Background
Neonatal early-onset sepsis (EOS) is one of the main causes of global neonatal mortality and morbidity, and initiation of early antibiotic treatment is key. However, antibiotics may be harmful.
Methods
We performed a secondary analysis of results from the Neonatal Procalcitonin Intervention Study, a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled intervention study. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of serial measurements of C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), and white blood count (WBC) within different time windows to rule out culture-positive EOS (proven sepsis).
Results
We analyzed 1678 neonates with 10 899 biomarker measurements (4654 CRP, 2047 PCT, and 4198 WBC) obtained within the first 48 hours after the start of antibiotic therapy due to suspected EOS. The areas under the curve (AUC) comparing no sepsis vs proven sepsis for maximum values of CRP, PCT, and WBC within 36 hours were 0.986, 0.921, and 0.360, respectively. The AUCs for CRP and PCT increased with extended time frames up to 36 hours, but there was no further difference between start to 36 hours vs start to 48 hours. Cutoff values at 16 mg/L for CRP and 2.8 ng/L for PCT provided a sensitivity of 100% for discriminating no sepsis vs proven sepsis.
Conclusions
Normal serial CRP and PCT measurements within 36 hours after the start of empiric antibiotic therapy can exclude the presence of neonatal EOS with a high probability. The negative predictive values of CRP and PCT do not increase after 36 hours.
This study was supported by The Thrasher Foundation (9143) to [M.S.]; The NutsOhra Foundation (1101-059) to [A.M.C.v.R.]; The Sophia Foundation for Scientific research (681) to [W.v.H.]; and the Swiss National Science Foundation (200021_188466) to [I.D.]. In addition, Thermofisher provided procalcitonin kits and provided an unrestricted grant for the organization of 4 investigator meetings (2008, 2009, 2013 and 2015). The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. M.S. and I.D. contributed equally as co-first authors. A.M.C.v.R. and J.E.V. contributed equally as co-senior authors.
Backgrounds
The large, international, randomized controlled NeoPInS trial showed that procalcitonin (PCT)-guided decision making was superior to standard care in reducing the duration of antibiotic therapy and hospitalization in neonates suspected of early-onset sepsis (EOS), without increased adverse events. This study aimed to perform a cost-minimization study of the NeoPInS trial, comparing health care costs of standard care and PCT-guided decision making based on the NeoPInS algorithm, and to analyze subgroups based on country, risk category and gestational age.
Methods
Data from the NeoPInS trial in neonates born after 34 weeks of gestational age with suspected EOS in the first 72 h of life requiring antibiotic therapy were used. We performed a cost-minimization study of health care costs, comparing standard care to PCT-guided decision making.
Results
In total, 1489 neonates were included in the study, of which 754 were treated according to PCT-guided decision making and 735 received standard care. Mean health care costs of PCT-guided decision making were not significantly different from costs of standard care (€3649 vs. €3616). Considering subgroups, we found a significant reduction in health care costs of PCT-guided decision making for risk category ‘infection unlikely’ and for gestational age ≥ 37 weeks in the Netherlands, Switzerland and the Czech Republic, and for gestational age < 37 weeks in the Czech Republic.
Conclusions
Health care costs of PCT-guided decision making of term and late-preterm neonates with suspected EOS are not significantly different from costs of standard care. Significant cost reduction was found for risk category ‘infection unlikely,’ and is affected by both the price of PCT-testing and (prolonged) hospitalization due to SAEs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.