Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23701338›Full record

ArticleTransfusion2014

Evaluation of an ethidium monoazide-enhanced 16S rDNA real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for bacterial screening of platelet concentrates and comparison with automated culture.

Jeremy A Garson, Poorvi Patel, Carl McDonald, Joanne Ball, Gillian Rosenberg, Kate I Tettmar, Susan R Brailsford, Tyrone Pitt, Richard S Tedder

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transfusion, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026
    Article
  2. Bacterial Analysis of the Whole Blood in Chinese Healthy Donors Using 16S rDNA-Targeted Metagenomic Sequencing.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jeremy A GarsonNational Transfusion Microbiology Laboratories, NHSBT/HPA Epidemiology Unit, NHS Blood and Transplant, Colindale, London; Research Department of Infection, Division of Infection and Immunity, University College London, London; Blood Borne Virus Unit, Viral Reference Department, Centre for Infections, Health Protection Agency, Colindale, London, UK.
Poorvi Patel
Carl McDonald
Joanne Ball
Gillian Rosenberg
Kate I Tettmar
Susan R Brailsford
Tyrone Pitt
Richard S Tedder
University College London · GBNHS Blood and Transplant · GBInstitute of Infection and Immunity · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCulture-based systems are currently the preferred means for bacterial screening of platelet (PLT) concentrates. Alternative bacterial detection techniques based on nucleic acid amplification have also been developed but these have yet to be fully evaluated. In this study we evaluate a novel 16S rDNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay and compare its performance with automated culture. STUDY DESIGN AND

methodsA total of 2050 time-expired, 176 fresh, and 400 initial-reactive PLT packs were tested by real-time PCR using broadly reactive 16S primers and a "universal" probe (TaqMan, Invitrogen). PLTs were also tested using a microbial detection system (BacT/ALERT, bioMérieux) under aerobic and anaerobic conditions.

resultsSeven of 2050 (0.34%) time-expired PLTs were found repeat reactive by PCR on the initial nucleic acid extract but none of these was confirmed positive on testing frozen second aliquots. BacT/ALERT testing also failed to confirm any time-expired PLTs positive on repeat testing, although 0.24% were reactive on the first test. Three of the 400 "initial-reactive" PLT packs were found by both PCR and BacT/ALERT to be contaminated (Escherichia coli, Listeria monocytogenes, and Streptococcus vestibularis identified) and 14 additional packs were confirmed positive by BacT/ALERT only. In 13 of these cases the contaminating organisms were identified as anaerobic skin or oral commensals and the remaining pack was contaminated with Streptococcus pneumoniae.

conclusionThese results demonstrate that the 16S PCR assay is less sensitive than BacT/ALERT and inappropriate for early testing of concentrates. However, rapid PCR assays such as this may be suitable for a strategy of late or prerelease testing.

Indexed as

AzidesBlood PlateletsDNA, RibosomalHumansPolymerase Chain Reaction8-azidoethidiumAzidesDNA, Ribosomal

Identifiers

PMID23701338
PMCPMC4282358
OpenAlexW1518389877

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.