Download PDFPDF
How to use… Procalcitonin
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Rational Use of Procalcitonin in Neonatal Sepsis
    • Jogender Kumar, Neonatologist Post Graduate Institute of Medical education and Research, Chandigarh India 160012

    Dear Editor,
    We read with interest the article by Robinson et al on use of Procalcitonin (PCT) in the pediatric population.[1] This article meticulously narrates the importance as well as shortcomings of the PCT in pediatric population. Being a neonatologist, I read the neonatal part very carefully and found few points which are either contrary or extension to the above article.
    1. Authors stated that the number of patient used to generate nomogram for neonatal PCT were too low, to validate it and quotes an old study with 83 healthy subjects (1998) by Chiesa et al. However, the same group published another study in 2011 (not cited by authors) with 421 healthy participants, which provides largest normative data on PCT.[2] The nomograms are robust for term neonates but for preterms < 33 weeks the data is very small and needs further studies.
    2. Author stated that PCT is better marker for early-onset sepsis (EOS) than late sepsis, which is not true. This statement is based on extrapolation of an old meta-analysis by Yu et al[3] which included 22 studies. In this meta-analysis also they found that PCT has moderate diagnostic accuracy in early as well as late-onset sepsis. So, the basis of author’s statement that PCT is better marker for early-onset sepsis is not very clear. On the contrary, Vouloumanou et al[4] published a systematic review and meta-analysis of 29 studies and concluded that the diagnostic accuracy is higher for late-onset neonatal se...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.