PDF(1235 KB)
中性粒细胞CD64和降钙素原联合检测在新生儿细菌感染早期诊断中的价值
秦道建, 唐宗生, 陈淑丽, 许雪梅, 茅双根, 张士发
中国当代儿科杂志 ›› 2017, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (8) : 872-876.
PDF(1235 KB)
PDF(1235 KB)
中性粒细胞CD64和降钙素原联合检测在新生儿细菌感染早期诊断中的价值
Value of combined determination of neutrophil CD64 and procalcitonin in early diagnosis of neonatal bacterial infection
目的 探讨血清中性粒细胞CD64和降钙素原（PCT）联合检测在新生儿细菌感染早期诊断中的价值。方法 将37例细菌感染新生儿依据出院诊断分为败血症组（n=15）和一般感染组（非败血症患儿； n=22）；并选取同期住院非感染新生儿作为对照组（n=21）。各组新生儿均于入院后即刻抽取静脉血，采用流式细胞术检测血清中性粒细胞CD64表达，化学发光法和免疫透射比浊法分别检测血清PCT及CRP水平。结果 败血症组血清中性粒细胞CD64、PCT、CRP水平高于对照组（P < 0.01）；一般感染组中性粒细胞CD64水平高于对照组（P < 0.01）；败血症组血清PCT、CRP水平高于一般感染组（P < 0.01）。中性粒细胞CD64、PCT、CRP诊断细菌感染的曲线下面积分别为0.818、0.818、0.704，均低于中性粒细胞CD64与PCT联合诊断细菌感染的曲线下面积（0.926）。中性粒细胞CD64与PCT联合检测在早期诊断新生儿感染的灵敏度和准确度分别为97.29%和89.65%，较CRP联合中性粒细胞CD64或PCT检测的灵敏度和准确度均高，较中性粒细胞CD64、PCT及CRP单项检测的灵敏度和准确度更高。结论 中性粒细胞CD64、PCT联合检测能显著提高新生儿细菌感染诊断的灵敏度及准确度，有助于早期识别细菌感染。
Objective To investigate the value of combined determination of neutrophil CD64 and procalcitonin (PCT) in the early diagnosis of neonatal bacterial infection.Methods According to discharge diagnosis, 37 neonates with bacterial infection were divided into sepsis (n =15) and ordinary infection (non-sepsis) groups (n =22). Twenty-one neonates without infection who were hospitalized during the same period of time were enrolled as the control group. Venous blood samples were collected immediately after admission. Flow cytometry was used to measure the serum level of neutrophil CD64. Chemiluminescence and immune transmission turbidimetry were used to measure the serum levels of PCT and CRP respectively.Results The sepsis group had higher serum levels of neutrophil CD64, PCT, and CRP than the control group (P < 0.01), the ordinary infection group had a higher serum level of neutrophil CD64 than the control group (P < 0.01), and the sepsis group had higher serum levels of PCT and CRP than the ordinary infection group (P < 0.01). The areas under the ROC curve (AUC) of neutrophil CD64, PCT, and CRP in diagnosing bacterial infection were 0.818, 0.818, and 0.704 respectively, and the AUC of combined neutrophil CD64 and PCT was 0.926. A combination of neutrophil CD64 and PCT had a sensitivity of 97.29% and an accuracy of 89.65% in the early diagnosis of neonatal bacterial infection.The sensitivity and accuracy were higher than those of a combination of CRP and neutrophil CD64 or PCT as well as neutrophil CD64, PCT, or CRP alone for the early diagnosis of neonatal bacterial infection.Conclusions The combined determination of neutrophil CD64 and PCT can improve the sensitivity and accuracy in the diagnosis of neonatal bacterial infection, which helps with early identification of bacterial infection.
CD64 / 降钙素原 / 细菌感染 / 败血症 / 诊断 / 新生儿
CD64 / Procalcitonin / Bacterial infection / Sepsis / Diagnosis / Neonate
[1] Fitchett EJ, Seale AC, Vergnano S, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology for Newborn Infection (STROBE-NI): an extension of the STROBE statement for neonatal infection research[J]. Lancet Infect Dis, 2016, 16 (10): e202-e213.
[2] Kipfmueller F, Schneider J, Prusseit J, et al. Role of neutrophil CD64 index as a screening marker for late-onset sepsis in very low birth weight infants[J]. PLoS One, 2015, 10 (4): e0124634.
[3] Delanghe JR, Speeckaert MM. Translational research and biomarkers in neonatal sepsis[J]. Clin Chim Acta, 2015, 451 (Pt A): 46-64.
[4] Bhandari V. Effective biomarkers for diagnosis of neonatal sepsis[J]. J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc, 2014, 3 (3): 234-245.
[5] Yang AP, Liu J, Yue LH, et al. Neutrophil CD64 combined with PCT, CRP and WBC improves the sensitivity for the early diagnosis of neonatal sepsis[J]. Clin Chem Lab Med, 2016, 54 (2): 345-351.
[6] 王政力, 余加林. 新生儿败血症诊断新进展[J]. 中国当代儿科杂志, 2013, 15 (3): 236-241.
[7] 赵军育, 姜毅, 侯新琳. 降钙素原在诊断早期新生儿感染中的意义[J]. 实用儿科临床杂志, 2012, 27 (2): 122-124.
[8] Simonsen KA, Anderson-Berry AL, Delair SF, et al. Early-onset neonatal sepsis[J]. Clin Microbiol Rev, 2014, 27 (1): 21-47.
[9] Lynema S, Marmer D, Hall ES, et al. Neutrophil CD64 as a diagnostic marker of sepsis: impact on neonatal care[J]. Am J Perinatol, 2015, 32 (4): 331-336.
[10] Hoffmann JJ. Neutrophil CD64 as a sepsis biomarker[J]. Biochem Med (Zagreb), 2011, 21 (3): 282-290.
[11] Kayange N, Kamugisha E, Mwizamholya DL, et al. Predictors of positive blood culture and deaths among neonates with suspected neonatal sepsis in a tertiary hospital, Mwanza-Tanzania[J]. BMC Pediatr, 2010, 10: 39.
[12] Wang K, Bhandari V, Chepustanova S, et al. Which biomarkers reveal neonatal sepsis?[J]. PLoS One, 2013, 8 (12): e82700.
[13] Matsuki T, Watanabe K, Tanaka R. Genus- and species-specific PCR primers for the detection and identification of bifidobacteria[J]. Curr Issues Intest Microbiol, 2003, 4 (2): 61-69.
[14] 刘朝军, 沈定霞. 16SrDNA序列测定在细菌鉴定中的应用[J]. 军医进修学院学报, 2011, 32 (7): 774-776.
[15] de Jong E, de Lange DW, Beishuizen A, et al. Neutrophil CD64 expression as a longitudinal biomarker for severe disease and acute infection in critically ill patients[J]. Int J Lab Hematol, 2016, 38 (5): 576-584.
[16] Pradhan R, Jain P, Paria A, et al. Ratio of neutrophilic CD64 and monocytic HLA-DR: A novel parameter in diagnosis and prognostication of neonatal sepsis[J]. Cytometry B Clin Cytom, 2016, 90 (3): 295-302.
[17] Ten OJ, Netea MG, Kullberg BJ. Utility of immune response-derived biomarkers in the differential diagnosis of inflammatory disorders[J]. J Infect, 2016, 72 (1): 1-18.
[18] Naess A, Nilssen SS, Mo R, et al. Role of neutrophil to lymphocyte and monocyte to lymphocyte ratios in the diagnosis of bacterial infection in patients with fever[J]. Infection, 2017, 45 (3): 299-307.
[19] 蔡群, 徐美玉. 中性粒细胞CD64在儿童社区获得性肺炎诊断中的价值[J]. 中国当代儿科杂志, 2012, 14 (11): 819-822.
[20] Cortegiani A, Russotto V, Montalto F, et al. Neutrophil CD64 as a marker of infection in patients admitted to the emergency department with acute respiratory failure[J]. Open Access Emerg Med, 2014, 6: 37-44.
[21] 徐茜茜, 陈灵芝, 徐海滨, 等. CD64在新生儿感染诊断中的价值[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2006, 24 (3): 185-187.
[22] Sandquist M, Wong HR. Biomarkers of sepsis and their potential value in diagnosis, prognosis and treatment[J]. Expert Rev Clin Immunol, 2014, 10 (10): 1349-1356.
[23] Miyake F, Ishii M, Hoshina T, et al. Analysis of the physiological variation in neutrophil CD64 expression during the early neonatal period[J]. Am J Perinatol, 2016, 33 (14): 1377-1381.
[24] Shi J, Tang J, Chen D. Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of neutrophil CD64 for neonatal sepsis[J]. Ital J Pediatr, 2016, 42 (1): 57.
[25] 余加林, 吴仕孝. 败血症[M]//邵肖梅, 叶鸿瑁, 丘小汕. 实用新生儿学. 第4版. 北京:人民卫生出版社, 2011: 340-347.
[26] El Shimi MS, Abou Shady NM, Hamed GM, et al. Significance of neutrophilic CD64 as an early marker for detection of neonatal sepsis and prediction of disease outcome[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2017, 30 (14): 1709-1714.
[27] van Veen M, Nijman RG, Zijlstra M, et al. Neutrophil CD64 expression is not a useful biomarker for detecting serious bacterial infections in febrile children at the emergency department[J]. Infect Dis (Lond), 2016, 48 (5): 331-337.
