Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 649

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Procalcitonin to initiate or discontinue antibiotics in acute respiratory tract infections

Open access
Schuetz, Philipp, Wirz, Yannick, Sager, Ramon, Christ-Crain, Mirjam, Stolz, Daiana, Tamm, Michael, Bouadma, Lila, Luyt, Charles E, Wolff, Michel, Chastre, Jean, Tubach, Florence, Kristoffersen, Kristina B, Burkhardt, Olaf, Welte, Tobias, Schroeder, Stefan, Nobre, Vandack, Wei, Long, Bucher, Heiner C C, Bhatnagar, Neera, Annane, Djillali, Reinhart, Konrad, Branche, Angela, Damas, Pierre, Nijsten, Maarten, de Lange, Dylan W, Deliberato, Rodrigo O, Lima, Stella SS, Maravić-Stojković, Vera, Verduri, Alessia, Cao, Bin, Shehabi, Yahya, Beishuizen, Albertus, Jensen, Jens-Ulrik S, Corti, Caspar, Van Oers, Jos A, Falsey, Ann R, de Jong, Evelien, Oliveira, Carolina F, Beghe, Bianca, Briel, Matthias, Mueller, Beat·2017·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory infections (ARIs) comprise of a large and heterogeneous group of infections including bacterial, viral, and other aetiologies. In recent years, procalcitonin (PCT), a blood marker for bacterial infections, has emerged as a promising tool to improve decisions about antibiotic therapy (PCT-guided antibiotic therapy). Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated the feasibility of using procalcitonin for starting and stopping antibiotics in different patient populations with ARIs and different settings ranging from primary care settings to emergency departments, hospital wards, and intensive care units. However, the effect of using procalcitonin on clinical outcomes is unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review and individual participant data meta-analysis first published in 2012 designed to look at the safety of PCT-guided antibiotic stewardship. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review based on individual participant data was to assess the safety and efficacy of using procalcitonin for starting or stopping antibiotics over a large range of patients with varying severity of ARIs and from different clinical settings. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, and Embase, in February 2017, to identify suitable trials. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov to identify ongoing trials in April 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs of adult participants with ARIs who received an antibiotic treatment either based on a procalcitonin algorithm (PCT-guided antibiotic stewardship algorithm) or usual care. We excluded trials if they focused exclusively on children or used procalcitonin for a purpose other than to guide initiation and duration of antibiotic treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two teams of review authors independently evaluated the methodology and extracted data from primary studies. The primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and treatment failure at 30 days, for which definitions were harmonised among trials. Secondary endpoints were antibiotic use, antibiotic-related side effects, and length of hospital stay. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using multivariable hierarchical logistic regression adjusted for age, gender, and clinical diagnosis using a fixed-effect model. The different trials were added as random-effects into the model. We conducted sensitivity analyses stratified by clinical setting and type of ARI. We also performed an aggregate data meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: From 32 eligible RCTs including 18 new trials for this 2017 update, we obtained individual participant data from 26 trials including 6708 participants, which we included in the main individual participant data meta-analysis. We did not obtain individual participant data for four trials, and two trials did not include people with confirmed ARIs. According to GRADE, the quality of the evidence was high for the outcomes mortality and antibiotic exposure, and quality was moderate for the outcomes treatment failure and antibiotic-related side effects.Primary endpoints: there were 286 deaths in 3336 procalcitonin-guided participants (8.6%) compared to 336 in 3372 controls (10.0%), resulting in a significantly lower mortality associated with procalcitonin-guided therapy (adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.99, P = 0.037). We could not estimate mortality in primary care trials because only one death was reported in a control group participant. Treatment failure was not significantly lower in procalcitonin-guided participants (23.0% versus 24.9% in the control group, adjusted OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.01, P = 0.068). Results were similar among subgroups by clinical setting and type of respiratory infection, with no evidence for effect modification (P for interaction > 0.05). Secondary endpoints: procalcitonin guidance was associated with a 2.4-day reduction in antibiotic exposure (5.7 versus 8.1 days, 95% CI -2.71 to -2.15, P < 0.001) and lower risk of antibiotic-related side effects (16.3% versus 22.1%, adjusted OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.82, P < 0.001). Length of hospital stay and intensive care unit stay were similar in both groups. A sensitivity aggregate-data analysis based on all 32 eligible trials showed similar results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This updated meta-analysis of individual participant data from 12 countries shows that the use of procalcitonin to guide initiation and duration of antibiotic treatment results in lower risks of mortality, lower antibiotic consumption, and lower risk for antibiotic-related side effects. Results were similar for different clinical settings and types of ARIs, thus supporting the use of procalcitonin in the context of antibiotic stewardship in people with ARIs. Future high-quality research is needed to confirm the results in immunosuppressed patients and pat

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd007498.pub3

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 649

Metadata

Authors
Schuetz, P., Wirz, Y., Sager, R., Christ-Crain, M., Stolz, D., Tamm, M., Bouadma, L., Luyt, C. E., Wolff, M., Chastre, J., Tubach, F., Kristoffersen, K. B., Burkhardt, O., Welte, T., Schroeder, S., Nobre, V., Wei, L., Bucher, H. C. C., Bhatnagar, N., Annane, D., Reinhart, K., Branche, A., Damas, P., Nijsten, M., de Lange, D. W., Deliberato, R. O., Lima, S. S., Maravić-Stojković, V., Verduri, A., Cao, B., Shehabi, Y., Beishuizen, A., Jensen, J.-U. S., Corti, C., Van Oers, J. A., Falsey, A. R., de Jong, E., Oliveira, C. F., Beghe, B., Briel, M., & Mueller, B.
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-10-12
Volume
2019
Issue
5
Pages
CD007498-CD007498
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W2033541705
Cited by
649
References
12
FWCI
43.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Procalcitonin to initiate or discontinue antibiotics in acute respiratory tract infections. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd007498.pub3
The paper
Schuetz, P., Wirz, Y., Sager, R., Christ-Crain, M., Stolz, D., Tamm, M., Bouadma, L., Luyt, C. E., Wolff, M., Chastre, J., Tubach, F., Kristoffersen, K. B., Burkhardt, O., Welte, T., Schroeder, S., Nobre, V., Wei, L., Bucher, H. C. C., Bhatnagar, N., . . . Mueller, B. (2017). Procalcitonin to initiate or discontinue antibiotics in acute respiratory tract infections. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd007498.pub3

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.