Molecular diagnostics of sepsis - Where are we today?

被引:57
|
作者
Bauer, Michael [1 ]
Reinhart, Konrad [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Klinikum Jena, Klin Anasthesiol & Intensivtherapie, D-07743 Jena, Germany
关键词
Transcriptomics; Proteomics; Nucleic acid amplification; Polymerase chain reaction; Infection; Critical care; POLYMERASE-CHAIN-REACTION; TIME PCR ASSAY; ANTIBIOTIC-TREATMENT; BINDING DOMAIN; IDENTIFICATION; DNA; BACTERIAL; THERAPY; IMPACT; INFECTIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijmm.2010.04.006
中图分类号
Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 100705 ;
摘要
Rapid diagnosis of sepsis is of outstanding significance as each hour of delay of appropriate antimicrobial therapy increases mortality by 5-10%. As a result, antibiotics are started without a definitive microbial result based on clinical signs in concert with "biomarkers" with high sensitivity but a lack of specificity. Diagnostic uncertainty is compensated for by liberal use of broad spectrum antibiotics with inherent resistance as an increasing public-health problem. Blood culture reflects the current gold-standard but is positive only in approximately 20% of cases and even if positive, results are obtained too late to influence decision making. Culture-independent microbial nucleic acid amplification techniques may allow ways out of this dilemma. In addition to diagnosis of infection, "biomarkers" reflecting the host response can provide valuable information regarding prognosis, course, and response to treatment. Among available single protein markers, procalcitonin (PCT) covers these features best and a PCT-based therapeutic strategy carries potential to reduce antibiotic courses even in life-threatening infections. Recent data from transcriptomic and/or proteomic profiling would, however, indicate that marker panels derived from transcriptomic or proteomic profiling are superior to single proteins to differentiate non-infectious from sepsis-associated systemic inflammation. Multiplexed assay systems, e.g. after platform transfer from whole-genomic chips to multiplexed quantitative PCR are currently being developed with potential to improve sensitivity and specificity. Clinical utility of both, molecular tests to identify the pathogen and the ensuing host response, has still to be evaluated in prospective trials. (C) 2010 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:411 / 413
页数:3
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Current targets: where are we today?
    Pringle, M
    HEART, 2003, 89 : II10 - II12
  • [42] Dermatitis 2023: Where Are We Today?
    Gaspari, Anthony A.
    Turrentine, Jake
    DERMATITIS, 2023,
  • [43] Lung transplantation: Where are we today?
    Daly, RC
    MAYO CLINIC PROCEEDINGS, 1997, 72 (01) : 77 - 78
  • [44] MRI of Adenomyosis: Where Are We Today?
    Zhang, Michelle
    Bazot, Marc
    Tsatoumas, Maria
    Munro, Malcolm G.
    Reinhold, Caroline
    CURRENT OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY REPORTS, 2022, 11 (03) : 225 - 237
  • [45] Fifteen years on – where are we today?
    Buck, Sarah
    Structural Engineer, 2023, 101 (06): : 40 - 41
  • [46] Ocular tuberculosis: Where are we today?
    Testi, Ilaria
    Agrawal, Rupesh
    Mehta, Salil
    Basu, Soumvaya
    Quan Nguyen
    Pavesio, Carlos
    Gupta, Vishali
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2020, 68 (09) : 1808 - 1817
  • [47] Meniscal Salvage: Where We Are Today
    Anderson, Ashley B.
    Gaston, Joel
    LeClere, Lance E.
    Dickens, Jonathan F.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS, 2021, 29 (14) : 596 - 603
  • [48] MRI of Adenomyosis: Where Are We Today?
    Zhang, Michelle
    Bazot, Marc
    Tsatoumas, Maria
    Munro, Malcolm G. G.
    Reinhold, Caroline
    CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF RADIOLOGISTS JOURNAL-JOURNAL DE L ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DES RADIOLOGISTES, 2023, 74 (01): : 58 - 68
  • [49] Patellofemoral arthroplasty, where are we today?
    Lustig, Sebastien
    Magnussen, Robert A.
    Dahm, Diane L.
    Parker, David
    KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2012, 20 (07) : 1216 - 1226
  • [50] LUMBAR DISCOGRAPHY - WHERE ARE WE TODAY
    NACHEMSON, A
    SPINE, 1989, 14 (06) : 555 - 557