Plasma PCSK9 levels and sepsis severity: an early assessment in the emergency department
Clinical and Experimental Medicine, ISSN: 1591-9528, Vol: 21, Issue: 1, Page: 101-107
2021
- 13Citations
- 18Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations13
- Citation Indexes13
- 13
- CrossRef1
- Captures18
- Readers18
- 18
Article Description
The aim of the study is to evaluate the prognostic value of early PCSK9 levels in non-intubated septic patients admitted to the emergency department. This report utilized a portion of the data collected in a prospective study, with the aim of identifying reliable biomarkers for an early sepsis diagnosis. In the period November 2011–December 2016, we enrolled 268 patients, admitted to our High-Dependency Unit from the emergency department with a diagnosis of sepsis. Study-related blood samplings were performed at ED-HDU admission (T0), after 6 h (T6) and 24 h (T24). The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality rate. PCSK9 circulating levels were higher than the normal value (≤ 313 ng/mL): at T0 661 ± 405 ng/mL, at T6 687 ± 417 ng/mL, at T24 718 ± 430 ng/mL. We divided the study population based on T0 quartiles distribution (≤ 370, 370–600, 600–900 and > 900 ng/ml). At T0, patients with normal PCSK9 showed the highest mortality compared to those in higher quartiles (T0: 39%, 20%, 23% and 18%, p = 0.036). By T6, the mortality curve tended to become U-shaped, with the lowest mortality among patients in the intermediate subgroups and an adverse prognosis in the presence of normal or very high levels of PCSK9 (35%, 26%, 18% and 23%, p = 0.235). A Kaplan–Meier analysis showed an increased mortality in patients with T0 and T6 PCSK9 ≤ 313 ng/ml (T0: 55 vs. 80%, p = 0.001; T6: 62 vs. 78%, p = 0.034). In subgroups with increasing levels of PCSK9, we found the best prognosis in the intermediate subgroups and an increased mortality among patients with normal and high values.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85089958068&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10238-020-00658-9; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32869163; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10238-020-00658-9; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10238-020-00658-9; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10238-020-00658-9
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know