ReviewClinical microbiology reviews2000
Applications of flow cytometry to clinical microbiology.
Review in Clinical microbiology reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
71 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fast-tracking fungal detection: a rapid flow cytometric method for the detection of yeasts in blood cultures.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Advances in pathogen detection ofInfectious medicine · 2025Review
- Rapid and Simple Morphological Assay for Determination of Susceptibility/Resistance to Combined Ciprofloxacin and Ampicillin, Independently, inAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Methods for screening and evaluation of antimicrobial activity: A review of protocols, advantages, and limitations.European journal of microbiology & immunology · 2024Review
- Non-Microbiological Mycobacterial Detection Techniques for Quality Control of Biological Products: A Comprehensive Review.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Relative quantification of the recA gene for antimicrobial susceptibility testing in response to ciprofloxacin for pathogens of concern.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A streamlined workflow for a fast and cost-effective count of tyndallized probiotics using flow cytometry.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Label-Free CD34+ Cell Identification Using Deep Learning and Lens-Free Shadow Imaging Technology.Biosensors · 2023Article
- Nanotechnology Involved in Treating Urinary Tract Infections: An Overview.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Shedding light on the composition of extreme microbial dark matter: alternative approaches for culturing extremophiles.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- An ensemble method for prediction of phage-based therapy against bacterial infections.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Identifying Bacterial Lineages in Salmonella by Flow Cytometry.EcoSal Plus · 2022Review
- A Technique for Rapid Bacterial-Density Enumeration through Membrane Filtration and Differential Pressure Measurements.Micromachines · 2022Article
- Phage-Host Interaction Analysis by Flow Cytometry Allows for Rapid and Efficient Screening of Phages.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- FlowUTI: An interactive web-application for optimizing the use of flow cytometry as a screening tool in urinary tract infections.PloS one · 2022Article
- Antibacterial and anatomical defenses in an oil contaminated, vulnerable seaduck.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Early detection of drug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae by quantitative flow cytometry.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Hydrodynamic particle focusing enhanced by femtosecond laser deep grooving at low Reynolds numbers.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Improving the Activity of Antimicrobial Peptides Against Aquatic Pathogen Bacteria by Amino Acid Substitutions and Changing the Ratio of Hydrophobic Residues.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
- Diagnosing Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia: A review of current methods and novel approaches.Medical mycology · 2020Review
11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Classical microbiology techniques are relatively slow in comparison to other analytical techniques, in many cases due to the need to culture the microorganisms. Furthermore, classical approaches are difficult with unculturable microorganisms. More recently, the emergence of molecular biology techniques, particularly those on antibodies and nucleic acid probes combined with amplification techniques, has provided speediness and specificity to microbiological diagnosis. Flow cytometry (FCM) allows single- or multiple-microbe detection in clinical samples in an easy, reliable, and fast way. Microbes can be identified on the basis of their peculiar cytometric parameters or by means of certain fluorochromes that can be used either independently or bound to specific antibodies or oligonucleotides. FCM has permitted the development of quantitative procedures to assess antimicrobial susceptibility and drug cytotoxicity in a rapid, accurate, and highly reproducible way. Furthermore, this technique allows the monitoring of in vitro antimicrobial activity and of antimicrobial treatments ex vivo. The most outstanding contribution of FCM is the possibility of detecting the presence of heterogeneous populations with different responses to antimicrobial treatments. Despite these advantages, the application of FCM in clinical microbiology is not yet widespread, probably due to the lack of access to flow cytometers or the lack of knowledge about the potential of this technique. One of the goals of this review is to attempt to mitigate this latter circumstance. We are convinced that in the near future, the availability of commercial kits should increase the use of this technique in the clinical microbiology laboratory.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.