4.4 Article

The role of fecal calprotectin and lactoferrin in the diagnosis of necrotizing enterocolitis

期刊

PEDIATRIC CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
卷 13, 期 4, 页码 452-454

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e3182388ae9

关键词

calprotectin; fecal; lactoferrin; necrotizing enterocolitis

资金

  1. Inonu University Scientific Research Projects Unit [2007/15]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Early detection of necrotizing enterocolitis can improve the prognosis, however, there is not a reliable laboratory test to detect either newborns at risk for necrotizing enterocolitis development or those at early stages of the disease. Since fecal lactoferrin and fecal calprotectin are inflammatory markers of gastrointestinal diseases, it was hypothesized that both these biomarkers could be successfully used in the diagnosis of necrotizing enterocolitis. Methods: In a prospective study, fecal lactoferrin and fecal calprotectin concentrations of 14 newborns with necrotizing enterocolitis and consecutively admitted 40 healthy preterm, and 23 healthy full-term newborns were measured with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay technique. Results: Mean fecal lactoferrin and fecal calprotectin were not different between preterm and full-term newborns (p = .235 and p = .845, respectively), or those who were diagnosed with necrotizing enterocolitis or not (p = .545 and p = .968, respectively). Prevalence of necrotizing enterocolitis was 1.51% (14 of 2734). Stage of the disease did not have a statistical effect on mean levels (p = .694 and p = .267, respectively). Mean fecal lactoferrin and fecal calprotectin levels were not different in the case of breast-feeding (p = .623 and p = .792, respectively). Conclusion: Neither fecal lactoferrin nor fecal calprotectin has a role in the identification of necrotizing enterocolitis, especially in early stages of the disease. Further studies on wider necrotizing enterocolitis series are needed for a more definite conclusion. (Pediatr Crit Care Med 2012; 13:452-454)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据