Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39290622›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2024

Are C-reactive protein and procalcitonin safe and useful for antimicrobial stewardship purposes in patients with COVID-19? A scoping review.

Anita Williams, Ernestina Repetto, Ishmael Lebbie, Mohamad Khalife, Tomas Oestergaard Jensen

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Anita WilliamsWesfarmers Centre for Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, Perth, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5295-8451
Ernestina RepettoInfectious Diseases Department, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), CHU Saint-Pierre, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1219-8566
Ishmael LebbieKenema Project, Médecins Sans Frontières, Operational Centre Brussels, Kenema City, Sierra Leone.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-7439-3621
Mohamad KhalifeMiddle East Medical Unit, Médecins Sans Frontières, Beirut, Lebanon.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1482-9958
Tomas Oestergaard JensenMedical Department, Médecins Sans Frontières, Operational Center Paris, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0398-4431

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The primary objectives of this study were to assess the usefulness of C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) in the diagnosis of bacterial co-infections in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and if their incorporation in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs is safe and useful, stratified by severity of disease as level of care, intensive care unit (ICU) or non-ICU. Our secondary objectives were to identify cut-off values for antibiotic decision-making and identify reported results from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Design: A scoping review of published literature, adhering to the PRISMA statement for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The last search was performed in January 2024. Results: Fifty-nine studies were included in this scoping review: 20 studies reporting predictive values and/or sensitivity/specificity results for PCT, 8 reporting clear objectives on AMS, and 3 studies from LMICs. Conclusion: In the context of non-ICU hospitalized COVID-19 patients in high-income countries, a PCT value below 0.25 mg/L can be a useful tool to rule out bacterial co-infection. The wide range of reported negative predictive values suggests that PCT should be interpreted in the context of other clinical findings. Our results do not support the use of CRP in the same manner as PCT. There is a clear need for more studies in LMICs.

Identifiers

PMID39290622
PMCPMC11406566

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.