Assessment of Systemic Inflammation as a Tool for Estimating the Risk of Death by Visceral Leishmaniasis
Rattachement africain : br, ca. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Background: Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is a life-threatening protozoan disease prevalent in tropical and subtropical regions and a frequent coinfection among people living with HIV. Early identification of patients at high risk of death may reduce case-fatality. This study evaluated the post-test prognostic value of C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) as biomarkers of mortality in VL. Methods: A retrospective hospital-based cohort of 101 VL patients was analyzed. CRP and IL-6 concentrations at admission were correlated with clinical findings, the Kala-Cal® prognostic score, and in-hospital mortality. Results: Eight patients died, most presenting with hemorrhagic manifestations. At admission, 87.1% of patients had both biomarkers above the predefined cut-offs. CRP and IL-6 levels were markedly elevated in patients with hemorrhage or fatal outcomes. The AUC was 0.85 for CRP and 0.87 for IL-6, with no significant difference between markers. Optimal prognostic cut-offs were 150 mg/L for CRP and 90 pg/mL for IL-6. Conclusions: In this sample, CRP and IL-6 showed good prognostic performance in VL. In patients with low initial clinical risk, positive biomarker results substantially increased the probability of death. When combined with Kala-Cal®, these markers may improve risk stratification and guide referral decisions.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Assessment of Systemic Inflammation as a Tool for Estimating the Risk of Death by Visceral Leishmaniasis
- Date Crossref
- 03/02/2026
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.