Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24818144›Full record

ReviewBioMed research international2014

Improving the diagnosis of bloodstream infections: PCR coupled with mass spectrometry.

Elena Jordana-Lluch, Montserrat Giménez, M Dolores Quesada, Vicente Ausina, Elisa Martró

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioMed research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

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

  1. Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests forPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Crossing the Barrier:Microorganisms · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. miRNA-23b as a biomarker of culture-positive neonatal sepsis.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

5 authors.

Elena Jordana-LluchServei de Microbiologia, Fundació Institut d'Investigació en Ciències de la Salut Germans Trias i Pujol, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08916 Badalona, Spain.
Montserrat GiménezServei de Microbiologia, Fundació Institut d'Investigació en Ciències de la Salut Germans Trias i Pujol, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08916 Badalona, Spain.
M Dolores QuesadaServei de Microbiologia, Fundació Institut d'Investigació en Ciències de la Salut Germans Trias i Pujol, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08916 Badalona, Spain.
Vicente AusinaServei de Microbiologia, Fundació Institut d'Investigació en Ciències de la Salut Germans Trias i Pujol, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08916 Badalona, Spain ; CIBER Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES), 07110 Bunyola, Spain.
Elisa MartróServei de Microbiologia, Fundació Institut d'Investigació en Ciències de la Salut Germans Trias i Pujol, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08916 Badalona, Spain ; CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), 08036 Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The reference method for the diagnosis of bloodstream infections is blood culture followed by biochemical identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing of the isolated pathogen. This process requires 48 to 72 hours. The rapid administration of the most appropriate antimicrobial treatment is crucial for the survival of septic patients; therefore, a rapid method that enables diagnosis directly from analysis of a blood sample without culture is needed. A recently developed platform that couples broad-range PCR amplification of pathogen DNA with electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (PCR/ESI-MS) has the ability to identify virtually any microorganism from direct clinical specimens. To date, two clinical evaluations of the PCR/ESI-MS technology for the diagnosis of bloodstream infections from whole blood have been published. Here we discuss them and describe recent improvements that result in an enhanced sensitivity. Other commercially available assays for the molecular diagnosis of bloodstream infections from whole blood are also reviewed. The use of highly sensitive molecular diagnostic methods in combination with conventional procedures could substantially improve the management of septic patients.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacterial InfectionsHumansMass SpectrometryMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPolymerase Chain ReactionReagent Kits, DiagnosticReagent Kits, Diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID24818144
PMCPMC4000954

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.