Clinical Chemistry
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Clinical Chemistry 49: 21-22, 2003; 10.1373/49.1.21
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow A correction has been published
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Escobar, G. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Escobar, G. J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine and Test Utilization
Right arrow Proteomics and Protein Markers
Right arrow Endocrinology and Metabolism
(Clinical Chemistry. 2003;49:21-22.)
© 2003 American Association for Clinical Chemistry, Inc.


Editorials

Effect of the Systemic Inflammatory Response on Biochemical Markers of Neonatal Bacterial Infection: A Fresh Look at Old Confounders

Gabriel J. Escobar1

1 Perinatal Research Unit, Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program, Division of Research, 2000 Broadway, 2nd Floor, Oakland, CA 94612, Fax 510-891-3508, E-mail gabriel.escobar@kp.org

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

"Rule out sepsis" remains a persistently frustrating diagnosis in neonatology. It a common diagnosis: in the US, where 400 000 to 600 000 newborns are evaluated with a complete blood count (CBC) and blood culture each year, it is probably the second most common neonatal diagnosis after "well baby" (1)(2)(3). No one disputes that babies with clear-cut clinical signs of infection should receive systemic antibiotic therapy. However, beyond these two facts, and despite individual nursery protocols somehow keeping the problem—more or less—under control, multiple disagreements exist. Discord is most pronounced in two areas. The first is what test or combinations of tests permit one to diagnose sepsis early enough and reliably enough. After all, by the time a newborn shows clear-cut signs of infection, it is usually pretty late in the game (1). The second concerns newborns with maternal risk factors who are initially asymptomatic: what constitute appropriate criteria for initiating antibiotic therapy in such infants (4)(5)(6)?

Faced with these questions, many investigators have attempted to find the diagnostic equivalent of a "magic bullet", and a voluminous literature now exists advocating individual diagnostic tests or combinations of diagnostic tests, as well as combinations of a diagnostic test or tests with risk factors and/or clinical signs. All of these studies have yielded conflicting results, and the fact that these studies keep appearing in our journals highlights the fact that satisfactory solutions remain to be found.

In this issue, Chiesa et al. . . . [Full Text of this Article]




The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:


Home page
Clin. Chem.Home page
C. Chiesa, A. Panero, J. F. Osborn, A. F. Simonetti, and L. Pacifico
Diagnosis of Neonatal Sepsis: A Clinical and Laboratory Challenge
Clin. Chem., February 1, 2004; 50(2): 279 - 287.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.