Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18596146›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2008

Evaluation of a new Etest vancomycin-teicoplanin strip for detection of glycopeptide-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (GISA), in particular, heterogeneous GISA.

Anne Yusof, Anette Engelhardt, Asa Karlsson, Lina Bylund, Pamela Vidh, Karen Mills, Mandy Wootton, Timothy R Walsh

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Vancomycin MIC Distribution among Methicillin-ResistantOpen access Macedonian journal of medical sciences · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anne YusofAB Biodisk, Solna, Sweden. anne.yusof@abbiodisk.se
Anette Engelhardt
Asa Karlsson
Lina Bylund
Pamela Vidh
Karen Mills
Mandy Wootton
Timothy R Walsh
Cardiff University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glycopeptide-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (GISA) and, in particular, heterogeneous GISA (hGISA) are difficult to detect by standard MIC methods, and thus, an accurate detection method for clinical practice and surveillances is needed. Two prototype Etest strips designed for hGISA/GISA resistance detection (GRD) were evaluated using a worldwide collection of hGISA/GISA strains covering the five major clonal lineages. A total of 150 strains comprising 15 GISA and 60 hGISA strains (defined by population analysis profiles-area under the curve [PAP-AUC]), 70 glycopeptide-susceptible S. aureus (GSSA) strains, and 5 S. aureus ATCC reference strains were tested. For standardized Etest vancomycin (VA) MIC testing, the modified Etest macromethod with VA and teicoplanin (TP) strips tested with a heavier inoculum using brain heart infusion agar (BHI) and two glycopeptide screening agar plates (6 microg/ml VA/BHI and 5 microg/ml Mueller-Hinton agar [MHA]) were tested in parallel with the two new Etest GRD strips: a VA 32 (0.5-microg/ml)-TP 32 (0.5-microg/ml) double-sided gradient (E-VA/TP) with one prototype overlaid with a nutrient (E-VA/TP+S) to enhance the growth of hGISA. The Etest GRD strips were tested with a standard 0.5-McFarland standard inoculum using MHA and MHA plus 5% blood (MHB) and were read at 18 to 24 and 48 h. The interpretive MIC cutoffs used for the new Etest GRD strips at 24 and 48 h were as follows: for GISA, TP or VA, >or=8, and a standard VA MIC of >or=6; for hGISA, TP or VA, >or=8, and a standard VA MIC of <or=4. The results on MHB at 48 h showed that E-VA/TP+S had high specificity (94%) and sensitivity (95%) in comparison to PAP-AUC and was able to detect all GISA (n = 15) and 98% of hGISA (n = 60) strains. In contrast, the glycopeptide screening plates performed poorly for hGISA. The new Etest GRD strip (E-VA/TP+S), utilizing standard media and inocula, is a simple and acceptable tool for detection of hGISA/GISA for clinical and epidemiologic purposes.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDrug Resistance, BacterialMicrobial Sensitivity TestsReagent StripsSensitivity and SpecificityStaphylococcus aureusTeicoplaninVancomycinVancomycin ResistanceAnti-Bacterial AgentsReagent StripsTeicoplaninVancomycin

Identifiers

PMID18596146
PMCPMC2546754
OpenAlexW2124256044

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.