Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock
Home About us Editors Ahead of Print Current Issue Archives Search Instructions Subscribe Advertise Login 
Users online:1940   Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size   
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 271-275

The eminence of neutrophil-lymphocyte count ratio in predicting bacteremia for community-acquired infections at an emergency medicine department in a tertiary care setting

1 Department of Emergency Medicine, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University, AIMS, Kochi, Kerala, India
2 Department of Pharmacy Practice, Amrita School of Pharmacy, Amrita University, AIMS, Kochi, Kerala, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Vishnu Manohar
Department of Emergency Medicine, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita University, AIMS, Kochi, Kerala
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/JETS.JETS_72_17

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: The changes in the white blood cells counts and other blood parameters are well-recognized feature in sepsis. A ratio between neutrophils and lymphocytes can be used as a screening marker in sepsis. Even though new markers such as Procalcitonin and adrenomedullin have been rolled out in the field, implementation of these markers has been hindered by cost, accessibility, and proper validation. We looked for the ability of simple neutrophil-lymphocyte count ratio (NLCR) when compared to the gold standard blood culture method in predicting bacteremia, on patients presented to emergency department (ED) with features of suspected community-acquired infections. Materials and Methods: A comparative study done on 258 adult patients, admitted with suspected features of community-acquired infections. The study group included all patients who had positive blood culture results on index presentation at ED. Patients with hematological, chronic liver and retroviral diseases, patients receiving chemotherapy, and steroid medications were excluded from the study. The study group was compared with gender- and age-matched control group who were also admitted with a suspicion of the same, but in whom the blood culture results were negative. Results: There was no statistically significant difference for predicting bacteremia by NLCR (>4.63) and culture positivity methods (P = 1.00). NLCR of > 4.63 predicts bacteremia with an accuracy of 84.9%. Conclusion: In our setting, NLCR performs equally well with culture positivity, in detecting severe infection at the early phase of disease. The NLCR may, therefore, be used as a suitable screening marker at ED for suspected community-acquired infections.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded19    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal