Delta neutrophil index (DNI) as a novel diagnostic and prognostic marker of infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 388 Downloads
Delta neutrophil index (DNI) representing the number of immature granulocytes is an emerging marker used in diagnosis of infections and prediction of mortality in infected patients. The present study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of DNI as a predictive and prognostic factor in infected patients.
We performed a PubMed search on January 1st, 2017 and identified studies that evaluated DNI as either a predictive or prognostic factor in infected patients. Studies with appropriate information to construct 2 × 2 contingency tables were extracted. We calculated pooled sensitivity and specificity. Meta-analysis of the multivariate logistic regression data set was performed to assess whether DNI functions as an independent factor.
Overall, 12 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria and a total of 499 cases and 9549 controls were examined. As a predictive factor of infection, DNI’s pooled sensitivity was 0.67 (95% CI 0.62–0.71, I 2 = 86.0%) and pooled specificity was 0.94 (95% CI 0.94–0.95, I 2 = 92.8%). Area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was 0.89. As a prognostic factor for death in infected patients, DNI’s pooled sensitivity was 0.70 (95% CI 0.56–0.81, I 2 = 0.0%) and pooled specificity was 0.78 (95% CI 0.73–0.83, I 2 = 26.6%). Area under the ROC curve was 0.84. Meta-analysis of the multivariate logistic regression data set showed insignificant results.
DNI is a potentially useful diagnostic tool and predicts mortality among infected patients and should be more widely used in the clinical practice.
KeywordsDelta neutrophil index DNI Infection Diagnosis Prognosis
JHP and HJB had the idea for and designed the study, searched the scientific literature, collected, statistically analyzed and interpreted data, and wrote and critically revised the report. KHL drafted and critically revised the report. JWL analyzed, interpreted data, drafted, and critically revised the report. AK and ME critically analyzed the report and revised it comprehensively. JIS had the idea for and designed the study, analyzed and interpreted the data, drafted and critically revised the report, supervised the study, and gave administrative, technical, and material support.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.Bone RC, Cerra FB, Dellinger RP, Fein AM, Knaus WA, Schein RM, et al. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest. 1992;101(6):1644–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Borenstein LHM, Rothstein H. Comprehensive meta-analysis. 2nd ed. Englewood: Biostat; 2005.Google Scholar
- 38.Papoff P. Use of hematologic data to evaluate infections in neonates. Hematologic Problems of the Neonate. Philadelphia: WB Saunders company; 2000. p. 389–403.Google Scholar