Evidence Hub

Real-word utility of procalcitonin in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia: A matched cohort study

D. Ilges, Dylan L. Kosaski, M. T. Seville, Alyssa K McGary, J. O’Horo, Christine L. H. Snozek, Ryan W. Stevens, Aditya Shah

Infection control and hospital epidemiology, 2025

15,364 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objective: To retrospectively observe procalcitonin (PCT) and antibiotic ordering practices in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Design: Retrospective, exact matched, multicenter cohort study from October 1, 2018 – March 31, 2023. Setting: All hospitals across the Mayo Clinic Enterprise. Participants: Adult patients with CAP, identified using pneumonia diagnosis codes and receipt of systemic antibiotics with an indication of “respiratory tract infection” within 48 hours of hospitalization. Methods: PCT testing within the first 7 days of hospitalization was compared to non-PCT care (nPCT). The primary outcomes were treatment duration, antibiotic days of therapy (DOT), and length of stay (LOS). Results: 15364 patients met inclusion criteria. PCT testing occurred in 42.4% (6515/15364) of encounters, totaling 8214 PCT results. 12880 unique patient encounters were matched 1:1, 6440 in each group. Treatment duration was longer in the PCT group compared to the nPCT group (5.1 vs 4.6 days, respectively, P < 0.001). Patients in the PCT group also received more DOT (8.6 vs 7.6 DOT, P < 0.001) and had a longer LOS (6.8 vs 5.9 days, P < 0.001), respectively. There was no difference in 30-day all-cause mortality or C. difficile infection between groups. In a sensitivity analysis of nPCT patients compared to those with a peak value <0.25 ng/mL (i.e. normal result) there was no difference in treatment duration (4.6 days nPCT vs 4.7 days normal PCT, P =…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 15,364 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free