Published online Mar 9, 2024. doi: 10.5492/wjccm.v13.i1.88540
Peer-review started: October 1, 2023
First decision: November 23, 2023
Revised: December 4, 2023
Accepted: January 2, 2024
Article in press: January 2, 2024
Published online: March 9, 2024
Processing time: 156 Days and 1.2 Hours
Thrombocytopenia is common in patients with sepsis and septic shock.
To analyse the decrease in the number of platelets for predicting bloodstream infection in patients with sepsis and septic shock in the intensive care unit.
A retrospective analysis of patients admitted with sepsis and septic shock in Xingtai People Hospital was revisited. Patient population characteristics and laboratory data were collected for analysis.
The study group consisted of 85 (39%) inpatients with bloodstream infection, and the control group consisted of 133 (61%) with negative results or contamination. The percentage decline in platelet counts (PPCs) in patients positive for pathogens [57.1 (41.3-74.6)] was distinctly higher than that in the control group [18.2 (5.1–43.1)] (P < 0.001), whereas the PPCs were not significantly different among those with gram-positive bacteraemia, gram-negative bacteraemia, and fungal infection. Using receiver operating characteristic curves, the area under the curve of the platelet drop rate was 0.839 (95%CI: 0.783-0.895).
The percentage decline in platelet counts is sensitive in predicting bloodstream infection in patients with sepsis and septic shock. However, it cannot identify gram-positive bacteraemia, gram-negative bacteraemia, and fungal infection.
Core Tip: Thrombocytopenia is common in sepsis and septic shock, but there are few reports on the diagnostic value of thrombocytopenia in bloodstream infection. Our results found that the rate of platelet drop but not the lowest platelet count has a high predictive ability for bloodstream infection in patients with sepsis or septic shock. However, it cannot identify gram-positive bacteraemia, gram-negative bacteraemia, and fungal infection. Dynamic detection of platelet counts appears to be an early alert for the clinician in identifying the site of infection and evaluating serious infection. This will guide the performance of blood cultures and the use of empirical antibiotics.