Advertisement

Accuracy of CD64 expression on neutrophils and monocytes in bacterial infection diagnosis at pediatric intensive care admission

  • Alberto García-SalidoEmail author
  • A. Martínez de Azagra-Garde
  • M. A. García-Teresa
  • G. De Lama Caro-Patón
  • M. Iglesias-Bouzas
  • M. Nieto-Moro
  • I. Leoz-Gordillo
  • C. Niño-Taravilla
  • M. Sierra-Colomina
  • G. J. Melen
  • M. Ramírez-Orellana
  • A. Serrano-González
Original Article
  • 28 Downloads

Abstract

The CD64 receptor has been described as an interesting bacterial infection biomarker. Its expression has not been studied in previously healthy children admitted to pediatric critical care unit (PICU). Our objective was firstly to describe the CD64 expression and secondly study its diagnostic accuracy to discriminate bacterial versus viral infection in this children. We made a prospective double-blind observational study (March 2016–February 2018). A flow cytometry (FC) was done from peripheral blood at PICU admission. We studied the percentage of CD64+ neutrophils and the CD64 mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) on neutrophils (nCD64) and monocytes (mCD64). Statistical analyses were performed with non-parametric tests (p < 0.05). Twenty children in the bacterial infection group (BIG) and 25 in the viral infection group (VIG). Children in BIG showed higher values of CD64+ neutrophils (p = 0.000), nCD64 (p = 0.001), and mCD64 (p = 0.003). In addition, CD64+ neutrophils and nCD64 expression have positive correlation with procalcitonin and C reactive protein. The nCD64 area under the curve (AUC) was 0.83 (p = 0.000). The %CD64+ neutrophils showed an AUC of 0.828 (p = 0.000). The mCD64 AUC was 0.83 (p = 0.003). The nCD64 and %CD64+ neutrophils also showed higher combined values of sensitivity (74%) and specificity (90%) than all classical biomarkers.In our series CD64 expression allows to discriminate between bacterial and viral infection at PICU admission. Future studies should confirm this and be focused in the study of CD64 correlation with clinical data and its utility as an evolution biomarker in critical care children.

Keywords

Viral infection Bacterial infection Critical care Flow cytometry CD64 Sensitivity Specificity 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to all the medical doctors, nurses, and nurse assistants working in our PICU. We extend our appreciation to all the children who participated in this study, as well as their caregivers for their patience and understanding.

Funding

Funding was provided by “Fundación de Investigación Biomédico”, Hospital Infantil Universitario Niño Jesús.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee for clinical research, Hospital Infantil Universitario Niño Jesús.

Informed consent

The blood samples were extracted after parents or legal guardians consent at admission in pediatric critical care unit. Also, the children were recruited by this procedure.

Supplementary material

10096_2019_3497_FIG3_ESM.png (1.4 mb)
Fig. S1

Three flow cytometry dot-plots representing CD64 expression on leukocytes surface. The leukocytes are gated by side scatter characteristics (SSC) and CD64 expression. The positive CD64 region is indicated by a striped arrow. A: healthy control, no expression on surface in neutrophils and lymphocytes. The lymphocytes do not express CD64 so they act as an internal negative control in each dot-plot chart. Monocytes are always positive to CD64 and its mean fluorescence intense (MFI) is 5556 and change in case of infection. B: children with viral infection. The lymphocytes are negative to CD64. The neutrophils has move to the right and 83% of them have CD64 expression on surface. The MFI of CD64 in neutrophils is 1800 and the MFI on monocytes is 8638. C: children with bacterial infection. The lymphocytes are negative to CD64. The CD64 expression on neutrophils is increased. Now 100% of neutrophils are CD64 positive and MFI is 9551. The CD64 MFI in monocytes is 15,556. (PNG 1396 kb)

10096_2019_3497_MOESM2_ESM.tif (1.7 mb)
High Resolution Image (TIF 1777 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Boeddha NP, Schlapbach LJ, Driessen GJ, Herberg JA, Rivero-Calle I, Cebey-Lopez M, Klobassa DS et al (2018) Mortality and morbidity in community-acquired sepsis in European pediatric intensive care units: a prospective cohort study from the European childhood life-threatening infectious disease study (EUCLIDS). Crit Care 22:143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cid J, Aguinaco R, Sanchez R, Garcia-Pardo G, Llorente A (2010) Neutrophil CD64 expression as marker of bacterial infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Infect 60:313–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dai J, Jiang W, Min Z, Yang J, Tan Y, Ma T, Ge Z (2017) Neutrophil CD64 as a diagnostic marker for neonatal sepsis: meta-analysis. Adv Clin Exp Med 26:327–332Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Daix T, Guerin E, Tavernier E, Mercier E, Gissot V, Herault O, Mira JP et al (2018) Multicentric standardized flow cytometry routine assessment of patients with Sepsis to predict clinical worsening. In: ChestGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davis BH, Olsen SH, Ahmad E, Bigelow NC (2006) Neutrophil CD64 is an improved indicator of infection or sepsis in emergency department patients. Arch Pathol Lab Med 130:654–661Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Jong E, de Lange DW, Beishuizen A, van de Ven PM, Girbes AR, Huisman A (2016) Neutrophil CD64 expression as a longitudinal biomarker for severe disease and acute infection in critically ill patients. Int J Lab Hematol 38:576–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Efe Iris N, Yildirmak T, Gedik H, Simsek F, Aydin D, Demirel N, Yokus O (2017) Could neutrophil CD64 expression be used as a diagnostic parameter of bacteremia in patients with febrile neutropenia? Turk J Haematol 34:167–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fontela PS, O'Donnell S, Papenburg J (2018) Can biomarkers improve the rational use of antibiotics? Curr Opin Infect Dis 31:347–352Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garcia-Salido A, Melen G, Gomez-Pina V, Onoro-Otero G, Serrano-Gonzalez A, Casado-Flores J, Ramirez M (2018) Circulating soluble RAGE and cell surface RAGE on peripheral blood mononuclear cells in healthy children. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab 31:649–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garcia-Salido A, Serrano-Gonzalez A, Casado-Flores J, Sierra-Colomina M, de Azagra-Garde AM, Garcia-Teresa MA, Melen GJ, Ramirez-Orellana M (2018) CD64 on monocytes and granulocytes in severe acute bronchiolitis: pilot study on its usefulness as a bacterial infection biomarker. J Leukoc Biol 103:965–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garcia-Salido A, Serrano-Gonzalez A, de Azagra-Garde AM, Nieto-Moro M, Melen GJ, Ramirez-Orellana M (2017) Flow cytometry analysis of CD64, CD18, CD11a and CD11b in four children with Bordetella pertussis infection and admitted to critical care: New biomarkers? Medicina intensivaGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jamsa J, Ala-Kokko T, Huotari V, Ohtonen P, Savolainen ER, Syrjala H (2018) Neutrophil CD64, C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin in the identification of sepsis in the ICU - post-test probabilities. J Crit Care 43:139–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Larsen FF, Petersen JA (2017) Novel biomarkers for sepsis: a narrative review. Eur J Intern Med 45:46–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li S, Huang X, Chen Z, Zhong H, Peng Q, Deng Y, Qin X, Zhao J (2013) Neutrophil CD64 expression as a biomarker in the early diagnosis of bacterial infection: a meta-analysis. Int J Infect Dis 17:e12–e23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liu Y, Hou JH, Li Q, Chen KJ, Wang SN, Wang JM (2016) Biomarkers for diagnosis of sepsis in patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. SpringerPlus 5:2091Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Muzlovic I, Ihan A, Stubljar D (2016) CD64 index on neutrophils can diagnose sepsis and predict 30-day survival in subjects after ventilator-associated pneumonia. J Infect Dev Countries 10:260–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nancy Hilda J, Das S (2018) Neutrophil CD64, TLR2 and TLR4 expression increases but phagocytic potential decreases during tuberculosis. Tuberculosis 111:135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ng PC, Li K, Wong RP, Chui KM, Wong E, Fok TF (2002) Neutrophil CD64 expression: a sensitive diagnostic marker for late-onset nosocomial infection in very low birthweight infants. Pediatr Res 51:296–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rogina P, Stubljar D, Lejko Zupanc T, Ihan A, Skvarc M (2017) Neutrophil CD64 molecule expression can predict bloodstream infection in septic shock patients. Clin Chem Lab Med 55:e130–e132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rudensky B, Sirota G, Erlichman M, Yinnon AM, Schlesinger Y (2008) Neutrophil CD64 expression as a diagnostic marker of bacterial infection in febrile children presenting to a hospital emergency department. Pediatr Emerg Care 24:745–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sack U (2017) CD64 expression by neutrophil granulocytes. Cytometry B Clin Cytom 92:189–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sheneef A, Mohamed T, Boraey NF, Mohammed MA (2017) Neutrophil CD11b, CD64 and Lipocalin-2: early diagnostic markers of neonatal Sepsis. Egypt J Immunol 24:29–36Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shores DR, Everett AD (2018) Children as biomarker orphans: Progress in the field of pediatric biomarkers. J Pediatr 193(14–20):e31Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Umlauf VN, Dreschers S, Orlikowsky TW (2013) Flow cytometry in the detection of neonatal sepsis. Int J Pediatr 2013:763191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Venet F, Lepape A, Monneret G (2011) Clinical review: flow cytometry perspectives in the ICU - from diagnosis of infection to monitoring of injury-induced immune dysfunctions. Crit Care 15:231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yang AP, Liu J, Yue LH, Wang HQ, Yang WJ, Yang GH (2016) Neutrophil CD64 combined with PCT, CRP and WBC improves the sensitivity for the early diagnosis of neonatal sepsis. Clin Chem Lab Med 54:345–351Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zinsly Sampaio Camargo T, Marra AR, Bacal NS, Casaroto E, Pinto LM, Pasternak J, Victor ED, Dos Santos OF, Edmond MB (2016) Evaluation of two methods for determination of CD64 as a diagnostic marker of infection in critically ill adults. Biomed Res Int 2016:6593232CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alberto García-Salido
    • 1
    Email author
  • A. Martínez de Azagra-Garde
    • 1
  • M. A. García-Teresa
    • 1
  • G. De Lama Caro-Patón
    • 1
  • M. Iglesias-Bouzas
    • 1
  • M. Nieto-Moro
    • 1
  • I. Leoz-Gordillo
    • 1
  • C. Niño-Taravilla
    • 1
  • M. Sierra-Colomina
    • 1
  • G. J. Melen
    • 2
  • M. Ramírez-Orellana
    • 2
  • A. Serrano-González
    • 1
  1. 1.Pediatric Critical Care UnitHospital Infantil Universitario Niño JesúsMadridSpain
  2. 2.Department of Pediatric Hematology and OncologyHospital Infantil Universitario Niño JesúsMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations