SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2025
Prognostic value of presepsin in sepsis and septic shock: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic accuracy of presepsin for sepsis in adult patients according to the criteria of sepsis-3: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Pooled it
- Development and validation of QuadraSynth ML: a novel classifier for sepsis prediction.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Integrated single-cell and bulk transcriptomic analyses reveal cDC1-centered ubiquitination dysregulation and identify UBE2F as a critical regulator in sepsis.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Presepsin, an innate immune activation biomarker, shows potential for predicting the prognosis of sepsis, but its predictive accuracy remains unclear. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate its efficiency for predicting the risk of mortality in sepsis and septic shock. Methods: Per PRISMA guidelines, four databases were searched until January 2025. Sixteen observational studies with 2,066 patients were included. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, DOR, and AUC were calculated using bivariate random-effects models. The sources of heterogeneity were explored via subgroup analyses and meta-regression. Study quality was assessed with QUADAS-2. Results: Presepsin showed moderate accuracy for predicting the risk of mortality (pooled AUC 0.80, 95% CI: 0.76-0.83). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 76% (95% CI: 69-82%) and 70% (95% CI: 59-78%), respectively. Sensitivity was notably higher in patients with septic shock (90%) compared to those with sepsis (75%), whereas specificity was comparatively lower (50% vs. 77%). Substantial heterogeneity stemmed from threshold variability and geographic differences (particularly in Korean cohorts). Prospective studies had higher sensitivity (80%) than retrospective studies (60%). No publication bias was detected. Conclusions: Presepsin is a pragmatic biomarker for predicting the risk of mortality, with enhanced sensitivity in septic shock. Presepsin may be integrated into clinical decision-making for early intervention. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42025639268.
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.