ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2014
Clinical consequences of using PNA-FISH in Staphylococcal bacteraemia.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- New Microbiological Techniques for the Diagnosis of Bacterial Infections and Sepsis in ICU Including Point of Care.Current infectious disease reports · 2021Review
- Impact of QuickFISH in addition to antimicrobial stewardship on vancomycin use and resource utilization in cancer patients with coagulase-negative staphylococcal blood cultures.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2018Article
- Antimicrobial Stewardship: How the Microbiology Laboratory Can Right the Ship.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2017Review
- The rebirth of culture in microbiology through the example of culturomics to study human gut microbiota.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To optimize patient treatment and rational use of antimicrobials, it is important to provide fast information on findings in blood-cultures (BCs). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of using peptide nucleic acid fluorescence in situ hybridization (PNA-FISH) on positive BCs containing Gram-positive cocci in clusters to differentiate between Staphylococcus aureus (SA) and coagulase negative staphylococci (CoNS) on the prescribed antimicrobial therapy and on the number of contacts between microbiologist and clinician. All cases of positive BCs in our laboratory with SA or CoNS in the year 2011 were identified and the charts were reviewed retrospectively. The group of patients with BCs tested with PNA-FISH was compared to the group of patients with untested BCs. A total of 200 patients with SA and 725 patients with CoNS were included. The mean number of contacts was 0.82 when PNA-FISH showed CoNS and 1.39 when PNA-FISH was not done (p < 0.0001). More patients were recommended appropriate antimicrobial therapy for SA bacteraemia in the PNA-FISH group (98.0%) than in the non-PNA-FISH group (89.4 %) (p = 0.025). The percentage treated with dicloxacillin was 29.6 in the PNA-FISH group, and 8.2 in the non-PNA-FISH group (p = 0.0003). The use of PNA-FISH on BCs in this study was associated with more appropriate and narrow spectrum antimicrobial therapy for patients with SA in an area with low prevalence of methicillin-resistant SA, and a lower number of contacts between clinical microbiologist and clinician about BCs with CoNS as contaminants.
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.