Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24626409›Full record

ArticleRevista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo

Comparison between automated system and PCR-based method for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility profile of clinical Enterococcus spp.

Luciana Furlaneto-Maia, Kátia Real Rocha, Vera Lúcia Dias Siqueira, Márcia Cristina Furlaneto

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pangenomics insights of enterococcus faecium human isolates and identification of novel therapeutic targets by in silico subtractive genomics.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Luciana Furlaneto-MaiaTechnological Federal University of Paraná, Brazil, Technological Federal University of Paraná, Brazil.
Kátia Real RochaDepartment of Microbiology, State University at Londrina, Paraná, Brazil, Department of Microbiology, State University at Londrina, Paraná, Brazil.
Vera Lúcia Dias SiqueiraDepartment of Clinical Analysis, State University at Maringa, Paraná, Brazil, Department of Clinical Analysis, State University at Maringa, Paraná, Brazil.
Márcia Cristina FurlanetoDepartment of Microbiology, State University at Londrina, Paraná, Brazil, Department of Microbiology, State University at Londrina, Paraná, Brazil.
Universidade Estadual de Londrina · BRUniversidade Estadual de Maringá · BRUniversidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Enterococci are increasingly responsible for nosocomial infections worldwide. This study was undertaken to compare the identification and susceptibility profile using an automated MicrosScan system, PCR-based assay and disk diffusion assay of Enterococcus spp. We evaluated 30 clinical isolates of Enterococcus spp. Isolates were identified by MicrosScan system and PCR-based assay. The detection of antibiotic resistance genes (vancomycin, gentamicin, tetracycline and erythromycin) was also determined by PCR. Antimicrobial susceptibilities to vancomycin (30 µg), gentamicin (120 µg), tetracycline (30 µg) and erythromycin (15 µg) were tested by the automated system and disk diffusion method, and were interpreted according to the criteria recommended in CLSI guidelines. Concerning Enterococcus identification the general agreement between data obtained by the PCR method and by the automatic system was 90.0% (27/30). For all isolates of E. faecium and E. faecalis we observed 100% agreement. Resistance frequencies were higher in E. faecium than E. faecalis. The resistance rates obtained were higher for erythromycin (86.7%), vancomycin (80.0%), tetracycline (43.35) and gentamicin (33.3%). The correlation between disk diffusion and automation revealed an agreement for the majority of the antibiotics with category agreement rates of > 80%. The PCR-based assay, the van(A) gene was detected in 100% of vancomycin resistant enterococci. This assay is simple to conduct and reliable in the identification of clinically relevant enterococci. The data obtained reinforced the need for an improvement of the automated system to identify some enterococci.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDisk Diffusion Antimicrobial TestsDrug Resistance, BacterialEnterococcusHumansPolymerase Chain ReactionRandom Amplified Polymorphic DNA TechniqueAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID24626409
PMCPMC4085851
OpenAlexW1996879848

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.