↓ Skip to main content

Effect of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic treatment on clinical outcomes in intensive care unit patients with infection and sepsis patients: a patient-level meta-analysis of randomized trials

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
235 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
178 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
295 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effect of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic treatment on clinical outcomes in intensive care unit patients with infection and sepsis patients: a patient-level meta-analysis of randomized trials
Published in
Critical Care, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13054-018-2125-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yannick Wirz, Marc A. Meier, Lila Bouadma, Charles E. Luyt, Michel Wolff, Jean Chastre, Florence Tubach, Stefan Schroeder, Vandack Nobre, Djillali Annane, Konrad Reinhart, Pierre Damas, Maarten Nijsten, Arezoo Shajiei, Dylan W. deLange, Rodrigo O. Deliberato, Carolina F. Oliveira, Yahya Shehabi, Jos A. H. van Oers, Albertus Beishuizen, Armand R. J. Girbes, Evelien de Jong, Beat Mueller, Philipp Schuetz

Abstract

The clinical utility of serum procalcitonin levels in guiding antibiotic treatment decisions in patients with sepsis remains unclear. This patient-level meta-analysis based on 11 randomized trials investigates the impact of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy on mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with infection, both overall and stratified according to sepsis definition, severity, and type of infection. For this meta-analysis focusing on procalcitonin-guided antibiotic management in critically ill patients with sepsis of any type, in February 2018 we updated the database of a previous individual patient data meta-analysis which was limited to patients with respiratory infections only. We used individual patient data from 11 trials that randomly assigned patients to receive antibiotics based on procalcitonin levels (the "procalcitonin-guided" group) or the current standard of care (the "controls"). The primary endpoint was mortality within 30 days. Secondary endpoints were duration of antibiotic treatment and length of stay. Mortality in the 2252 procalcitonin-guided patients was significantly lower compared with the 2230 control group patients (21.1% vs 23.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8 to 0.99; p = 0.03). These effects on mortality persisted in a subgroup of patients meeting the sepsis 3 definition and based on the severity of sepsis (assessed on the basis of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, occurrence of septic shock or renal failure, and need for vasopressor or ventilatory support) and on the type of infection (respiratory, urinary tract, abdominal, skin, or central nervous system), with interaction for each analysis being > 0.05. Procalcitonin guidance also facilitated earlier discontinuation of antibiotics, with a reduction in treatment duration (9.3 vs 10.4 days; adjusted coefficient -1.19 days, 95% CI -1.73 to -0.66; p <  0.001). Procalcitonin-guided antibiotic treatment in ICU patients with infection and sepsis patients results in improved survival and lower antibiotic treatment duration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 235 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 295 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 295 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 36 12%
Researcher 35 12%
Student > Postgraduate 24 8%
Student > Master 22 7%
Student > Bachelor 18 6%
Other 63 21%
Unknown 97 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 113 38%
Unspecified 13 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 3%
Other 33 11%
Unknown 104 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 165. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2023.
All research outputs
#251,053
of 25,880,422 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#114
of 6,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,191
of 343,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#1
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,880,422 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,624 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,170 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.