Jeandrot A, Richard J-L, Combescure C, Jourdan N, Finge S, Rodier M, Corbeau P, Sotto A, Lavigne J-P
Department of Bacteriology, University Hospital Caremeau, Nimes, France.
Diabetologia. 2008 Feb;51(2):347-52. doi: 10.1007/s00125-007-0840-8. Epub 2007 Oct 13.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Infection of diabetic foot ulcers is common; at early stages it is difficult to differentiate between non-infected ulcers (or those colonised with normal flora) and ulcers infected with virulent bacteria that lead to deterioration. This pilot study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of inflammatory markers as an aid to making this distinction.
We included 93 diabetic patients who had an episode of foot ulcer and had not received antibiotics during the 6 months preceding the study. Ulcers were classified as infected or uninfected, according to the Infectious Diseases Society of America-International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot classification. Diabetic patients without ulcers (n=102) served as controls. C-reactive protein (CRP), orosomucoid, haptoglobin and procalcitonin were measured together with white blood cell and neutrophil counts. The diagnostic performance of each marker, in combination (using logistic regression) or alone, was assessed.
As a single marker, CRP was the most informative for differentiating grade 1 from grade 2 ulcers (sensitivity 0.727, specificity 1.000, positive predictive value 1.000, negative predictive value 0.793) with an optimal cut-off value of 17 mg/l. In contrast, white blood cell and neutrophil counts were not predictive. The most relevant combination derived from the logistic regression was the association of CRP and procalcitonin (AUC 0.947), which resulted in a significantly more effective determination of ulcer grades, as shown by comparing receiver operating characteristic curves.
CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Measurement of only two inflammatory markers, CRP and procalcitonin, might be of value for distinguishing between infected and non-infected foot ulcers in subgroups of diabetic patients, to help ensure the appropriate allocation of antibiotic treatment. Nevertheless, external validation of the diagnostic value of procalcitonin and CRP in diabetic foot ulcers is needed before routine use can be recommended.
目的/假设:糖尿病足溃疡感染很常见;在早期阶段,很难区分未感染的溃疡(或那些被正常菌群定植的溃疡)和被导致病情恶化的致病细菌感染的溃疡。这项初步研究旨在评估炎症标志物在辅助进行这种区分方面的诊断准确性。
我们纳入了93例患有足部溃疡且在研究前6个月内未接受过抗生素治疗的糖尿病患者。根据美国传染病学会-糖尿病足国际工作组的分类,将溃疡分为感染性或非感染性。没有溃疡的糖尿病患者(n = 102)作为对照。同时测量C反应蛋白(CRP)、血清类黏蛋白、触珠蛋白和降钙素原以及白细胞和中性粒细胞计数。评估每个标志物单独或联合使用(采用逻辑回归)时的诊断性能。
作为单一标志物,CRP在区分1级和2级溃疡方面信息最丰富(敏感性0.727,特异性1.000,阳性预测值1.000,阴性预测值0.793),最佳临界值为17mg/l。相比之下,白细胞和中性粒细胞计数没有预测价值。逻辑回归得出的最相关组合是CRP和降钙素原的联合(曲线下面积0.947),通过比较受试者工作特征曲线可知,这能更有效地确定溃疡分级。
结论/解读:仅测量两种炎症标志物CRP和降钙素原,可能有助于区分糖尿病患者亚组中感染性和非感染性足部溃疡,从而确保抗生素治疗的合理分配。然而,在推荐常规使用之前,需要对降钙素原和CRP在糖尿病足溃疡中的诊断价值进行外部验证。