Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 May 20.
Published in final edited form as: Pediatr Res. 2021 Nov 20;91(2):425–431. doi: 10.1038/s41390-021-01861-4

Noninfectious Influencers of Early-Onset Sepsis Biomarkers

Caterina Tiozzo 1, Sagori Mukhopadhyay 2,3
PMCID: PMC8818022  NIHMSID: NIHMS1756303  PMID: 34802035

Abstract

Diagnostic tests for sepsis aim to either detect the infectious agent (such as microbiological cultures) or detect host markers that commonly change in response to an infection (such as C-reactive protein). The latter category of tests has advantages compared to culture-based methods, including a quick turnaround time and in some cases lower requirements for blood samples. They also provide information on the immune response of the host, a critical determinant of clinical outcome. However, they do not always differentiate nonspecific host inflammation from true infection and can inadvertently lead to antibiotic overuse. Multiple noninfectious conditions unique to neonates in the first days after birth, can lead to inflammatory marker profiles that mimic those seen among infected infants. Our goal was to review noninfectious conditions and patient characteristics that alter host inflammatory markers commonly used for the diagnosis of early-onset sepsis. Recognizing these conditions can focus the use of biomarkers on patients most likely to benefit while avoiding scenarios that promote false positives. We highlight approaches that may improve biomarker performance and emphasize the need to use patient outcomes, in addition to conventional diagnostic performance analysis, to establish clinical utility.

INTRODUCTION:

Sepsis comprises of a systemic inflammatory response to infection with the production and release of inflammatory and immune mediators.1 Neonatal sepsis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality2 and early presentation can be nonspecific, making the diagnosis challenging. Diagnostic tests for sepsis either aim to detect the infectious agent (such as microbiological cultures) or measure the levels of markers produced by the host responding to an infection (such as C-reactive protein, CRP; procalcitonin; interleukin 6, IL-6). The latter category of ‘sepsis biomarkers’ has many advantages compared to culture-based methods: they have a quick turnaround time, in some cases require smaller blood volumes, are less affected by antibiotic exposure, unaffected by contamination, and provide information about the host’s immune response, a critical determinant of the final outcome.3 However, host immune markers do not detect the actual pathogen or provide information on antimicrobial sensitivities. Importantly, they do not always distinguish between inflammation secondary to infection and a sterile inflammatory state, which will not benefit from antibiotic treatment. The performance of a biomarker also depends on its kinetics relative to the stage of the disease4 and has been incorporated in implementation of procalcitonin use.5 CRP rises later in the disease course, suggesting a limited role for CRP in antibiotic initiation decisions.4 Despite this, single CRP values continue to be used in practice and drive both initiation and continuation of antibiotic therapy.6, 7 When used in the absence of microbiologically confirmed infection and/or appropriate clinical context, these tests can increase antibiotic overuse,8, 9 contribute to the adverse effects of antibiotic exposure10, 11 and increase microbial resistance.12

Noninfectious inflammatory conditions associated with abnormal host inflammation markers such as malignancies and rheumatologic diseases are rare in neonates, while infection is relatively common. This may contribute to the difficulty in formulating an alternate explanation for an abnormal marker. However, multiple noninfectious conditions unique to the neonatal population can lead to inflammatory marker profiles that mimic those seen among infected infants, particularly in the first few days after birth.13 The birth and early postnatal period are marked by physiological stress and complex adaptations in the newborn.14 It is also the period when the most common indication for antibiotic administration in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) occurs - empiric antibiotic administration for suspected early-onset sepsis (EOS).15 Our goal was to review noninfectious conditions and patient characteristics that alter host inflammatory markers commonly used for EOS diagnosis. To focus the scope of the review, we have limited the discussion predominantly to CRP, one of the most widely available sepsis biomarkers in clinical use, and included information on other biomarkers briefly and where available.

EOS evaluation:

Sepsis biomarkers, specifically CRP along with hematological markers, have been used for decades to assist with various aspects of EOS evaluation.16 CRP is also part of some national guidelines for EOS evaluation, recommended for use in diagnosis and in determination of length of treatment.17 However, routine use of CRP in EOS evaluations has several challenges: the reported sensitivity of CRP in EOS evaluations is variable;18 among infants with maternal perinatal risk factors CRP use is associated with increased procedures and antibiotic use with limited information on improved patient outcomes;8, 9, 19, 20 and its incremental contribution to decision making, beyond available clinical information, is debatable.6 Many of these challenges stem from noninfectious conditions that can cause elevated CRP. Procalcitonin and IL-6 are promising but less widely used sepsis biomarkers. Although these biomarkers may perform better that CRP,5 they are also influenced by noninfectious conditions and may involve similar challenges when implemented for routine use, as reported with CRP. Tables 1 and 2 summarize the noninfectious perinatal factors, patient characteristics, and conditions that are can influence common sepsis biomarkers used in EOS evaluation.

Table 1:

Perinatal factors and C-reactive protein, procalcitonin and interleukin-6 levels

Characteristic Biomarker Effect on biomarker Reference
Vaginal delivery CRP Higher levels compared to cesarean deliveries, particularly those that were elective [26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 39]
PCT No association [29]
IL-6 Higher levels compared to elective cesarean delivery [38, 36]
No effect; but significant effect of duration of labor [37]
Duration of labor CRP Higher levels with longer duration of labor [27, 28, 29]
PCT No association [29]
IL-6 Higher levels with longer duration of labor [35, 37]
Rupture of membrane CRP Higher levels with longer duration of rupture [29]
PCT Higher levels with longer duration of rupture [43, 44]
Maternal fever or signs of infection CRP Higher levels [45]
PCT No association [43]
IL-6 Higher levels [48]
Maternal intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis CRP Higher levels [29]
PCT No association [43]
Lower levels [47]
IL-6 Higher levels [46]
Maternal hypertensive disorder CRP Higher levels [49]
PCT Higher levels [46]
IL-6 No association [46]

CRP – C-reactive protein, IL-6 – interleukin-6

Table 2:

Infant characteristics and C-reactive protein, procalcitonin and interleukin-6 levels

Characteristic Biomarker Effect on biomarker Reference
Lower gestational age CRP Lower levels [13, 19, 29, 46, 50]
PCT Higher levels [29]
IL-6 Higher levels [49]
Increasing birth weight CRP Higher levels [13, 29]
PCT Higher levels [29]
Birth injury e.g. cephalhematoma and tissue trauma CRP No association [26]
Hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy CRP Higher levels [65, 66, 67]
PCT Higher levels [68]
IL-6 Higher levels [63]
Meconium aspiration CRP Higher levels [79]
PCT Higher levels [83]
IL-6 Higher levels [84]
Gastroschisis CRP Higher levels [95, 96]
IT ratio Higher levels [97]
IL-6 Higher levels [98]

CRP – C-reactive protein, IL-6 – interleukin-6

PERINATAL FACTORS AND PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS:

Birth injury:

Injury during the process of birth occurs at a rate of 1.9 per 1000 live births.21 While these injuries are reported to increase CRP levels, many reports that highlight these associations do so without formal statistical analysis, making the attribution anecdotal rather than a true association.18, 2224 Other studies have refuted such associations after more formal analysis.25, 26 In particular, Kaapa et al. reported results from a prospective study of 238 mother-infant dyads where they measured CRP levels at 24 and 72 hours after birth.26 Signs of tissue trauma including cephalhematoma, fracture clavicle, and severity of bruising were documented. They noted a significant association of vaginal delivery and vacuum extraction with elevated CRP at 24 hours. However, they found no association between the presence or severity of tissue trauma and the level of CRP.

Delivery mode and labor:

Multiple studies report higher mean/median CRP levels among infants delivered by vaginal delivery (VD) and emergency cesarean delivery (CD) compared to elective CD.2730 The association is attributed to fetal ‘stress’ with labor,31 and possibly with differences in mother-to-child colonization patterns.32 Instrumental vaginal deliveries are also associated with a higher maximum CRP value and are attributed to labor duration, rather than tissue traumatization.26, 27 Labor duration and VD are associated with higher total neutrophil levels, higher white count, and immature neutrophils that resolve after the first 24 hours.3335 Duration of labor is also associated with higher IL-6 levels.3639 Notably, delivery mode is not associated with differences in immature to total neutrophil count,34, 35 or procalcitonin levels.29.30

Variation in peak levels by delivery mode can impact the proportion of infants who meet a set cut-off threshold for the diagnosis of sepsis. Overall, the proportion of uninfected infants with the highest CRP value above the 10 mg/L cut-off varies from 3–25% of the overall cohort depending on the study,13, 19, 27, 29 and occurs more frequently in infants delivered by VD.28, 30 In a cohort study of infants admitted to the NICU and ultimately managed as uninfected, the 75th quartile for the highest CRP value at 36 hours after birth was 13.7 mg/L compared to 2.74 mg/L among those delivered by CD.30 Similarly, the 95th centile for CRP at 48 hours after birth in a cohort of uninfected term infants was 12.1 mg/L and 11.3 mg/L for infants delivered by VD and emergency CD respectively, compared to 6 mg/L for infants delivered by CD.28

Perinatal risk factors for infection:

Perinatal factors associated with the risk of EOS occur at a substantially higher incidence than actual invasive infection,40 and can alter the inflammatory response in infants independently of actual infection. In a study of serial CRP values obtained among term infants ultimately diagnosed as uninfected, almost one-fourth infants with perinatal risk factors reported a CRP value at some point above the 10 mg/L cut-off.19 Similarly, among 554 infants born to mothers with a diagnosis of chorioamnionitis, 22% were found to have a CRP value >10 mg/L and 28% had either an abnormal IT ratio or an elevated CRP at 12 hours of age.9 While only 4 infants had culture-confirmed infection, an elevated 12 hour CRP led to both prolonged antibiotics administration and increased frequency of lumbar punctures. The lack of specificity when defining chorioamnionitis41 and variation in the use of perinatal risk factors to identify at-risk infants,42 can result in variable performance of inflammatory biomarkers.

Studies have described multiple perinatal factors that affect biomarker levels. Chiesa et al. enrolled infants without evidence of maternal intraamniotic infection and with an unremarkable early postnatal course to establish reference levels among uninfected infants.29 After adjusting for gestational age, age at sampling, and infant sex, they noted a significant association of mean CRP value with duration of active labor (14.5% increase per hour), membrane rupture (0.4% increase per hour) and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (increase by 28%) compared to infants without these factors. These factors were not associated with changes in procalcitonin level in this study; however, prolonged membrane rupture has been associated with higher procalcitonin levels in other studies.43, 44 Other perinatal variables associated with elevated CRP levels, often reported as unadjusted associations, include maternal fever,45 antenatal steroid administration,29 maternal diagnosis of hypertension,46 and low Apgar scores.46 The level of procalcitonin has been variably associated with maternal antibiotic exposure with significantly lower values reported in one study47 and no change in another study.43 Maternal fever was associated with elevated maternal IL-6 levels and with elevated IL-6 in cord blood.48

Many of these factors are interrelated and only a few studies perform multivariable models to identify independent contributions. Study design and analytical approaches further limit interpretation of results. For example, while maternal antibiotic exposure was found to be associated with elevated CRP levels,29 in a different study when the analysis was restricted to patients with an indication for intrapartum prophylaxis association was found only with incomplete prophylaxis.28 Despite limitations, these studies confirm that multiple perinatal factors known to be associated with increased risk of infection are also associated with abnormal markers among uninfected infants, confounding the diagnostic performance of these biomarkers. Finally, the association of perinatal risk factors for infection with abnormal sepsis biomarkers cannot simply be attributed to undetected infection,22 as many of these studies ensured an unremarkable course for study infants for multiple weeks after birth.2729, 49

Gestational age:

Preterm gestation is associated with lower CRP,13, 19, 27, 29, 50 and higher procalcitonin29, 47 and IL-6 values.46 The lower baseline level of CRP in preterm infants may alter diagnostic performance. In a cohort of 179 term and 353 preterm infants, CRP had a lower sensitivity of 53% among preterm infants compared to 86% in term infants for diagnosing culture-confirmed EOS.13 After birth, the median CRP value increased for all gestational ages, with an earlier (27–36 hours) but lower peak value in preterm infants compared to term infants (56–70 hours).13 Procalcitonin levels (adjusted for gender and age at sampling) among uninfected infants were negatively associated with gestational age: term infants had an estimated peak value of 2.9 ng/mL (0.4–18.7) at 24 hours while preterm infants (<37 weeks) had a peak value of 6.5 ng/mL (0.9–48.4) at 21–22 hours.29 Neutrophil levels also vary by gestation age with higher peak values in term infants compared to moderately and late preterm infants and earlier peak levels compared to extremely preterm infants.33

Chronological age:

Many sepsis biomarkers increase immediately after birth, followed by a decline over 72–96 hours. This rise and fall is seen with CRP,19, 29, 30, 50 procalcitonin,29, 43, 44 IL-6,51 and neutrophil counts.33, 52 Accounting for age improves the diagnostic performance of hematologic markers,53 and has been used with procalcitonin,5 but has not been widely incorporated in the interpretation of CRP. Instead serial values are used to trend changes that incorporate information from both disease progression, if present, and physiological changes that occur in the first days after birth.16 Such an approach is often aimed at discontinuing antibiotics rather than initiation.17 However, single values are frequently used in practice despite poor performance.6

In light of the many perinatal and patient-related factors that affect baseline CRP levels, a single common threshold for all newborns may be inadequate. A dynamic threshold that accounts for gestational age and chronological age has been proposed as a means to improve performance, but is not yet widely available.18

HYPOXIC ISCHEMIC ENCEPHALOPATHY

Neonates diagnosed with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) are also at high risk for EOS. The incidence of culture-confirmed infection among infants enrolled in therapeutic hypothermia (TH) trials ranges from 3% to over 12%54 and in database studies from 1–2%.55, 56 No difference in the incidence of EOS is reported with the use of TH.54 Sending cultures and initiating empiric antibiotics is therefore common among infants with HIE.56 Stopping antibiotics once cultures are sterile is, however, more variable. In a study of more than 1,500 HIE cases, 16% infants were treated as culture-negative infection with 8 median days of antibiotics.56 The hesitation to stop antibiotics when cultures are negative persists among neonatal providers,57 and is heightened when managing children who are critically ill. Part of this hesitation comes from concerns about the reliability of blood cultures and part from a reliance on abnormal sepsis biomarkers instead.58, 59 However, the reliability of biomarkers can also be affected by many factors in HIE, not related to infection, that result in systemic inflammation.

The pathophysiology of HIE, regardless of concomitant infection, includes an inflammatory cascade with microglial activation and migration, infiltration of peripheral macrophages into the brain, and the release of cytotoxic and pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6 and IL-8 both locally in the neural circulation and in the systemic circulation.60, 61 TH, alternately, is known to reduce neuroinflammation and can alter the dynamics of common sepsis biomarkers in the absence of proven infection.6264 An elevated CRP level >10 mg/L is reported in 55–68% of infants with HIE in the absence of culture-confirmed infection and is associated with severity of HIE.6567 Besides higher values, CRP levels were slower to peak, and remained high for a longer duration among patients undergoing TH compared to normothermic historic controls with HIE, independent of perinatal infection risk factors, severity of HIE and concomitant meconium aspiration.58, 59, 67 Higher levels of procalcitonin and IL-6 levels are also reported in neonates and adults receiving TH.63, 64, 68 The cut-off values proposed for IL-6 levels in sepsis diagnosis vary from <10 pg/mL to over 300 pg/mL.69 Among 22 infants with HIE and without infection, IL-6 median levels were 198.2 pg/mL (IQR: 49.8–358.3) and 101.9 pg/mL (IQR: 24.9–562.9) on day 1 and 2, respectively.63 These values suggest that reliance on abnormal inflammatory markers in infants with HIE will promote prolonged antibiotic administration in the majority. An appropriately obtained blood culture has a high detection rate for the vast majority of organisms between ≥4 CFU/mL,70, 71 and it is unlikely that two-thirds of cases of HIE cases have actual bacteremia that was not detected in the blood culture. The wide center variation in prolonged antibiotic administration to infants suggests antibiotic overuse,56 while there is no evidence to suggest that prolonged antibiotics based on inflammatory markers improve outcomes. In addition, infants with HIE have an increased risk of drug toxicity that can be compounded by unnecessary antibiotic exposure.72

In summary, the use of immune markers to guide antibiotic therapy in infants with HIE infants is fraught with challenges. Studies are urgently needed to establish the best antibiotic use practices in this population.

MECONIUM ASPIRATION SYNDROME:

Meconium stained amniotic fluid complicates approximately 10–20% of all pregnancies and meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS) occurs in 5–10% of these newborns.7376 The pathogenesis of MAS is multifactorial and involves airway obstruction, surfactant dysfunction, pulmonary hypertension, and alveolar inflammation with resultant hypoxia and hypercapnia.77 Inflammation plays a central role in the pathogenesis of MAS, affecting both surfactant production and function, and pulmonary perfusion leading to local and ultimately systemic manifestations.78 Pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-8, IL-1B, IL-6, and TNF-a) are found in tracheal aspirates of patients affected by MAS as early as 6 hours after exposure and recapitulated in animal studies.7984 IL-8, found in meconium, plays a role in attracting neutrophils from the system circulation into alveoli spaces.82 Inflammatory markers have been proposed as markers of disease severity and therapeutic response. Among 239 infants without culture-confirmed infection, severe MAS (requiring mechanical ventilation) in the first 2 days after birth was associated with a significantly higher CRP and immature to total neutrophil ratio and a lower WBC and ANC, compared to infants with less severe MAS (no mechanical ventilation).85 Conversely, a decrease in inflammatory markers 96 hours after birth was associated with an improvement in respiratory parameters.79

The diagnosis of early-onset culture-negative infection is highly variable between units2 and is often based on a combination of inflammatory markers and clinical symptoms.7 The elevated inflammatory markers observed in MAS and the need for critical care in these infants can potentially lead to prolonged use. However, there is no established benefit from such use of antibiotics. Three trials conducted in low-middle-income settings have compared antibiotic administration in infants with MAS: two trials compared 7 days of antibiotics and one compared 3 days of empiric antibiotics with no antibiotics.8688 Individually and in a meta-analysis, no differences were observed in the incidence of proven infection, mortality, or duration of hospital admission.89, 90

Although no difference in the incidence of bacteremia is reported between infants born with and without meconium-stained amniotic fluid, the baseline rate of infection in some of these studies is high.91 Therefore, we focus on sending appropriate microbiological tests and stopping antibiotics when they are negative rather than not initiating antibiotics at all. The association between inflammatory indices in the early phase of the disease and the severity of MAS raises the question whether the inflammatory markers should be more rigorously evaluated as predictors of the disease course, which can inform therapeutic planning, such as the decision to transport to a center with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation facilities.

SURGICAL CONDITIONS AFFECTING EARLY LIFE BIOMARKER LEVELS

Surgery is associated with metabolic stress and cytokine release that can raise many common inflammatory biomarkers.92, 93 Surgical interventions soon after birth may involve major procedures such as correction of congenital anomalies or minor elective procedures such as circumcision. Inflammatory biomarker levels in response to circumcision during birth hospitalization have not been well described. In a study of 115 children aged 1–13 years undergoing circumcision with different modes of anesthesia, there was no difference in levels before and after the procedure.94 It is unclear whether CRP and other inflammatory biomarkers are equally unaffected during neonatal circumcision.

In conditions that require major surgery soon after birth, evaluation for infection is often done, but antibiotics administered may target the ongoing risk of infection rather than EOS. A condition with baseline elevation of inflammatory markers is gastroschisis. Elevated CRP, I:T ratio, and IL-6 levels are reported both before and after surgery in infants with gastroschisis compared to control infants and infants with other anomalies such as omphalocoel.95, 96 These high levels are thought to reflect inflammation that is intrinsic to gastroschisis and are not considered reliable markers for EOS.96, 97 Nevertheless, clinical reports show that when obtained in gastroschisis patients, abnormal biomarker levels result in more invasive procedures such as lumbar punctures95 and longer courses of antibiotics.97 The more common use of inflammatory markers is to assess for postoperative infection. Studies vary in detecting changes in biomarker levels after neonatal surgery.96, 98 The ability of a particular test to discriminate a postsurgical inflammatory response from infection is also variable.99101 In most cases higher cut-offs and close attention to the temporal relation with surgery are required for optimal test performance98, 99, 101 As with many of the other conditions triggering sepsis evaluation after birth, it is unclear whether the use of biomarkers aids decision making and improves patient outcomes.

DISCUSSION:

In summary, multiple noninfectious factors present among infants admitted to the NICU affect the median values of common sepsis biomarkers and the proportion of infants who meet the threshold for a ‘positive’ test. Beyond EOS evaluation, other investigators have also highlighted sensitivity issues when using CRP in late-onset infection evaluations. In a recent meta-analysis of 22 studies using a preset cutoff of 5–10 mg/L the pooled sensitivity was 0.62 (95%CI, 0.50–0.72).102 The authors concluded that CRP would not contribute to improving sepsis diagnosis and may increase unnecessary medicalization. Along these lines, the deimplementation of routine CRP use in EOS evaluation significantly reduced antibiotic use without reported adverse effects in a single-center study.103 One may say, at this point, why don’t we just cut our losses with CRP and move on? And while that may be one approach, there remain unresolved issues. First, there is a gap in sepsis diagnosis that could be improved with a fast turnaround test. Second, the use of CRP is still quite prevalent.74 Finally, many of the issues identified for CRP and other common biomarkers may also be relevant for the next novel inflammatory biomarker that is introduced into practice.

There are several ways to improve test performance. One is to recognize the noninfectious conditions that influence test results and incorporate them into the interpretation of sepsis biomarker results. For example, leukopenia in a growth-restricted infant delivered to a mother with preeclampsia prior to the onset of labor or rupture is likely not related to EOS and its use for antibiotic initiation during after birth could be avoided.104 Another characteristic infrequently addressed is the changing pre-test probability of infection in different clinical scenarios. A biomarker is expected to be valuable when the pre-test probability of infection in the patient being tested is neither too high (almost all clinicians would treat regardless of test results) nor too low (no clinician would treat regardless of test results). Studies that include patients with extreme pre-test probabilities do not capture the information a clinician desires in real-world practice. A similar idea can be extended to the pre-test probability of inflammation in the absence of infection. Testing should be avoided in scenarios where the probability of sterile inflammation is too high for a biomarker to discriminate additional infection.

Another approach could be to incorporate adjusted receiver operator characteristic curves105, 106 that account for covariates, such as gestational or chronological age, associated with the distribution of a biomarker value among uninfected infants. The traditional approach of using biomarkers for the diagnosis of sepsis with one cut-off point, regardless of patient age, characteristics or prior probability of infection of the patient, is potentially inadequate. Covariate adjustment, a cornerstone in bias reduction in association studies, is infrequently considered in the analysis of neonatal sepsis biomarker performance.18 Variables that are associated with both biomarker value and the risk of infection, such as duration of membrane rupture and labor, qualify as confounders. Not accounting for these variables overestimates the performance of diagnostic markers.105 In contrast, accounting for variables that are associated with the marker but not necessarily with EOS, such as delivery mode or sampling time, can improve the accuracy of the marker. While combining biomarkers may improve performance, accounting for covariate distribution in uninfected infants that influence individual markers and/or outcomes will still be required.

The end point for sepsis biomarker studies is often time to infection diagnosis and improved identification of infection cases.107 Given the many concerns with the culture-based gold standard of infection diagnosis, it may be more relevant to focus on measures of patient outcome, such as mortality, and measures of morbidity, such as length of hospitalization and readmissions. Rigorous analysis is needed to understand which sepsis biomarkers change decision making beyond that provided by history and clinical exam, and whether incorporating the test into existing risk prediction models, such as the sepsis risk calculator, has incremental value with demonstrable health benefits.

A final thought is whether we have used all information that these common tests provide us with. Inflammation itself is recognized as a key mediator of multiple adverse outcomes among infants admitted to the NICU. Yet, the clinical focus when using common inflammatory biomarkers like CRP is primarily on antibiotic administration. A CRP value of >100 mg/L was reported in 4% of NICU admissions (258 infants); of the 106 infants identified in the first 3 days, most were of term gestation and 81% were considered not infected.108 One wonders if such a heightened inflammatory response is not relevant to the health of these infants. Are there practices in neonatal care beyond antibiotics, that can be informed with these values? Does evidence of early inflammation impact ultimate outcomes and, if so, can that be manipulated in favor of the patient? Sepsis biomarkers provide information about the state of the host. Whether there is infection or not, an abnormal value may have health implications, as has been demonstrated in other settings.109111 Using these widely available markers to further our understanding of the newborn’s immunological state may provide important avenues for improving outcomes.

What does this article add to the existing literature?

  1. Most reviews of neonatal sepsis biomarkers focus on detection of true positives and highlight the clinical utility in doing so. However, understanding the drivers of false positive test results is equally relevant in optimizing use.

  2. We review common patient characteristics and non-infectious conditions that alter host inflammatory markers commonly used for neonatal sepsis diagnosis.

  3. We discuss approaches that may improve biomarker performance and emphasize the need to use patient outcomes, in addition to conventional diagnostic performance analysis, to establish clinical utility.

Funding:

Dr. Mukhopadhyay receives funding from Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development from the National Institutes of Health grant (K23HD088753).

Footnotes

Conflict of interest disclosure statement: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Singer M, et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315:801–810. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Mukhopadhyay S, et al. Impact of Early-Onset Sepsis and Antibiotic Use on Death or Survival with Neurodevelopmental Impairment at 2 Years of Age among Extremely Preterm Infants. J Pediatr. 2020;221:39–46. e5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Wynn J, Cornell TT, Wong HR, Shanley TP, Wheeler DS. The host response to sepsis and developmental impact. Pediatrics. 2010;125:1031–1041. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Eschborn S, Weitkamp JH. Procalcitonin versus C-reactive protein: review of kinetics and performance for diagnosis of neonatal sepsis. J Perinatol. 2019;39:893–903. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Stocker M, et al. Procalcitonin-guided decision making for duration of antibiotic therapy in neonates with suspected early-onset sepsis: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial (NeoPIns). Lancet. 2017;390:871–881. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Nabulsi M, Hani A, Karam M. Impact of C-reactive protein test results on evidence-based decision-making in cases of bacterial infection. BMC Pediatr. 2012;12:140–140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Ayrapetyan M, Carola D, Lakshminrusimha S, Bhandari V, Aghai ZH. Infants Born to Mothers with Clinical Chorioamnionitis: A Cross-Sectional Survey on the Use of Early-Onset Sepsis Risk Calculator and Prolonged Use of Antibiotics. Amer J Perinatol. 2019;36:428. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Mukherjee A, Davidson L, Anguvaa L, Duffy DA, Kennea N. NICE neonatal early onset sepsis guidance: greater consistency, but more investigations, and greater length of stay. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2015;100:248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kiser C, Nawab U, McKenna K, Aghai ZH. Role of guidelines on length of therapy in chorioamnionitis and neonatal sepsis. Pediatrics. 2014;133:992–998. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ting JY, Roberts A. Association of early life antibiotics and health outcomes: Evidence from clinical studies. Semin Perinatol. 2020;44:151322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Wang T, et al. Early life antibiotic exposure and host health: Role of the microbiota-immune interaction. Semin Perinatol. 2020;44:151323. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion (DHQP). Biggest Threats and Data: 2019 AR Threats Report. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/biggest-threats.html?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fdrugresistance%2Fbiggest_threats.html.
  • 13.Hofer N, Müller W, Resch B. Non-infectious conditions and gestational age influence C-reactive protein values in newborns during the first 3 days of life. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2011;49:297–302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Hillman NH, Kallapur SG, Jobe AH. Physiology of transition from intrauterine to extrauterine life. Clin Perinatol. 2012;39:769–783. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Cantey JB, Wozniak PS, Sánchez PJ. Prospective surveillance of antibiotic use in the neonatal intensive care unit: results from the SCOUT study. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2015;34:267–272. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Benitz WE. Adjunct laboratory tests in the diagnosis of early-onset neonatal sepsis. Clin Perinatol. 2010;37:421–438. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Neonatal infection: antibiotics for prevention and treatment (NG195). Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng195. Accessed 7/19/, 2021. [PubMed]
  • 18.Hofer N, Zacharias E, Müller W, Resch B. An update on the use of C-reactive protein in early-onset neonatal sepsis: current insights and new tasks. Neonatology. 2012;102:25–36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Macallister K, Smith-Collins A, Gillet H, Hamilton L, Davis J. Serial C-Reactive Protein Measurements in Newborn Infants without Evidence of Early-Onset Infection. Neonatology. 2019;116:85–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Sturgeon JP, Zanetti B, Lindo D. C-Reactive Protein (CRP) levels in neonatal meningitis in England: an analysis of national variations in CRP cut-offs for lumbar puncture. BMC Pediatr. 2018;18:380–x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Dumpa VKR. Birth trauma. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Emmerson AJ. C-reactive protein and the newborn infant. Arch Dis Child Educ Pract Ed. 2011;96:e1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Berger C, Uehlinger J, Ghelfi D, Blau N, Fanconi S. Comparison of C-reactive protein and white blood cell count with differential in neonates at risk for septicaemia. European journal of pediatrics. 1995;154:138–144. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Pourcyrous M, Bada HS, Korones SB, Baselski V, Wong SP. Significance of serial C-reactive protein responses in neonatal infection and other disorders. Pediatrics. 1993;92:431–435. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Wagle S, Grauaug A, Kohan R, Evans SF. C-reactive protein as a diagnostic tool of sepsis in very immature babies. J Paediatr Child Health. 1994;30:40–44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kääpä P, Koistinen E. Maternal and neonatal C-reactive protein after interventions during delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1993;72:543–546. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Mjelle AB, Guthe HJT, Reigstad H, Bjørke-Monsen AL, Markestad T. Serum concentrations of C-reactive protein in healthy term-born Norwegian infants 48–72 hours after birth. Acta Paediatr. 2019;108:849–854. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Perrone S, et al. C reactive protein in healthy term newborns during the first 48 hours of life. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2018;103:F163–F166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Chiesa C, et al. C reactive protein and procalcitonin: reference intervals for preterm and term newborns during the early neonatal period. Clin Chim Acta. 2011;412:1053–1059. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Ishibashi M, Takemura Y, Ishida H, Watanabe K, Kawai T. C-reactive protein kinetics in newborns: application of a high-sensitivity analytic method in its determination. Clin Chem. 2002;48:1103–1106. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Bellieni CV, et al. C-reactive protein: a marker of neonatal stress? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:612–615. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Thompson AL, Houck KM, Jahnke JR. Pathways linking caesarean delivery to early health in a dual burden context: Immune development and the gut microbiome in infants and children from Galápagos, Ecuador. Am J Hum Biol. 2019:e23219. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Schmutz N, Henry E, Jopling J, Christensen RD. Expected ranges for blood neutrophil concentrations of neonates: the Manroe and Mouzinho charts revisited. J Perinatol. 2008;28:275–281. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Hasan R, Inoue S, Banerjee A. Higher white blood cell counts and band forms in newborns delivered vaginally compared with those delivered by cesarean section. Am J Clin Pathol. 1993;100:116–118. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Chirico G, Gasparoni A, Ciardelli L, Martinotti L, Rondini G. Leukocyte counts in relation to the method of delivery during the first five days of life. Biol Neonate. 1999;75:294–299. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Chan CJ, Summers KL, Chan NG, Hardy DB, Richardson BS. Cytokines in umbilical cord blood and the impact of labor events in low-risk term pregnancies. Early Hum Dev. 2013;89:1005–1010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Barug D, et al. Reference values for interleukin-6 and interleukin-8 in cord blood of healthy term neonates and their association with stress-related perinatal factors. PLoS One. 2014;9:e114109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Jokic M, et al. Fetal distress increases interleukin-6 and interleukin-8 and decreases tumour necrosis factor-alpha cord blood levels in noninfected full-term neonates. BJOG. 2000;107:420–425. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Malamitsi-Puchner A, et al. The influence of the mode of delivery on circulating cytokine concentrations in the perinatal period. Early Hum Dev. 2005;81:387–392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Mukhopadhyay S, Eichenwald EC, Puopolo KM. Neonatal early-onset sepsis evaluations among well-appearing infants: projected impact of changes in CDC GBS guidelines. Journal of perinatology. 2012;33:198–205. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Higgins RD, et al. Evaluation and Management of Women and Newborns With a Maternal Diagnosis of Chorioamnionitis: Summary of a Workshop. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127:426–436. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Mukhopadhyay S, et al. Variation in Sepsis Evaluation Across a National Network of Nurseries. Pediatrics. 2017;139: 10.1542/peds.2016-2845. Epub 2017 Feb 8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Turner D, et al. Procalcitonin in preterm infants during the first few days of life: introducing an age related nomogram. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2006;91:283. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Assumma M, et al. Serum procalcitonin concentrations in term delivering mothers and their healthy offspring: a longitudinal study. Clin Chem. 2000;46:1583–1587. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Mathai E, et al. Is C-reactive protein level useful in differentiating infected from uninfected neonates among those at risk of infection? Indian Pediatr. 2004;41:895–900. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Chiesa C, et al. C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and procalcitonin in the immediate postnatal period: influence of illness severity, risk status, antenatal and perinatal complications, and infection. Clin Chem. 2003;49:60–68. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Lee J, Bang YH, Lee EH, Choi BM, Hong YS. The influencing factors on procalcitonin values in newborns with noninfectious conditions during the first week of life. Korean J Pediatr. 2017;60:10–16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Goetzl L, Evans T, Rivers J, Suresh MS, Lieberman E. Elevated maternal and fetal serum interleukin-6 levels are associated with epidural fever. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:834–838. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Chiesa C, et al. Serial measurements of C-reactive protein and interleukin-6 in the immediate postnatal period: reference intervals and analysis of maternal and perinatal confounders. Clin Chem. 2001;47:1016–1022. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Rallis D, et al. C-reactive protein in infants with no evidence of early-onset sepsis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2021:1–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Panero A, et al. Interleukin 6 in neonates with early and late onset infection. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1997;16:370–375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Henry E, Christensen RD. Reference Intervals in Neonatal Hematology. Clin Perinatol. 2015;42:483–497. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Newman TB, Puopolo KM, Wi S, Draper D, Escobar GJ. Interpreting complete blood counts soon after birth in newborns at risk for sepsis. Pediatrics. 2010;126:903–909. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Jacobs SE, et al. Cooling for newborns with hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2013:CD003311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Hakobyan M, et al. Outcome of Infants with Therapeutic Hypothermia after Perinatal Asphyxia and Early-Onset Sepsis. Neonatology. 2019;115:127–133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Rao R, et al. Antimicrobial therapy utilization in neonates with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE): a report from the Children’s Hospital Neonatal Database (CHND). J Perinatol. 2020;40:70–78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Cantey JB, Baird SD. Ending the Culture of Culture-Negative Sepsis in the Neonatal ICU. Pediatrics. 2017;140:e20170044. doi: 10.1542/peds.2017-0044. Epub 2017 Sep 19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Okumuş N, et al. Effect of therapeutic hypothermia on C-reactive protein levels in patients with perinatal asphyxia. Am J Perinatol. 2015;32:667–674. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Chakkarapani E, Davis J, Thoresen M. Therapeutic hypothermia delays the C-reactive protein response and suppresses white blood cell and platelet count in infants with neonatal encephalopathy. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014;99:458. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Martín-Ancel A, et al. Interleukin-6 in the cerebrospinal fluid after perinatal asphyxia is related to early and late neurological manifestations. Pediatrics. 1997;100:789–794. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Jenkins DD, et al. Serum cytokines in a clinical trial of hypothermia for neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2012;32:1888–1896. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Polderman KH. Mechanisms of action, physiological effects, and complications of hypothermia. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:186. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Saito J, et al. Temporal Relationship between Serum Levels of Interleukin-6 and C-Reactive Protein in Therapeutic Hypothermia for Neonatal Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy. Am J Perinatol. 2016;33:1401–1406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Schuetz P, et al. Serum procalcitonin, C-reactive protein and white blood cell levels following hypothermia after cardiac arrest: a retrospective cohort study. Eur J Clin Invest. 2010;40:376–381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Rath S, Narasimhan R, Lumsden C. C-reactive protein (CRP) responses in neonates with hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014;99:F172. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Cilla A, et al. Effect of Hypothermia and Severity of Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy in the Levels of C-Reactive Protein during the First 120 Hours of Life. Am J Perinatol. 2020;37:722–730. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Muniraman H, et al. Biomarkers of hepatic injury and function in neonatal hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy and with therapeutic hypothermia. Eur J Pediatr. 2017;176:1295–1303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Munteanu AI, Manea AM, Jinca CM, Boia M. Basic biochemical and hematological parameters in perinatal asphyxia and their correlation with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy. Exp Ther Med. 2021;21:259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Sun B, et al. A meta-analysis of interleukin-6 as a valid and accurate index in diagnosing early neonatal sepsis. Int Wound J. 2019;16:527–533. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Schelonka RL, et al. Volume of blood required to detect common neonatal pathogens. J Pediatr. 1996;129:275–278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Lancaster DP, Friedman DF, Chiotos K, Sullivan KV. Blood Volume Required for Detection of Low Levels and Ultralow Levels of Organisms Responsible for Neonatal Bacteremia by Use of Bactec Peds Plus/F, Plus Aerobic/F Medium, and the BD Bactec FX System: an In Vitro Study. J Clin Microbiol. 2015;53:3609–3613. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Frymoyer A, Meng L, Bonifacio SL, Verotta D, Guglielmo BJ. Gentamicin pharmacokinetics and dosing in neonates with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy receiving hypothermia. Pharmacotherapy. 2013;33:718–726. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Tran SH, Caughey AB, Musci TJ. Meconium-stained amniotic fluid is associated with puerperal infections. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189:746–750. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Oyelese Y, et al. Meconium-stained amniotic fluid across gestation and neonatal acid-base status. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108:345–349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Ward C, Caughey AB. The risk of meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS) increases with gestational age at term. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020:1–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Lee J, et al. Meconium aspiration syndrome: a role for fetal systemic inflammation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214:366.e1–366.e9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Tyler DC, Murphy J, Cheney FW. Mechanical and chemical damage to lung tissue caused by meconium aspiration. Pediatrics. 1978;62:454–459. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Jones CA, et al. Undetectable interleukin (IL)-10 and persistent IL-8 expression early in hyaline membrane disease: a possible developmental basis for the predisposition to chronic lung inflammation in preterm newborns. Pediatr Res. 1996;39:966–975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Cayabyab RG, Kwong K, Jones C, Minoo P, Durand M. Lung inflammation and pulmonary function in infants with meconium aspiration syndrome. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2007;42:898–905. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Davey AM, Becker JD, Davis JM. Meconium aspiration syndrome: physiological and inflammatory changes in a newborn piglet model. Pediatr Pulmonol. 1993;16:101–108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.de Beaufort AJ, et al. Meconium is a source of pro-inflammatory substances and can induce cytokine production in cultured A549 epithelial cells. Pediatr Res. 2003;54:491–495. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.de Beaufort AJ, Pelikan DM, Elferink JG, Berger HM. Effect of interleukin 8 in meconium on in-vitro neutrophil chemotaxis. Lancet. 1998;352:102–105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Ochi F, et al. Procalcitonin as a marker of respiratory disorder in neonates. Pediatr Int. 2015;57:263–268. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Okazaki K, et al. Serum cytokine and chemokine profiles in neonates with meconium aspiration syndrome. Pediatrics. 2008;121:748. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Hofer N, Jank K, Strenger V, Pansy J, Resch B. Inflammatory indices in meconium aspiration syndrome. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2016;51:601–606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Basu S, Kumar A, Bhatia BD. Role of antibiotics in meconium aspiration syndrome. Ann Trop Paediatr. 2007;27:107–113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Lin HC, Su BH, Tsai CH, Lin TW, Yeh TF. Role of antibiotics in management of non-ventilated cases of meconium aspiration syndrome without risk factors for infection. Biol Neonate. 2005;87:51–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Shankar V, Paul VK, Deorari AK, Singh M. Do neonates with meconium aspiration syndrome require antibiotics? Indian J Pediatr. 1995;62:327–331. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Kelly LE, Shivananda S, Murthy P, Srinivasjois R, Shah PS. Antibiotics for neonates born through meconium-stained amniotic fluid. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;6:CD006183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Natarajan CK, Sankar MJ, Jain K, Agarwal R, Paul VK. Surfactant therapy and antibiotics in neonates with meconium aspiration syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Perinatol. 2016;36 Suppl 1:49. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Wiswell TE, Henley MA. Intratracheal suctioning, systemic infection, and the meconium aspiration syndrome. Pediatrics. 1992;89:203–206. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Caglayan F, Caglayan O, Gunel E, Sahin TK. Monitoring the metabolic response to major surgery in neonates. Int J Surg Investig. 2000;2:309–312. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Günel E, Cağlayan O, Cağlayan F, Sahin TK. Acute-phase changes in children recovering from minor surgery. Pediatr Surg Int. 1998;14:199–201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Buyukkocak U, et al. Anaesthesia and the acute phase protein response in children undergoing circumcision. Mediators Inflamm. 2005;2005:312–315. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Ramadan G, Rex D, Okoye B, Kennea NL. Early high C-reactive protein in infants with open abdominal wall defects does not predict sepsis or adverse outcome. Acta Paediatr. 2010;99:126–130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Bölke E, et al. Different acute-phase response in newborns and infants undergoing surgery. Pediatr Res. 2002;51:333–338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Williams SL, et al. Evaluation of Early Onset Sepsis, Complete Blood Count, and Antibiotic Use in Gastroschisis. Am J Perinatol. 2018;35:385–389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Pavcnik-Arnol M, Bonac B, Groselj-Grenc M, Derganc M. Changes in serum procalcitonin, interleukin 6, interleukin 8 and C-reactive protein in neonates after surgery. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2010;20:262–266. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Aryafar A, et al. Procalcitonin Concentration Measured Within the First Days of Cardiac Surgery Is Predictive of Postoperative Infections in Neonates: A Case-Control Study. Pediatr Cardiol. 2019;40:1289–1295. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Arkader R, et al. Procalcitonin does discriminate between sepsis and systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Arch Dis Child. 2006;91:117–120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101.Neunhoeffer F, et al. Serum Concentrations of Interleukin-6, Procalcitonin, and C-Reactive Protein: Discrimination of Septical Complications and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome after Pediatric Surgery. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2016;26:180–185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Brown JVE, Meader N, Wright K, Cleminson J, McGuire W. Assessment of C-Reactive Protein Diagnostic Test Accuracy for Late-Onset Infection in Newborn Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 2020;174:260–268. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103.Singh N, Gray JE. Antibiotic stewardship in NICU: De-implementing routine CRP to reduce antibiotic usage in neonates at risk for early-onset sepsis. J Perinatol. 2021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Garber SJ, et al. Delivery-based criteria for empiric antibiotic administration among preterm infants. J Perinatol. 2020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Janes H, Pepe MS. Adjusting for covariates in studies of diagnostic, screening, or prognostic markers: an old concept in a new setting. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;168:89–97. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Liu D, Zhou XH. ROC analysis in biomarker combination with covariate adjustment. Acad Radiol. 2013;20:874–882. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Reinhart K, Meisner M, Brunkhorst FM. Markers for sepsis diagnosis: what is useful? Crit Care Clin. 2006;22:503–x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Keane M, Fallon R, Riordan A, Shaw B. Markedly raised levels of C-reactive protein are associated with culture-proven sepsis or necrotising enterocolitis in extremely preterm neonates. Acta Paediatr. 2015;104:289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109.Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, et al. C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, and cardiovascular disease prediction. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1310–1320. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110.Thompson AL. Caesarean delivery, immune function and inflammation in early life among Ecuadorian infants and young children. J Dev Orig Health Dis. 2019;10:555–562. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Jiang NM, et al. Early Life Inflammation and Neurodevelopmental Outcome in Bangladeshi Infants Growing Up in Adversity. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017;97:974–979. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES