Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11344528›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2001

Real-time identification of Pseudomonas aeruginosa direct from clinical samples using a rapid extraction method and polymerase chain reaction (PCR).

R I Jaffe, J D Lane, C W Bates

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Combined effect of linolenic acid and tobramycin onExperimental and therapeutic medicine · 2017
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

R I JaffeClinical Investigation Facility, David Grant Medical Center, Travis AFB, California, USA. rjaffe@cbi-biotech.com
J D Lane
C W Bates

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pseudomonas aeruginosa has emerged as one of the most problematic Gram-negative nosocomial pathogens. Bacteremia caused by P. aeruginosa is clinically indistinguishable from other Gram-negative infections although the mortality rate is higher. This microorganism is also inherently resistant to common antibiotics. Standard bacterial identification and susceptibility testing is normally a 48-hour process and difficulty sometimes exists in rapidly and accurately identifying antimicrobial resistance. The Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) is a rapid and simple process for the amplification of target DNA sequences. However, many sample preparation methods are unsuitable for the clinical laboratory because they are not cost effective, take too long to perform, or do not provide a good template for PCR. Our goal was to provide same-day results to facilitate rapid diagnosis. In this report, we have utilized our rapid DNA extraction method to generate bacterial DNA direct from clinical samples for PCR. The lower detection level for P. aeruginosa was estimated to be 10 CFU/ml. In addition, we wanted to compare the results of a new rapid-cycle DNA thermocycler that uses continuous fluorescence monitoring with the results of standard thermocycling. We tested 40 clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa and 18 non-P. aeruginosa isolates received in a blinded fashion. Coded data revealed that there was 100% correlation in both the rapid-cycle DNA thermocycling and standard thermocycling when compared to standard clinical laboratory results. In addition, total results turn-around time was less than 1 hour. Specific identification of P. aeruginosa was determined using intragenic primer sets for bacterial 16S rRNA and Pseudomonas outer-membrane lipoprotein gene sequences. The total cost of our extraction method and PCR was $2.22 per sample. The accuracy and rapidness of this DNA-extraction method, with its PCR-based identification system, make it an ideal candidate for use in the clinical laboratory.

Indexed as

Polymerase Chain ReactionBacteremiaCosts and Cost AnalysisDNA, BacterialElectrophoresis, Agar GelHumansPseudomonas aeruginosaPseudomonas InfectionsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSensitivity and SpecificityTemperatureTime FactorsDNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID11344528
PMCPMC6807775

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.