Serum levels of interleukin-6 and interleukin-8 as diagnostic markers of acute pyelonephritis in children

PurposeEarly diagnosis and treatment of acute pyelonephritis in children is of special importance in order to prevent serious complications. This study was conducted to determine the diagnostic value of serum interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-8 in children with acute pyelonephritis.MethodsEighty-seven patients between 1 month to 12 years old with urinary tract infection (UTI) were divided into 2 groups based on the result of 99m-technetium dimercapto-succinic acid renal scan: acute pyelonephritis (n=37) and lower UTI (n=50) groups. White blood cell (WBC) count, neutrophil (Neutl) count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration, platelet count, and serum IL-6 and IL-8 concentrations of both groups were measured and compared.ResultsThere was a significant difference between two groups regarding WBC count, Neutl count, ESR, and CRP concentration (P<0.05). In addition, the difference between the two groups regarding serum IL-6 and IL-8 concentrations was not significant (IL-6, 60 and 35.4 pg/mL and IL-8, 404 and 617 pg/mL, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity of serum IL-6 and IL-8 for diagnosis of acute pyelonephritis were 73%, 42% and 78%, 32%, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values of serum IL-6 and IL-8 were less than those of acute phase serum reactants such as CRP.ConclusionThis study showed that there was no significant difference between acute pyelonephritis and lower UTI groups regarding serum IL-6 and IL-8 levels. Therefore, despite confirming results of previous studies, it seems that IL-6 and IL-8 are not suitable markers for differentiating between acute pyelonephritis and lower UTI

Further investigation of confirmed urinary tract infection (UTI) in children under five years: a systematic review.

Background: Further investigation of confirmed UTI in children aims to prevent renal scarring and future complications. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to determine the most effective approach to the further investigation of confirmed urinary tract infection (UTI) in children under five years of age. Results: 73 studies were included. Many studies had methodological limitations or were poorly reported. Effectiveness of further investigations: One study found that routine imaging did not lead to a reduction in recurrent UTIs or renal scarring. Diagnostic accuracy: The studies do not support the use of less invasive tests such as ultrasound as an alternative to renal scintigraphy, either to rule out infection of the upper urinary tract (LR- = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.47, 0.68) and thus to exclude patients from further investigation or to detect renal scarring (LR+ = 3.5, 95% CI: 2.5, 4.8). None of the tests investigated can accurately predict the development of renal scarring. The available evidence supports the consideration of contrast-enhanced ultrasound techniques for detecting vesico-ureteric reflux (VUR), as an alternative to micturating cystourethrography (MCUG) (LR+ = 14.1, 95% CI: 9.5, 20.8; LR- = 0.20, 95%CI: 0.13, 0.29); these techniques have the advantage of not requiring exposure to ionising radiation. Conclusion: There is no evidence to support the clinical effectiveness of routine investigation of children with confirmed UTI. Primary research on the effectiveness, in terms of improved patient outcome, of testing at all stages in the investigation of confirmed urinary tract infection is urgently required

How does study quality affect the results of a diagnostic meta-analysis?

Background: The use of systematic literature review to inform evidence based practice in diagnostics is rapidly expanding. Although the primary diagnostic literature is extensive, studies are often of low methodological quality or poorly reported. There has been no rigorously evaluated, evidence based tool to assess the methodological quality of diagnostic studies. The primary objective of this study was to determine the extent to which variations in the quality of primary studies impact the results of a diagnostic meta-analysis and whether this differs with diagnostic test type. A secondary objective was to contribute to the evaluation of QUADAS, an evidence-based tool for the assessment of quality in diagnostic accuracy studies. Methods: This study was conducted as part of large systematic review of tests used in the diagnosis and further investigation of urinary tract infection (UTI) in children. All studies included in this review were assessed using QUADAS, an evidence-based tool for the assessment of quality in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies. The impact of individual components of QUADAS on a summary measure of diagnostic accuracy was investigated using regression analysis. The review divided the diagnosis and further investigation of UTI into the following three clinical stages: diagnosis of UTI, localisation of infection, and further investigation of the UTI. Each stage used different types of diagnostic test, which were considered to involve different quality concerns. Results: Many of the studies included in our review were poorly reported. The proportion of QUADAS items fulfilled was similar for studies in different sections of the review. However, as might be expected, the individual items fulfilled differed between the three clinical stages. Regression analysis found that different items showed a strong association with test performance for the different tests evaluated. These differences were observed both within and between the three clinical stages assessed by the review. The results of regression analyses were also affected by whether or not a weighting (by sample size) was applied. Our analysis was severely limited by the completeness of reporting and the differences between the index tests evaluated and the reference standards used to confirm diagnoses in the primary studies. Few tests were evaluated by sufficient studies to allow meaningful use of meta-analytic pooling and investigation of heterogeneity. This meant that further analysis to investigate heterogeneity could only be undertaken using a subset of studies, and that the findings are open to various interpretations. Conclusion: Further work is needed to investigate the influence of methodological quality on the results of diagnostic meta-analyses. Large data sets of well-reported primary studies are needed to address this question. Without significant improvements in the completeness of reporting of primary studies, progress in this area will be limited