobody 80, 323 00, Pilsen, Czech Republic.
Martin Matejovic1st Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Teaching Hospital, Charles University, Prague, alej Svobody 80, 323 00, Pilsen, Czech Republic. matejovic@fnplzen.cz.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The monocyte distribution width (MDW) has emerged as a promising biomarker for accurate and early identification of patients with potentially life-threatening infections. Here we tested the diagnostic performance of MDW in adult patients requiring hospital admission for community-acquired infections and sepsis, evaluated sources of heterogeneity in the estimates of diagnostic accuracy, and assessed the meaning of MDW in a patient population presenting to the emergency department (ED) for acute non-infectious conditions. 1925 consecutive patients were categorized into three groups: non-infection (n = 1507), infection (n = 316), and sepsis/septic shock (n = 102). Diagnostic performance for infection or sepsis of MDW alone or in combination with components of SOFA was tested using AUC of ROC curves, sensitivity, and specificity. The relationship between MDW and different pathogens as well as the impact of non-infectious conditions on MDW values were explored. For the prediction of infection, the AUC/ROC of MDW (0.84) was nearly overlapping that of procalcitonin (0.83), and C-reactive protein (0.89). Statistical optimal cut-off value for MDW was 21 for predicting infection (sensitivity 73%, specificity 82%) and 22 for predicting sepsis (sensitivity 79%, specificity 83%). The best threshold to rule out infection was MDW ≤ 17 (NPV 96.9, 95% CI 88.3-100.0), and ≤ 18 (NPV 99.5, 95% CI 98.3-100.0) to rule out sepsis. The combination of MDW with markers of organ dysfunction (creatinine, bilirubin, platelets) substantially improved the AUC (0.96 (95% CI 0.94-0.97); specificity and sensitivity of 88% and 94%, respectively). In conclusion, MDW has a good diagnostic performance in diagnosing infection and sepsis in patients presenting in ED. Its use as an infection marker even increases when combined with other markers of organ dysfunction. Understanding the impact of interactions of non-infectious conditions and comorbidities on MDW and its diagnostic accuracy requires further elucidation.

Indexed as

BiomarkersEmergency Service, HospitalMonocytesSepsisAcute DiseaseAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCommunity-Acquired InfectionsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityBiomarkersDiagnostic biomarkersEmergency departmentInfectionMonocyte distribution widthSepsis

Identifiers

PMID38956252
PMCPMC11219845

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.