METHODS: Two independent reviewers conducted a comprehensive search using Ovid MEDLINE published from years 1993 to 2016 and SCOPUS published from year 1985 to 2017 to screen for relevant studies. The main inclusion criteria included adult subjects, patients with suspected or confirmed signs of infection and relevant outcomes which looked into the role of sPLA2-IIA in detecting the presence of sepsis and bacterial infection in the subjects.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Four studies met the inclusion criteria. SPLA2-IIA was found to be effective in detecting the presence of sepsis and bacterial infection in adults. The levels of serum sPLA2-IIA also correlated well with the presence of sepsis and bacterial infection.
CONCLUSION: This systematic review highlights the role of sPLA2-IIA as a reliable tool to diagnose sepsis and bacterial infection in adult patients. Nonetheless, further studies should be done in the future to provide more compelling evidence on its application in the clinical setting.
METHODS: Fifty-one adult patients with suspected bacterial sepsis on admission to the Emergency Department (ED) of a teaching hospital were included into the study. All relevant cultures and serology tests were performed. Serum levels for Group II Secretory Phospholipase A2 (sPLA2-IIA) and CD64 were subsequently analyzed.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Sepsis was confirmed in 42 patients from a total of 51 recruited subjects. Twenty-one patients had culture-confirmed bacterial infections. Both biomarkers were shown to be good in distinguishing sepsis from non-sepsis groups. CD64 and sPLA2-IIA also demonstrated a strong correlation with early sepsis diagnosis in adults. The area under the curve (AUC) of both Receiver Operating Characteristic curves showed that sPLA2-IIA was better than CD64 (AUC = 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.83-0.97 and AUC = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.82-0.99, respectively). The optimum cutoff value was 2.13μg/l for sPLA2-IIA (sensitivity = 91%, specificity = 78%) and 45 antigen bound cell (abc) for CD64 (sensitivity = 81%, specificity = 89%). In diagnosing bacterial infections, sPLA2-IIA showed superiority over CD64 (AUC = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.85-0.96, and AUC = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.93-1.00, respectively). The optimum cutoff value for bacterial infection was 5.63μg/l for sPLA2-IIA (sensitivity = 94%, specificity = 94%) and 46abc for CD64 (sensitivity = 94%, specificity = 83%).
CONCLUSIONS: sPLA2-IIA showed superior performance in sepsis and bacterial infection diagnosis compared to CD64. sPLA2-IIA appears to be an excellent biomarker for sepsis screening and for diagnosing bacterial infections, whereas CD64 could be used for screening bacterial infections. Both biomarkers either alone or in combination with other markers may assist in decision making for early antimicrobial administration. We recommend incorporating sPLA2-IIA and CD64 into the diagnostic algorithm of sepsis in ED.