Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Critical Care 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Septicemia | Research

Monocyte distribution width (MDW) performance as an early sepsis indicator in the emergency department: comparison with CRP and procalcitonin in a multicenter international European prospective study

Authors: Pierre Hausfater, Neus Robert Boter, Cristian Morales Indiano, Marta Cancella de Abreu, Adria Mendoza Marin, Julie Pernet, Dolores Quesada, Iris Castro, Diana Careaga, Michel Arock, Liliana Tejidor, Laetitia Velly

Published in: Critical Care | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Early sepsis diagnosis has emerged as one of the main challenges in the emergency room. Measurement of sepsis biomarkers is largely used in current practice to improve the diagnosis accuracy. Monocyte distribution width (MDW) is a recent new sepsis biomarker, available as part of the complete blood count with differential. The objective was to evaluate the performance of MDW for the detection of sepsis in the emergency department (ED) and to compare to procalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP).

Methods

Subjects whose initial evaluation included a complete blood count were enrolled consecutively in 2 EDs in France and Spain and categorized per Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 criteria. The performance of MDW for sepsis detection was compared to that of procalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP).

Results

A total of 1,517 patients were analyzed: 837 men and 680 women, mean age 61 ± 19 years, 260 (17.1%) categorized as Sepsis-2 and 144 patients (9.5%) as Sepsis-3. The AUCs [95% confidence interval] for the diagnosis of Sepsis-2 were 0.81 [0.78–0.84] and 0.86 [0.84–0.88] for MDW and MDW combined with WBC, respectively. For Sepsis-3, MDW performance was 0.82 [0.79–0.85]. The performance of MDW combined with WBC for Sepsis-2 in a subgroup of patients with low sepsis pretest probability was 0.90 [0.84–0.95]. The AUC for sepsis detection using MDW combined with WBC was similar to CRP alone (0.85 [0.83–0.87]) and exceeded that of PCT. Combining the biomarkers did not improve the AUC. Compared to normal MDW, abnormal MDW increased the odds of Sepsis-2 by factor of 5.5 [4.2–7.1, 95% CI] and Sepsis-3 by 7.6 [5.1–11.3, 95% CI].

Conclusions

MDW in combination with WBC has the diagnostic accuracy to detect sepsis, particularly when assessed in patients with lower pretest sepsis probability. We suggest the use of MDW as a systematic screening test, used together with qSOFA score to improve the accuracy of sepsis diagnosis in the emergency department.
Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03588325).
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
14.
go back to reference The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure 4. The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure 4.
17.
go back to reference Herrendörfer G, Johnson NL, Kotz S, Kemp AW. Univariate discrete distributions. 2nd ed. Wiley; 1992. Herrendörfer G, Johnson NL, Kotz S, Kemp AW. Univariate discrete distributions. 2nd ed. Wiley; 1992.
18.
go back to reference DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44(3):837–45.CrossRef DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44(3):837–45.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Monocyte distribution width (MDW) performance as an early sepsis indicator in the emergency department: comparison with CRP and procalcitonin in a multicenter international European prospective study
Authors
Pierre Hausfater
Neus Robert Boter
Cristian Morales Indiano
Marta Cancella de Abreu
Adria Mendoza Marin
Julie Pernet
Dolores Quesada
Iris Castro
Diana Careaga
Michel Arock
Liliana Tejidor
Laetitia Velly
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Critical Care / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1364-8535
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-021-03622-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Critical Care 1/2021 Go to the issue